or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Will the real Kastle FX94's please stand up?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Will the real Kastle FX94's please stand up? - Page 3

post #61 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by resonate11 View Post

 

Quote:
Hey, where did you find the umlaut on your computer

One can produce ä by holding the alt key down while typing 0228.  e.g. Kästle


If you're lazy, you can hold down the alt key and press the numbers 132 in sequence, like so, ä.  The codes don't work in all programs, but do work in most programs.

post #62 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

I wouldn't necessarily agree with either 1) or 2). The FX is a great ski, but is lighter, doesn't have as much metal, and doesn't share the same damp, grounded feeling that the MX series does. It is lighter, more "Fischer-watea like" in terms of feel on the snow, being lighter and flickable, and somewhat reminds me of the Elan Apex in terms of weight, yet is a bit livelier and not as smooth as that ski either.  It does fine on hardpack, but doesn't have the MX feel at speed, which is, to be specific; very similar to a wide race stock ski. If you have skied real race room stuff, you have an idea of how the MX series (especially RX/MX70/78/88) feels.  The FX has that lighter, nearly touring feel, with a bit of snap, a bit of energy, and isn't as grounded, but is much higher performing than the average AT ski.  Regarding various reviews; skier expectations and skiing speed also have a lot to do with it.  The MX88 is comfortable at 50mph+.  The FX84 just isn't meant to ski that hard, at least not on harder snow (which is mostly where I have used it).  The beef just isn't there. 

 

Again, I would compare them more to a more refined Watea 84 from Fischer: a good all-around ski, light in weight, light on the snow, flickable, can handle any condition and most any speed, but not as supremely smooth as the more damp, heavy skis on the market with more metal and wood.  The guys who ski 30,000 vert in 4 hours are going to want more ski.  Amongst the reviewers listed here, you have a wide range of skiing styles and skiing speeds. It is only natural that not everyone would come to the same conclusion on how it skis? As always (and especially when reviewing and rating skis): YMMV.

 

Nailed it as usual.  I had the exact same take away when I skied the FX stuff last season and I'm glad someone posted valuable comparisons to really help skiers get an idea of where the skis sit in the panorama.
 

post #63 of 106

Anyone have time on both the FX94 and Ski Logik's Ulllr's Chariot?  I'm interested in a comparison.  I've been skiing mostly the MX78 over the last two seasons and looking to add the RX / RX12 (thank you Dawg!) and something a bit wider for powder.

post #64 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSM126 View Post

Anyone have time on both the FX94 and Ski Logik's Ulllr's Chariot?  I'm interested in a comparison.  I've been skiing mostly the MX78 over the last two seasons and looking to add the RX / RX12 (thank you Dawg!) and something a bit wider for powder.



I think the harder question is whether anyone has time on Ullr's Chariot at all.....

those small batch niche skis are tough to demo

post #65 of 106

I have only had time on the Chariot on groomers.  The FX94 and the Chariot couldn't be more different if I'm recalling them both correctly.  I rode the FX94 back in February and the Chariot a couple weeks ago.  I stand by dawg's assessment of the FX94.  The Chariot didn't wow me.  It was a competent ski, but not a fantastic ski and I was running plenty of other fat skis that day that truly excelled on the groomers AND incorporated rocker for the deeper days (thinking the Blizzard The One, Nordica Enforcer, Katana, Rossi S7).

 

The Chariot is a fairly thick ski in the middle and all the way through the tips and tails.  It felt kind of heavy to me and skied kind of heavy to me.  Somehow though all that heft didn't translate into stability.  I felt like the skis got knocked around a bit too easily and didn't give me that glued to the snow edge grip I like to have.  They had decent edge grip underfoot, but it didn't extend out into the tips and tails.  The One was a nimble ski and the Chariot skied like a river barge.

 

My honest opinion on the state of fat skis right now for those looking for a wider ski for deeper days is to seriously consider at least some kind of "obvious" early rise or full on tip rocker in their ski selection.  You don't necessarily need the tail rocker, but the tip definitely changes the game when you're in the deep stuff.  So the traditional fat twin is no longer an attractive option to me.  I believe it no longer represents where ski design is headed for fat skis.  I just spent the morning on my ZAG Heli Golds and the shovel design on those skis has completely changed my perception of what's possible when a design just works as intended.

 

Here are a few shots from this morning to liven up this thread (the ZAGs in action):

 

LL 20101216 #1.PNG

LL 20101216 #2.PNG

LL 20101216 #3.PNG


Edited by Noodler - 12/16/10 at 7:26pm
post #66 of 106

Inspiring pics. Thanks! If it's not a secret, where?

post #67 of 106

<start/ major thread drift /

 

That's Loveland off chair #8.  The beauty of Loveland is that it has great terrain and the least amount of skiers out of all of the Front Range Rocky mountains.

 

end/ major thread drift>

 

To put the thread back on target I should point out that the tip design of the FX94 has a similar early taper design like the ZAGs (although not quite as radical), but the FX94 does not have the early rise like the ZAGs.  So the early taper tips reduce the "hookiness" without actually decreasing the available sidecut for quicker turns when you want to make them.  I find that I really like this feature when you're in chop and deeper snow (especially if it is set up a bit or heavy).

post #68 of 106
Just wondering if you had a chance to ski those Zags in more variable conditions and bumps. My local ski shop is carrying them for the first time this year and they have me intrigued. Just not sure about those big fat tips in cut up snow and especially bumps.
post #69 of 106

< cont'd thread drift / apologies to OP

 

I have skied the ZAGs in about 7" of fresh, cut-up, and downright crud at Breck last week.  The snow was much heavier and set up the day after the big storm last week and Breck gets enough traffic in the bowls to make things interesting if you're on the wrong pair of skis.  The 189cm Heli Golds almost feel like cheating - they practically make skiing that stuff mindless.  Picture a ski that's fat enough for excellent float, with a deep sidecut for quick turns when necessary, without being hooky in the slightest due to the early taper tip, and then add in a good dose of early rise to defeat any possible tip dive.  Sound like a good plan to you?  It did to me and the promise has lived up to reality for me.  They also have a stiffer tail / softer tip flex pattern that helps you get out of the back seat if you get in trouble.  The craziest thing (and I said it a few times today) is that the 189cm doesn't feel like a 189.  In fact it skis shorter than my 179s (Stockli VXLs and Scott Crusades).  They honestly feel like I'm skiing a 175 when I'm on them (from a turns perspective) and yet they have the stability you get with a longer ski.  It's just a shame that they have no distribution in North America this season and still haven't gained much traction.  I wish another manufacturer would take notice of the design and do something similar.

 

My ideal ski would be if Stockli or Kastle would build something in the vein of the ZAG Heli Gold design.  I prefer the feel of those constructions over the ZAG on hard-pack, but as long as the snow is deep enough that I'm not hitting bottom the ZAGs are just fine.

post #70 of 106

Back to the FX94....

 

Can anyone who has skied both skis, compare the FX94 to the Watea 94, say the version before the boat hull tip (2008-2009)?

 

They seem very similar in dimensions, and some have said the Kastle has a "Watea-like" feel.

 

I demoed the FX94 and absolutley love how it skis, however I have an option on a new & unused pair of the Watea, which I am considering as I can't afford the Kastle......

post #71 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_eleven View Post

Back to the FX94....

 

Can anyone who has skied both skis, compare the FX94 to the Watea 94, say the version before the boat hull tip (2008-2009)?

 

They seem very similar in dimensions, and some have said the Kastle has a "Watea-like" feel.

 

I demoed the FX94 and absolutley love how it skis, however I have an option on a new & unused pair of the Watea, which I am considering as I can't afford the Kastle......



I really liked the previous Watea 94's, I skied them for a couple of days in Steamboat a few years ago and thought they just ripped. 

 

Enjoying them here: 

 

n540901137_1023883_6420.jpg

 

But they are still not the Kastles.... wink.gif

post #72 of 106


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Noodler View Post

<start/ major thread drift /

 

That's Loveland off chair #8.  The beauty of Loveland is that it has great terrain and the least amount of skiers out of all of the Front Range Rocky mountains.

 

end/ major thread drift>

 

To put the thread back on target I should point out that the tip design of the FX94 has a similar early taper design like the ZAGs (although not quite as radical), but the FX94 does not have the early rise like the ZAGs.  So the early taper tips reduce the "hookiness" without actually decreasing the available sidecut for quicker turns when you want to make them.  I find that I really like this feature when you're in chop and deeper snow (especially if it is set up a bit or heavy).


Noodler, I'm getting a sense of assumptions that is a continuous theme in some skiers anecdotes of ski performance in deep snow. For example: saying that a ski is a good powder ski because the tip never dives assumes that a tip IN the snow is a problem, or a bad thing, and I would take exception to that notion. I would say that most of the modern rocker designs build up the idea that the tip should never be under the surface of the snow, thus the superiority of the design. It makes me wonder what type of skier they are marketing to, likely people that have a poor stance and fall every time the tip (quote:) dives. Also, lots of sidecut means that a ski turns more quickly. The only time that would be true would be while you are carving the ski on its edge. In all other situations, a tail without so much flair out, sidecut, may turn much more easily, slide and release to any degree with a smooth controlled feel instead of a kind of hook up and chatter, grab and hold, that is so annoying in crud.

 

I was handling a Kaestle in the local shop, and the resonance when tapping on the floor felt very nice, the overall flex and liveliness combined with a stable damp feel as well. I'd own 'em given the chance, especially since the tip will float AND sink, and the sidecut is moderate and classic.  The graphics are so undrstated that I couldn't even find the model name, so I don't know if I was in FX or MX.

 

post #73 of 106

davluri - I think we have a situation of differing definitions of tip dive.  To me that means a tip that has sunk so low as to cause the skier to either have to radically shift their weight back to stay upright or worse going head over heels.  I don't define it as the tips having to stay completely above the snow and you'll find that in deep conditions that's not always true of even the most aggressive rocker designs.

 

What the tip rocker really does for you is allows the skier to fully charge with no concern for going head over heels in deep conditions.

 

I also differ in my opinion on deep sidecuts in deep snow.  I believe that snow is always compressing as it is skied and that the sidecut is always active to some degree.  In deep conditions I still feel the benefits of a deeper sidecut ski and can more easily make shorter turns.  Note that rocker definitely provides a substitute for deep sidecuts when in 3D snow.  You have a pre-curved/de-cambered ski with a rocker design - lay it over and enjoy the ride.

post #74 of 106

I'm fine with pinning down definitions, and find nothing amiss with yours for tip dive. Your example has a lot to do with the type of snow. Heavy wet snow that is over a foot deep will stop you if you're speed is insufficient or you encounter some monster pockets of snow. We often have dense powder that compresses and that you actually turn the ski on edge. There is also snow so light that it doesn't compress at all.

 

Love the Kaestle's, just after handling them in the shop. My friend who owns the shop says I should have a pair. Hope he takes that thought to its logical conclusion. Discount!!! He said it's subtle, you have to have experience to notice the greatness of the ski.

 

note: Volkl Sanouk and rossignol B-Squad had long tapering, early rise tips about 4 to 5 seasons ago. I skied the B-Squad for several seasons. The first day on them I took them out in the deep and heavy, the tip design blew me away, never looked for clumps of snow to avoid again they were so confidence inspiring; so if that's what tip rocker is doing, I'm down.


Edited by davluri - 1/1/11 at 6:06pm
post #75 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

If you ask Kaestle, they will tell you that the FX series is made lighter in every possible way without sacrificing the real Kaestle feel (an Alpine touring ski that Chris Davenport would like, and does). With the MX, they were not shaving grams throughout the ski (except the swing weight tip and tail).



Not to flog a dead horse but every video you see and picture you see of Chris Davanport is with the MX108. I realize the Fx94 is his pro model but thats not what he skies very often. Maybe when he did the 49ers but thats about it. Just a marketing tool useing his succes to sell like everything in life. Show me Chris on a big line and the eye on the ski is Green,red or light blue all MX. Youll be hard pressed to find Chris on the FX94 skiing in any pictures. Why is that? About the only pro model I ever see any one exlusivly useing themself is Seth Morrisons and Hugo Harrison.

post #76 of 106

Not to mention that Chris was on MX 108s (as were others) for the latest 'Kastle Sponsored' Warren Miller film...wink.gif
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by whipper View Post


Not to flog a dead horse but every video you see and picture you see of Chris Davanport is with the MX108. I realize the Fx94 is his pro model but thats not what he skies very often. Maybe when he did the 49ers but thats about it. Just a marketing tool useing his succes to sell like everything in life. Show me Chris on a big line and the eye on the ski is Green,red or light blue all MX. Youll be hard pressed to find Chris on the FX94 skiing in any pictures. Why is that? About the only pro model I ever see any one exlusivly useing themself is Seth Morrisons and Hugo Harrison.
post #77 of 106

Just an idle question..........................Are any of you folks silly enough to believe that "movie star" skiers regularly ski on the same skis that bear their nameplates? Are you shocked to find that often they don't? Do you believe that World Cup skiers ski on the "xxxxWorld Cup GS" "race stock" skis that are on ski shop shelves? Do you believe in the tooth fairy or the easter bunny?

 

Are you really that..........uhhhhhhh

 

SJ

post #78 of 106

Nope.....nor silly enough to blindly believe every ski review or reviewer.

post #79 of 106

Chris is now a Kaestle skier, I'd imagine involved to some extent with every model. I don't really know or pretend to. He'd mostly ski the 108 for films because they mostly ski deep powder for their inspiring shots, and that is Kaestle's widest ski to date. That doesn't take away from the fact that he is a mountaineer and when doing that type of skiing might select a different model, depending on conditions and terrain he anticipates. you never know what the pros are thinking about skis because their selection is influenced by so many considerations, among them: they're being paid by someone to ski something.

 

Excellent shots, Noodler, thanks; but in conditions that good you'd be smiling (great smile by the way) on barrel stavesbiggrin.gif , and Kaestle 94's and Kaestle 108's, and Sixth Sense Huge, and Rossignol Pro 112's, and Watea 114's, and......well you see what I mean.

post #80 of 106

As far as I know the MX 108 is not the widest Kaestle makes. There is a MX128. Haven't seen any though.

 

Probably is a MX148 somewhere.............. Would it be a ski like this?  174cm/148cm/164cm   Why that's like having a phone booth door on each foot.

 

 

 

 

Still kind of reeling about the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny.

post #81 of 106

Regarding what racers/freeskier/ski gods and goddesses ski and what the company sells was pretty obvious watching the Men's Super G at Beaver Creek. I'm not sure what the typical length for the racers were but they all appeared to be longer than head height, narrower skis than what was seen on the podium:

 

Georg+Streitberger+Audi+FIS+World+Cup+Men+lmC2PWH-HZHl.jpg Didier+Cuche+Georg+Streitberger+Audi+FIS+World+moU2eIUuSuGl.jpg

post #82 of 106

The skis in the podium shot are Slalom skis.

 

SJ

post #83 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by skimalibu View Post

As far as I know the MX 108 is not the widest Kaestle makes. There is a MX128. Haven't seen any though.

 

Probably is a MX148 somewhere.............. Would it be a ski like this?  174cm/148cm/164cm   Why that's like having a phone booth door on each foot.


The MX128 is their widest ski, I have 2 pair if anyone is interested... 190cm 146-128-134 40m tr... sweet. Hugo likes 'em.

 

Kastle also makes a ski for Ghost, they built a 203cm SG ski for an Austrian race that involves completing a 'ring' around a ski valley... can't recall the name, but it's a big honor to win evidently. Kastle has feilded a team the last few seasons... sorry Ghost, I don't have any of those.

post #84 of 106
post #85 of 106

 

Kaestle has now stormed the entire spectrum of the market in what, 2 or 3 years. What an entry to North America. They must be pretty rare still as I hang around the shop ski walls a lot and never came across it. That is a pretty straight profile, wow. No wonder Hugo likes it. He once said he was about doing the big lines fast. I guess so.

 

My bad on not knowing about the 128mm.  glad I qualified my comment as I don't pretend to know, that was a close one.

post #86 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by davluri View Post

 

Kaestle has now stormed the entire spectrum of the market in what, 2 or 3 years. What an entry to North America. They must be pretty rare still as I hang around the shop ski walls a lot and never came across it. That is a pretty straight profile, wow. No wonder Hugo likes it. He once said he was about doing the big lines fast. I guess so.

 

My bad on not knowing about the 128mm.  glad I qualified my comment as I don't pretend to know, that was a close one.

I wouldn't say the 'entire spectum" yet...yet. wink.gif I did see some additions for next year that look very nice, I do have some concern as far as product overlap and what we want to stock. 
 

post #87 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post



I wouldn't say the 'entire spectum" yet...yet. wink.gif I did see some additions for next year that look very nice, I do have some concern as far as product overlap and what we want to stock. 
 


Can you share any of the specs of the new additions?
 

post #88 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by birddog10 View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post



I wouldn't say the 'entire spectum" yet...yet. wink.gif I did see some additions for next year that look very nice, I do have some concern as far as product overlap and what we want to stock. 
 


Can you share any of the specs of the new additions?
 

Expansion of the LX to a LX94, which will be a funtastic ski. The FX line will include a FX104. 
 

post #89 of 106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiteroom View Post

Kastle also makes a ski for Ghost, they built a 203cm SG ski for an Austrian race that involves completing a 'ring' around a ski valley... can't recall the name, but it's a big honor to win evidently. Kastle has feilded a team the last few seasons... sorry Ghost, I don't have any of those.


http://www.derweissering.at/english/index.html

 

Do you remember who was on the team? Wasn't Marc Ghirardelli on it?

post #90 of 106

Yeah, my understanding was that Giradelli was a team member. My favorite ski racer of all time, BTW. 

 

Phil, keep the new releases quiet for a while, we don't need the civilians knowing about 11 new models for next year. The new BMX line, the lower price stuff or the rental stuff..

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 › Will the real Kastle FX94's please stand up?