New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Kastle RX Any Reviews?

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 
Has anyone one bought and or demoed the 09 Kastle RX's? How do you like them, I haven't seen any feedback on these this season? I'm interested in a pair in 176cm, are there any deals to be had?
post #2 of 16
Originally Posted by Buckwild View Post
Has anyone one bought and or demoed the 09 Kastle RX's? How do you like them, I haven't seen any feedback on these this season? I'm interested in a pair in 176cm, are there any deals to be had?
I didn't see these at the Snowbasin demo. Maybe you can get a discount right now: flat skis for only $1100!

With that said, if they are as good as the other Kastle products, they are probably special skis.
post #3 of 16
Can you get the RX flat? I didn't think that you can?
post #4 of 16

No, it doesn't come flat.

post #5 of 16

Yes, I tried the Kastle 78mm ski.

Interestingly, I tried the same ski three different ways. 

176cm flat ski with Dukes. (Don't ask me why they had Dukes on them)  So yes, they come flat!! Unless that shop got lucky.

176 cm with system plate. 168 cm with system plate.

I weigh about 200lbs.


First off, they have upturned tails so they ski short.  Personally, for the East, I've been skiing 170's a lot or shorter 165 slaloms.  That's a pretty good length.  In the Kastle, I didn't like the 168 - too short!  So I would definitely go 176 - no question!!! That was a bit of a surprise.

The skis have a pretty flexible tip and a beefy mid section.


Really though, the ski is made more for groomed to mixed I guess.  On the groomed it carves quite nicely.  Here's something interesting.  They have a nice tail!  Can't remember when I've said that about a ski, but it's noticeable.  It doesn't lock you in, but has a real nice finish to the turn. They're smooth, fun in general.

Now, mach schneller's take note.  I experienced 'tip flop' with these babies when I turned the speed up in big gs turns. I'll confess that at the time it was late and I didn't call down to Scotty and ask for more power! So I don't know how they'd fare when Scotty would call back up and say "Captain, I'm givin' it all she's got!"  At that point you'd be into the mid 50mph + range.  Since they have a quite beefy midsection, esp. with plate, (the flappers had the plate on), they'd probably be ok. However, I actually tried to look down to try and see the tips flopping! Decided quickly that was not a good idea. So whether they're fine or not, I wouldn't really want to be going that type of speed with flopping tips.


Maybe lighter skiers wouldn't experience flop - don't know.

Bottom line is, they are not for speed demons!  I do mean speedy though!


Even more bizarrely, we had bonafide powder, like 15-20",  the first day with the Dukes/176 cm.  Ok, these got trashed in Skiing mag. for powder performance.  Well they ain't no powder ski, but sheesh they were fine! I mean whatever, that powder was light and nice. I don't recall thinking, "god, this ski bites" as we were hootin!

The tips are kind of soft so they work ok. I mean really, if you're considering this ski for it's powder performance, me thinks you have a problem.


The next day, I confess I skied myself into the ground a la 'jackass'.  The snow was cold windpack powder on the sides - at least a foot deep and some places twice that.  I headed to the side and entered thinking "this might not be a good idea" because I was going pretty fast.  Then I saw this small tree with the top bent down into the snow forming a mini St. Louis arch.  Figured I zip right underneath. Well, when I ducked I went forward instead of pulling a limbo type maneuver. The tips headed to the earth's core and I kept going.  Didn't even hear the double eject since the skis were under snow.  I was so close to the ground that I just drove my head right into the snow in one continous motion. A true faceplant! Received comments from the lift!


There were no moguls around at the time to give them a work out there.


So I would definitely give these baby's a try.  I'd be interested to hear if lighter skiers got the tip flop issue at high speeds.  Definitely a fun ski with a nice tail!


Also, the plate or the bindings have changeable rubber inserts that supposedly you can swap for slightly different characteristics.  Doubtful you'll find these pieces at your shop, but they talk about them in the Kastle book that the dealer has.


The 70mm waist width might really be where it's at with Kastle though. 


post #6 of 16

Well, when I demoed the Kastle line, I certainly didn't experience anything resembling Tog's "tip flop," but, then, I weigh 165 lbs. and wasn't skiing at over 55 MPH.  Not many recreational skiers do. 


The 88-waisted models might have been better in 20" of powder.  At Tog's weight, the 78 may have been a little narrow.


I found their entire line to be extremely smooth, precise, and powerful without being burly or excessively stiff--among ther best I tried at trade shows over the past two years.  Skier weight does make a difference.  Demo if possible.


Yes, they are available flat.

post #7 of 16

My buddy demoed and bought the 88 at Gorsouch in Vail with the Marker Griffin I believe(white). $1050.


He lovs them very smooth and solid. Tip reminds me of E T phone home!

post #8 of 16
Thread Starter 

Did you demo the RX (70mm waist) or the MX78's? I was looking for a review on the RX, anybody.



post #9 of 16

Kevin skied both the MX88 and the Stocki XXXL at Snowbasin 2 weeks ago. Said they both had that superb, ultra-refined feel: damp yet springy, did just what you wanted it to, nothing more, nothing less.  He was super impressed. With that said, he felt the XXXL was better for him: higher speed limit, could do no wrong. the MX88 got bounced around just a bit more at high speeds. When I demoed the MX98 in 174cm vs. the XXXL in 178cm, I found the same (granted, the XXXL was a bit longer).  The main deal with Stockli is that you have to really be ON to ski them; a strong and fast skier.  The Kastle's are more forgiving for sure. 

post #10 of 16

The RX and MX have virtually the same feel.  Identical construction.

post #11 of 16
Originally Posted by mike_m View Post

The RX and MX have virtually the same feel.  Identical construction.

Actually, the RX and the MX78 have some subtle differences.  The MX78 has a ash/silver fur core, where the RX's core is only ash.  So the differences in the cores, plus a thicker layer of titanal is going to make the RX a bit beefier.
post #12 of 16
Good to know.  I was going by what the Kastle reps told me at the time.  Amazing how both the Head and Kastle reps didn't seem to know the facts on their own skis.  For what it's worth, I couldn't feel any noticable difference (other than expected differences due to width).  Both felt smooth and powerful, without being so stiff that you feel beaten up skiing them.  Great skis.
post #13 of 16
Of course the FX84 might be a better bet..
post #14 of 16
 Funny how the new reviews at that other website are posted and all of a sudden there are all kinds of requests for info on kastle. 

Just kinda im curious about the brand as well.  I have sneaking suspicion they will justify ski lock purchases
post #15 of 16
 They are real nice skis,to say the least. The build quality these skis is evident when you ski them, they are just so smooth. I have skied pretty much every ski on the line, 70, 78, 84, 88 and 98, all are so responsive. Personally, I am leaning to the 84 myself for my frontside ski. I will mount them with either Jesters or some (real) turntables. 
post #16 of 16
I bought the MX 78 last year.
Smooth as silk yet very powerful.
Very fine construction quality.
Need to be driven!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews