or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Eastern Mid Fat Comparison Kastle, MX88 and 83, Head Monster 88 and 83.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Eastern Mid Fat Comparison Kastle, MX88 and 83, Head Monster 88 and 83. - Page 3

post #61 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post

On that note, I spent much of the day on next season's Monster 88 and played around with the binding position. It ended up in the identical position to my Rev 85... Roughly +1.5 from the marked line on the ski. I'm probably a bit on the front edge of things for WIW. I skied Blizzard WRC's in the AM which are a good bit further aft than either of the other skis mentioned. The WRC's are mounted on the mark and feel spot on. Go figure.

You never know.  Sometimes you just gotta experiment to see.   

post #62 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by levy1 View Post

Thanks to all of you for your help especially Tog who gave me a tip on buying the kastle for one half off.
Northen ski works Killington
8024229675 mx 88 177 with adjustable
Binding 750.
Still left head rally tighten volkl 81 86 stokli and many others

 I'll be very interested in your reactions to the MX88 177 as a replacement for your Kendos.  

 

I've been thinking of getting a Kastle (or a Stockli), or one of the Monsters, for a more narrow, better edge, versatile all mountain charger ski.

 

For me, still, the ski that works best for that I've ever owned is a 08/09 Stockli Stormrider XXL 80, 178, r ~18.  That sucker is pretty old now, but it keeps my standards high, I'd guess.  

post #63 of 79
Thread Starter 
It's going to be a while but I'll post up as soon as I get on them.
post #64 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by markojp View Post

On that note, I spent much of the day on next season's Monster 88 and played around with the binding position. It ended up in the identical position to my Rev 85... Roughly +1.5 from the marked line on the ski. I'm probably a bit on the front edge of things for WIW. I skied Blizzard WRC's in the AM which are a good bit further aft than either of the other skis mentioned. The WRC's are mounted on the mark and feel spot on. Go figure.


However you play around with the binding position of the worst ski from Head, it's all the same.

post #65 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bogatyr View Post


However you play around with the binding position of the worst ski from Head, it's all the same.
Monster 88, worst ski from head?!?!
post #66 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by smileguy1 View Post

Monster 88, worst ski from head?!?!
The whole Monster line to be exact. No need to change the glasses , you read it right !
post #67 of 79
Bogzy, indeed, if I were in your part of the world, I wouldn't ski the monsters as a daily driver, but for our part, the 88 is a lovely all around get it done ski in pretty much any terrain and condition. For the east, I'd stick with a Supershape, a Rebels iSpeed, or an RD SL.

I'd own the 88 out east for a powder day though. Anyhow... smile.gif
post #68 of 79
I think the some of problems with the MX 83 people have had is due to tunes. It's one thing to not like it, it's another to be planky, heavy, or not engage. I've seen some very bad things done to more than one pair. I actually owned one for awhile that required extensive rehab. It's a long story, but it did go back after discovering the extent of the dulling of tips and tails. Just too much to recover. Nevertheless, it was skied several days at Jackson Hole and a day at Mad River. It's a superb ski. Not hard to engage at all.

. I know of one shop that dulled tips and tails- seriously not just less sharp, to a bunch for awhile. If you seriously dull the tip it's not going to hook up right away. That's what I realized at Jackson when trying to do shorter turns and then checked the ski. Despite a grind and edge sets of .75/3 the tips were dull beyond recovery. I'm talking a couple inches back from contact. Yet despite all that it was a load of fun and clearly a great ski. I' ve since been on it at Snowmass and Sunlight. At Snowmass it was carving highspeed arcs that were loads of fun.

The 173 is a 173. It may be an actual 173, whatever that means, it is not somehow magically the equivalent of a ski 5cm longer. It's short. Too short for me at over 200 but still great and pretty good for the east. But Kastle should have made all the MX's in 5cm increments. It's their flagship line. Instead they make tons of different models. Park skis, touring skis, carbon skis. Geez, just eliminate a couple of models in the stable. Instead, we get if you want a 178 you buy an Mx78 or 88. Want a 183cm MX 88? Well buy a 183cm Mx83. Just moronic. Sheer pigheadedness on Kastle's part. They've been told this for years. So what do they do for next year? Go to 8cm steps. I guess it's progress.
post #69 of 79
Thread Starter 
Thanks Tog, in all my itunes I never asked a shop if they were going to tips just assumed if they didn't ask me they were not
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post

I think the some of problems with the MX 83 people have had is due to tunes. It's one thing to not like it, it's another to be planky, heavy, or not engage. I've seen some very bad things done to more than one pair. I actually owned one for awhile that required extensive rehab. It's a long story, but it did go back after discovering the extent of the dulling of tips and tails. Just too much to recover. Nevertheless, it was skied several days at Jackson Hole and a day at Mad River. It's a superb ski. Not hard to engage at all.

. I know of one shop that dulled tips and tails- seriously not just less sharp, to a bunch for awhile. If you seriously dull the tip it's not going to hook up right away. That's what I realized at Jackson when trying to do shorter turns and then checked the ski. Despite a grind and edge sets of .75/3 the tips were dull beyond recovery. I'm talking a couple inches back from contact. Yet despite all that it was a load of fun and clearly a great ski. I' ve since been on it at Snowmass and Sunlight. At Snowmass it was carving highspeed arcs that were loads of fun.

The 173 is a 173. It may be an actual 173, whatever that means, it is not somehow magically the equivalent of a ski 5cm longer. It's short. Too short for me at over 200 but still great and pretty good for the east. But Kastle should have made all the MX's in 5cm increments. It's their flagship line. Instead they make tons of different models. Park skis, touring skis, carbon skis. Geez, just eliminate a couple of models in the stable. Instead, we get if you want a 178 you buy an Mx78 or 88. Want a 183cm MX 88? Well buy a 183cm Mx83. Just moronic. Sheer pigheadedness on Kastle's part. They've been told this for years. So what do they do for next year? Go to 8cm steps. I guess it's progress.

I am glad you brought up the subject. I assume my skis are left sharp tip to tail when I have them tuned. Thats the only way I liked my Volkls. I have never looked or had problems but I want to make sure all my new skis are that way. Heads and Kastle.
post #70 of 79
I never assume anything anymore. I had this discussion with the Kastle rep at the demo tent last year. They dulled the tips on theMx's and most skis. It is way more common than you think. It is often used to by a shop where the customer says the ski is "catchy" or "hooky".

It's depressing actually how poor tuning can be. Even with machines costing north of $350k it comes down to the operator inspecting skis before, knowing the steps and what they do after. Never get your skis ground during Christmas week or busy holiday times. Unless it's a specialty shop you have faith in.
Always discuss that they shall not detune tips and tails. And by that we mean contact point and back. Functional edge - that whichbmakes you turn, not the curved up part - the very front should be round if no tip protector. Some skis with blunt tips run functional edge into the curved up part so you want it sharp beyond flat on ground contact point. New complicated tip shapes require discussion with the tuner.

Discuss these things with your tuner. If they poo poo it or think your ocd, then leave. Good tuning shops are happy to discuss the craft. Again, go at a non busy time if possible. Ship the skis if you must to a reliable shop that can do a proper stone grind. In grneral you want a shop that does a lot of race skis even if your ski is fat.

On a side note, some people get so enamored with their new expensive as a house machines that they loose their minds a bit. I was just in a shop where one of the guys was so excited about the coming robotic stone grinder. Able to do the pattern of chevrons or thumb prints in middle of the base and smooth on the edges. Well he started telling me how it was going to make tbe junior racers "who had trouble releasing able to release". Lol, structures may shave a little time but do not solve technique isses lets get real.
Edited by Tog - 4/10/16 at 9:54am
post #71 of 79
At 5ft 10, 180 lbs I ski the mx83 in a 173 and I absolutely love it. No speed limit, charges absolutely anything I put in front of it. I was initially thinking it would be a tad short but I would buy the exact same ski again. I just demoted the 95HP last weekend in the 181 and really enjoyed the ski but with the conditions i still prefered my 83,s in the 173.

FWIW I will try to buy some 95HP's. Pretty darn good hard snow performance but they should absolutely rip with soft snow.
post #72 of 79
Thread Starter 
That's amazing 180 pounds on a 173 I never would have thought. Where do you primarily ski?
post #73 of 79

@levy1 , I have over a week on a 173 MX83 and weigh over 200. It's fantastic. Some of the best arcs ever on that thing. It was also skied mostly in the west on everything including non groomed. But...one wants a little more and going all the way to 183cm is a bit much. I never got to try it because it was out.

 

Don't become too obsessed over a particular model/length. If you love the ski you push it into places and speeds it's not really meant for.( FIS slaloms are the king of that btw. Go watch crudology -Bob is often on an fis slalom. He skied the whole week at Big Sky on it including powder) You want crud busting, the 88 is much better. Just learn to ski it. It doesn't really punish bad inputs just sort of yawns like a disinterested cat. Good technical skiing is rewarded and the ski in general is very controllable due to the tip/front end shape. It's a bit neutral which is good for crud and it's a little soft which lets you bend it if wanted for shorter turns/moguls. It's been a bench mark since it came out. There's also not a lot of non rockered 88's at this point if any. Gotta love that flat tail too for stomping on out of the turn. Of course some complain it's "hooky". That's what killed the Mantra and they turned it into a Franken ski. :) ( though some love the non cambered one)

 

I did ski the MX88 again this year in Verbier for my last day there. Not good visibility up top and wanted just a basic decent ski for cruddy stuff. I was going to try the Factions at their demo but decided to not waste time and get more acquainted with the 88. I definitely found out that if you really drive it, it will perform much better. In cruddy cut up, sun dampened powder that refroze in the afternoon, really getting the skis tipped early and getting inside the turn it just blew through it. Basically, groomer committed into the turn technique. Really woke the ski up from being a bit more relaxed. That was fun.

post #74 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tog View Post
You want crud busting, the 88 is much better. Just learn to ski it. It doesn't really punish bad inputs just sort of yawns like a disinterested cat. Good technical skiing is rewarded and the ski in general is very controllable due to the tip/front end shape. It's a bit neutral which is good for crud and it's a little soft which lets you bend it if wanted for shorter turns/moguls. It's been a bench mark since it came out. There's also not a lot of non rockered 88's at this point if any. Gotta love that flat tail too for stomping on out of the turn. Of course some complain it's "hooky". That's what killed the Mantra and they turned it into a Franken ski. :) ( though some love the non cambered one)

 

Of course the model that replaces the 88 is the 89.  There are a few differences, but it's a great ski, too.

post #75 of 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by lakespapa View Post

 

Of course the model that replaces the 88 is the 89.  There are a few differences, but it's a great ski, too.

Can't wait to try that one. But he's already purchased the 88 at half off.

post #76 of 79
The nice thing about buying at the end of the model run is the great deal you can get. The not so great thing is that you don't get the next reference standard, which the 89 might just be. (On the other other hand, who complains about the 88?) (Other than the obvious whos.)
post #77 of 79
Thread Starter 
I called Head about the model change. Construction is the same, they've added graphene to the skis and little bit different turn shape. I play Head tennis racquets and they've added graphene to the new ones this year which I have can't tell the difference but it's a nice touch I guess
post #78 of 79

I have a pair of 15/16 Monster 88's in 170cm and I weigh 170lbs. I had them mounted 1cm forward because that is the way I like all of my carving skis except my SL skis. I love these skis on firm and corn snow, which is what I got them for. I had a tough time deciding which size to get and had decided to get the 177cm size but a couple of guys that weighs 190lbs said they prefer that ski in 170cm. They convinced me to get 170's. After I bought them but before I tried them I realized that the turn radius of the 170's is 16M (vs 17.4m for the 177cm) and that made me nervous but once I skied them I was glad I got 170's and that I mounted them 1cm forward. I like the option to carve fall line on black groomers  and these skis are great for that and any turn radius that I like to make. 

 

A well respected ski reviewer reviewed the 177cm's and said they weren't good groomer carvers but they are good bump skis. Maybe the 177cm were to stiff for that reviewer to carve at reasonable speeds. That is just a guess. I think they are excellent groomer carvers. I prefer narrower skis when the snow is firm all day and I have three pairs of wider skis for powder days but I love these for firm to soft snow. If the corn is clumpy and deep I prefer my Salomon Sentinels @ 177cm with a 94mm waist. The Monster 88's feel a little stiff for me for deeper corn but they work surprisingly well. Maybe the token tip rocker can be thanked for that.

 

Based on a couple of hours of research I did on graphene, I believe it is pure BS marketing as far as Head Skis are concerned. Still, I like my Monster 88's and the graphene influenced graphics too.

 

I've always been a real fan of Head and now I'm a fan of Head Skis too. Today I skied my Head Cyclics in about 7" of heavy wet fresh snow and they were a blast. Most other skiers and snowboarders were straight lining off piste because they couldn't turn in the goo. I suspect most of them were spooked because they couldn't skid their tails. I couldn't skid the Cyclics but they were spunky and easy to turn. 


Edited by dtraub1 - 4/10/16 at 5:15pm
post #79 of 79
We ended up skiing 50 days this year with 40 at our local hill (Mt Spokane) where my boy races and the other 10 are a split between Batchelor, Schweitzer, and Red Mountain.

Here is a sweet clip of my boy at red Mountain about a month ago (he is 6):
http://youtu.be/XWVwVMKa4Ok

I know it's hard to believe that the 173 would work at my size but I am telling you it rips. I turn GS gates with my boy with these and they are absolutely unbelievable. (I am picky about my tune and I tune these at 1 and 3 on my own.) Also, the other skis I ski are a 186 Gotama and it's really hard to go back to this lifeless ski after I ski my 83's.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Eastern Mid Fat Comparison Kastle, MX88 and 83, Head Monster 88 and 83.