EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2011 Kastle ski reviews
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2011 Kastle ski reviews

post #1 of 19
Thread Starter 

Back from bike racing season, time to write some reviews. 1st up, Kastle! 

 

2011 Kastle Reviews:

These were generated over the spring, 1st at the industry demo at Winter Park, and with a couple of other pairs we were able to get our hands on in the spring.

 

I will update the thread as we get into winter and I get time on my MX108’s, as well as more time on the MX98 in more favorable snow conditions.

 

Conditions: WP was hard snow, firm bumps, mostly manmade, with a couple of inches new here and there.  Later on, we had softer snow for testing in the spring (another great spring at Bachelor, too bad I transition into cycling by March and can’t ski much.  Gotta start logging those 20 hour weeks to get ready for NRC racing.)

 

About me: 5 foot 9, 155lbs, competent all-mountain skier, and could zipper-line expert-level bumps for the first time in my life by early spring.  Probably ski 40-50 days per year.  I tend to enjoy big open, high speed bowls, bumps, trees, fast groomers.  My skiing speed is fast to full-on. 

We are a Kastle dealer, so take these reviews with a grain of salt. If I didn’t like the skis, I wouldn’t be selling them.  Of course, Kastle isn’t exactly an easy sell like K2 for someone who doesn’t follow the industry, but those who have skied Kastle often have trouble buying anything else.  They are producing the best top-to-bottom ski line around right now, IMO.  This company isn’t a marketing-driven wonder: it produces great stuff and mostly goes on word of mouth.  The website has yet to get the 2011 skis on there.  I think they are guessing most customers will seek out a specialty retailer and demo, if possible. 

 

Here are the skis:

 

RX SL: length tested 166cm:  This ski is pretty much derived from a race-room slalom.  It is a stiff ski, with a  13m radius.  Overall, I found it to be a demanding, yet thrilling ride.  It is on the stiff side for a slalom ski, not unlike a Head iSL RD or a Fischer WC SL: powerful, but I had to have some speed to really make it come alive.   This ski is a monster on hard snow: it feels right at home on the hardest stuff; but you have to be on it.  Bigger guys could possibly relax, but it has none of the big sweet spot of the MX series. And, bumps were a handful. This ski likes to stick close to the groomers.  I would rate it as a legitimate lower-level race slalom, and was significantly more ski than other “carvers” that I tried, such as the Waveflex 14 from Elan, Blizzard SLR IQ, Stockli Cross CX and SX, Progressor 10+ from Fischer, Spitfire from Nordica, and a bunch of others.  It is a powerhouse of a ski!  I wouldn’t prefer it as my all-day ski out West, but those on short-turn hills or who need a slalom that works in and out of the gates should give it a shot.  Great Midwest ski: you could substitute this for a Fischer WC SL and have nearly the same performance.

 

When skiing this ski, I realized that the overall feel of the Kastles, the damp, stable, no speed limit, unlimited hold and power, is very prevalent in the better race room skis from several top brands, but typically lacking in most consumer skis.  That is why I think Kastle is so sought-after: they take race-room materials and feel and put them into everyday skis, whereas many brands “dumb-down” their consumer models and don’t put out the same quality of ski that their athletes see.  This isn’t really a surprise, as Kastle is made in the Head race-room department, so one would expect them to be at that level. 

Ratings (Scale of 1-10, 10 being basically the ultimate currently attainable).  Skill Level: 1 is never ever, 8 is very solid all-mountain skier, 9 is basically an all-mountain expert (including double black bumps) and 10 is a pro or high-level racer.

Stability at speed: 8.5

Forgiveness: 3

Sweet Spot speed: 25mph+

Skill Level Required: Strong L7 to L10

Float in soft snow: n/a

Bump suitability: 4

Likes to run in big arcs:  6

Likes to be on edge and turning: 9.5

Trilling or dull?: Thrilling, but wearing.  Demanding ski!

 

RX12: didn’t get to test. This is the “GS carver” ski in the lineup, which overlaps both the awesome MX70 and MX78.  I am sure it is a powerhouse.  Similar in construction to the MX series, but with a bit more metal and full ash core, instead of the ash/silver fir core of the MX series.  Hard to imagine how stable it is, given how nice the MX series is at speed!

 

We have one on order, and I will update as I get time on it.

 

MX70: length tested: 176cm.

This is a slightly narrower version of one of my everyday skis, the outstanding MX78.  Not much to add to my review of that ski: it skis a bit narrower, is a touch grippier on hard snow, but really pretty similar.  It is a powerhouse, with no speed limit in 176cm.  Feels like a “rec” GS but with versatility. Can go anywhere, do pretty much anything, save for deep snow.  Big sweet spot for what it is.  Quicker onto edge.  It really releases and engages smoother than a full race ski, so it is slightly detuned in that sense, but when you do hook up, the ski just seems to accelerate forward.  Such a powerful ride.  This is a ski to get max vertical in on a weekday.  Good in bumps, definitely better than one would expect, given the fairly stiff flex and race-like feel.  This ski is made for frontside, on-piste skiing for good to expert skiers.

 

Stability at speed:9                       

Forgiveness: 5.5

Sweet Spot speed: 15mph+, not much top end

Skill Level Required: L7-L10

Float in soft snow: 4

Bump suitability: 7.5

Likes to run in big arcs: 7.5

Likes to be on edge and turning: 5

Trilling or dull?: Somewhere in between: quite relaxing, but not a lazy-person’s ski

 

 

MX78: 78mm underfoot, same construction (dual titanial, ash/silver fir wood core, phenol sidewalls) of the MX70.  I have a bunch of time on this ski: It was my everyday ski for a couple of months last year, in a low-snow year where the wide skis didn’t get much use.  Time on some boilerplate at WP pretty much validated my observations: If I could only have 1 ski and lived in a place it where it didn’t snow too much (like back East); this would be the ski.  First off, it rips hard snow: the only ski close to 80mm that really can really “hold the jock strap” of a race room ski. Sure, edgehold isn’t quite as good, but it equals or beats 90% of the race-derived 70mm skis out there.  Maybe it is the laterally stiff nature of the ski, or the super hard phenol sidewalls, or the top-quality steel in the edges.  If you are a good skier, you can make this thing sing on hard snow.  As someone once said of a sketchy 5.12 R/X climb around here, it bites harder than Jack Nicholson.   Totally GS in feel: huge sweet spot, stable at ANY speed, perfect flex for a strong, aggressive, yet not burly skier.  In bumps, this was the best ski I tried in 2 days of demoing.  I might rate a couple of softer Heads and K2’s as equal, but they were nowhere near as good  on the rest of the mountain.  I was just learning to ski the zipper line at the time, and 1st run on the MX78, I was able to ski the long bump run (I think it was Derailer) with only 1 stop.  There wasn’t much new snow at WP that day, but I have skied it in 6-8 inches of new plenty of times, including at the 2nd demo show we did at Alpine Meadows (they were my own pair, though).  We hiked the NW ridge and dropped in to around 8 inches of really nice snow over at Idiot’s Delight and South Beaver, and the MX78 blasted through everything, with total confidence.  Float was as you would expect for a 78mm ski: not great, but workable, and really, how much float do you need in 8” of snow?  It also did very well on the big bumps and steeps over toward Keyhole and Scott Chute.  Also, did I mention how stable the MX78 is?  There is absolutely no real-world speed limit on it, at least not without losing your ticket. Think “consumer race GS”. 

 

The MX78 is all about skiing as fast and aggressively as you can, and knowing it will hold up for you in any condition.  Still the best all-around frontside ride I have used.

 

Stability at speed: 9.5

Forgiveness: 5.5

Sweet Spot speed: 20mph+, no top end

Skill Level Required: L7-L10

Float in soft snow: 5.5

Bump suitability: 8

Likes to run in big arcs: 8

Likes to be on edge and turning: 6

Trilling or dull?: More thrilling than dull, definitely comes alive when driven hard. A skier’s ski.

 

 

MX88: same layup as the MX78, but 10mm wider, and with a larger turn radius.  Length tested: 176cm

Review: I have skied this model on and off, and it was the 1st Kastle I tried about 3 years ago, and the one that opened me up to the brand.   This pair was primarily tested on hard snow, so it wasn’t exactly the ideal conditions it was designed for.  Mostly, it feels like a wider MX78: it holds like glue, is a little slower onto edge, is confident in bumps, extremely powerful, glued to the snow both when run flat and when on edge, and has no speed limit.  Overall, an extremely high performance ski.  The overall character is damp, smooth, and powerful, and with some kick in the tail.   Fairly large sweet spot, but really seems to sing at speed.  Differences from the MX78: definitely a bit slower to roll over, doesn’t have the near-race ski like acceleration out of the turn, doesn’t feel quite as locked in on pure boilerplate, not quite as quick. A bit more sluggish in bumps.  In 6” or more of crud, the MX88 is more confident, and the wider tip doesn’t see to get kicked around as much (although the MX78 is plenty stable).  It feels like you can ski 2-3 mph faster in really rough snow on the wider MX88; when you hit that speed limit (on the upside of 40mph) in choppy, cruddy off-piste conditions on the MX78, the MX88 is a bit more quiet and allows you stay in the fall line longer, and keep the speed up.  I have yet to ski it in deep, uncut snow, although I am sure it is great there too, but this ski really shines in the crudbuster mode.  There are a couple of other skis that match it in performance, but I can’t think of a better ~90mm all-around ski.

 Stability at speed: 9.5

Forgiveness: 5

Sweet Spot speed: 25mph+, no top end

Skill Level Required: L7+ to L10

Float in soft snow: 7.5

Bump suitability: 6

Likes to run in big arcs: 8.75

Likes to be on edge and turning: 5

Trilling or dull?: Can be very thrilling, but also relaxing if you don’t want to turn. Get out of it what you put into it.

 

MX98: new ski for 2011.  Gone is the “wider MX78/88” which was a truly outstanding ski; something similar to a Nordica Enforcer, with truly respectable hard snow performance and crud crushing ability rolled into one.  The metal is gone, and a new wood core only layup replaces it.  Width is 98mm underfoot, length tested was 178cm.  The old equivalent would have been 174cm.  They have an equivalent running length, as the old 174cm was a flat tail and the current ski has a turned-up tail and small rockered tip.

 

Review: a bit limited, due to the hard snow conditions.  At any rate, I got a feel for these.  The hard-snow hold and power that the old MX98 had isn’t there.  It is softer, doesn’t hook up as aggressively, and doesn’t have the “wide race ski” feel of the old model. It is extremely stable, quite damp, and very smooth. The sweet spot feels even larger, and it is a solid big-arc carver, but lacking in energy.  It reminds me somewhat of the old Legend Pro Rider, but with a more user-friendly radius, and not quite as stiff, or perhaps the Elan 999, but with more heft.  The rockered tip (when I got it into some soft snow, which there wasn’t more than a few inches of) helped ease release of the skis. It was a bit wide for bumps, but workable.  The overall feel was solid wood-core ski that is a real jack of all trades.  I wouldn’t choose it as a 1-ski quiver (that would be the MX88) but if I primarily skied soft snow and wanted a day-in/day-out ski, then it would be toward the top of the list.  What it gives up over the old MX98 is the hard snow power and fun factor, but soft snow performance increases just a little with the new tip and softer flex, in terms of release. I don’t think it is quite as good at speed in crud, though close. The upside is the wider performance envelope, and lower price, making at a bit more accessable to level 6’s, whereas before, it was a pretty strong ski, suited to very good skiers only.  And, in primarily soft snow, it is really at home, at most any speed.   

Stability at speed: 8.5

Forgiveness: 7           

Sweet Spot speed: 20mph+

Skill Level Required: Low L7 to L10

Float in soft snow:8.5

Bump suitability: 6

Likes to run in big arcs: 9

Likes to be on edge and turning: 6

Trilling or dull?: Somewhere in the middle. Not as peppy as the metal MX series skis.

 

MX108: basically the same ski as the MX98, but wider, and more soft-snow oriented. This is the prototypical “big-mountain” ski, or in other words, a 90/10 ski for new snow and crud.  108mm underfoot, with a slightly rockered tip and turned-up tail, skis a bit short in the 187cm length tested.  No metal. This is the ski you will see most of the pro freeskiers on.

 

Review: hard to say exactly, due to less than stellar testing conditions.  Again, there wasn’t much fresh snow to try out.  It felt about the same as the MX98, with no speed limit in this length, very damp, smooth, and confidence-inspiring.  Surprisingly OK on groomers, although this ski, like most skis 110mm underfoot, basically is only meant to see groomers when getting back to the lift.  Really slow edge to edge, and not the right choice for less than a 8” of new snow; like most 110mm skis, probably wants at least a foot of new to really come into it’s own.   I have one of these on order, and I will post a full review once I get time on it, in the conditions it was designed for. 

 

MX128: the huge ski, but I haven’t skied it, nor will I get a chance to.  There are only a couple of days a year where I would want something like this over the MX108, and last year there were zero days, so we aren’t likely to bring it in as a demo.

 

FX84: you have probably heard a lot about this ski: light, thinner profile, but still with some metal, which results in a very high performance touring/AT ski.  This was tested in 176cm, and has an 18m radius.  Layup is 2 sheets of .3mm of titanium, and a thinner wood core profile.  This ski is light, and is designed for little compromise on backcountry descents.

Review: it definitely didn’t feel like the MX series!  Much lighter underfoot, very lively, different feel than I have had on any high-end ski.  Still had the wood-core “dampness” somewhat, but not the grounded to the snow feel of the MX series, probably due to the lack of weight in the ski.   When compared to the MX88, I would guess hard-snow hold was probably 85% as good: it held, but didn’t lock in quite as well as the stiffer MX 88.  Stability was not far off, but again, it got bounced more in rough snow.  It was pretty fun in bumps as well: softer flex, not too much sidecut=a solid bump ski. A big difference in comparison to the MX series was the lower speed limit; at big speeds on the frontside of Winter Park, especially when it went from boilerplate to piles of scrubbed-off snow, the ski was a bit bouncy.  In primarily off-piste conditions, where this ski is most likely to be used, that probably won’t be an issue.  I liked the combination of flex and weight, and it seems this ski will ski circles around most any other backcountry ski I have tried.

Also, I think this could be a credible, if not formidable, in-bounds choice for any technically skilled, yet lighter weight skier who doesn’t have the strength or weight to flex an MX series ski.   One would just have to get used to the very light weight of the skis on the snow; it is lighter than most women’s skis I have tried.  Not that I have skied every AT ski around, but of those I have tried, this is easily the best.

 

Stability at speed:7

Forgiveness: 8

Sweet Spot speed: 15mph+ to 35mph

Skill Level Required: L7-L10

Float in soft snow: 7

Bump suitability: 6.5

Likes to run in big arcs: 5

Likes to be on edge and turning: 6

Trilling or dull?: Quite exciting, like driving a short-wheelbase sportscar, but one that doesn’t have a particularly large engine.  My dad’s old MG MGB comes to mind; super fun to drive, very sporty, but not really a car to being doing 120mph in.

 

Kastle FX94 review: 176cm tested, with a 20m radius.  This ski is 94mm underfoot, which is a more useful backcountry width much of the time for most male skiers.  Adds a bit of weight over the FX84 and FX74, so it weight is a concern, you may want to look at those. The 94 is likely to give better descending performance in variable conditions, though.

It skis about the same as the 84, but with some added contact area and weight that gives it more heft and a grounded feel at speed. It seemed a bit superior to the 84 when hitting choppy snow, which one would expect.  Even so, it feels lighter on the snow than any MX series ski.  I would rate edgehold again a bit below the MX88, but close to that of the non-metal MX98.  The main difference is really the light and lively feel of the ski. It feels like it will do whatever the pilot wants, and isn’t locked into a straight-ahead feel as much as the MX series. It also feels quicker and a bit more turny than the 94mm waist and 20m radius would indicate. If I had to compare it to a ski, it would get close marks to the Fischer Watea 94: light on the snow, very lively, smearable, but with less of a power on edge feel than the beefier Mantra-style (wood core w/metal) ski.  If you like the Watea, you will really like the FX series.  This is going to rip as a backcountry ski as well.

Stability at speed:7.75

Forgiveness: 8

Sweet Spot speed: 15mph+ to 45mph

Skill Level Required: L7-L10

Float in soft snow: 8

Bump suitability: 6

Likes to run in big arcs: 6

Likes to be on edge and turning: 5

Thrilling or Dull?  A sporty ski, it is quite nimble for it’s size, so I have to say more on the Thrilling side. It isn’t a slalom carver, though.

 

 

LX 82 and 72: only ½ of a run on each, felt along the performance lines of a Sultan 80 or 85, but more damp, smooth as a Caddie Deville, and overall very refined. I will post more info once I get some additional time on them. This is going to be a much better choice than the MX series for those improving Level 5 and 6's, and also better for the less aggressive Level 7 and 8's out there.  If you are looking at a Sultan-type ski, this would be a terrific alternative.

 

Overall, I really think the new MX108 is going to be a hit.  My 3-ski quiver of choice if I were doing strictly Kastle?

 

MX108 for bigger fresh days

MX88 for mixed conditions

MX78 or MX70 for harder snow and frontside days.  For low-traffic weekdays, subsitute the RX12.   

 

The 78/98 would make a great 2-quiver ski for the Eastern Skier, and the Western Skier may want to opt for the 78 or 88, and the 108.  I know in a normal year, I get about 10 days locally where I would prefer a 108 over a 98 or 88.  Last year, it was only 3, though, so it really all depends.  In fact, It wasn’t until mid-February until I got off my MX78’s, as we just weren’t getting much snow. It made the low-snow start to the season so much more interesting than it would have otherwise been, though.  They were a great investment!

post #2 of 19

Interesting revies dawgcatching. I always enjoy reading(and looking for) your write-ups and your gear reviews come across as very usefull. You should start your own review publication. It's nice to hear the straight-scoop instead of the usual sales pitch you get from the ski reviews in magazines.

 

As far as Kastle, I get the impression that they are not the most forgiving skis. I have never been on a Kastle, but based on your information, is it correct to assume that they are not geared towards the intermediate skier? 

post #3 of 19

I'll jump in on this to note that being forgiving is not the same as being targeted at an intermediate. Or vice versa. I find Kastles to be surprisingly forgiving, compared to say a similar Stockli or Head. In that sense, an intermediate could do fine on most of them as long as they didn't backseat too egregiously. But the ski would be wasted. Put it another way: I find modern 911's fairly easy to drive briskly. But I do not have the skills to appreciate what they're really capable of, or even how it is they can make me look good when I'm not. They're wasted on me. Rear engine 911's were another story; they had nearly the same envelope, corrected for cc and so on, but absolutely no tolerance for mistakes. Blink and you were facing the wrong way while still moving waay fast. So they were simply not a great idea to push...

post #4 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

I'll jump in on this to note that being forgiving is not the same as being targeted at an intermediate. Or vice versa. I find Kastles to be surprisingly forgiving, compared to say a similar Stockli or Head. In that sense, an intermediate could do fine on most of them as long as they didn't backseat too egregiously. But the ski would be wasted. Put it another way: I find modern 911's fairly easy to drive briskly. But I do not have the skills to appreciate what they're really capable of, or even how it is they can make me look good when I'm not. They're wasted on me. Rear engine 911's were another story; they had nearly the same envelope, corrected for cc and so on, but absolutely no tolerance for mistakes. Blink and you were facing the wrong way while still moving waay fast. So they were simply not a great idea to push...


I would totally agree: the performance level you get from such a "forgiving" ski is astounding.  That is really what makes these stand out: most of the customers purchasing these are definitely not full-blown experts, but they are giving out the same 2 thumbs-up as guys who are legit "ski everything with confidence" experts.

 

Have you skied Stockli recently?  Many of the new stuff is more forgiving and very Kastle-like. The new VXL is miles more forgiving than the XXXL, as is the new CX and SX pro.  It used to be that any of their "expert" skis were truly for experts only and seem to be the same layup as a WC GS-stock ski, but no longer.  Their stuff is seriously under the radar, but the SX and CX were perhaps the most fun frontside skis I tried last year.  Can't afford them, though. I was ripping 6" of new snow and soft bumps on the Cross CX and loving every minute of it, and the week before it was pure boilerplate and manmade snow that was nearly as much fun on the same ski.

post #5 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MojoMan View Post

Interesting revies dawgcatching. I always enjoy reading(and looking for) your write-ups and your gear reviews come across as very usefull. You should start your own review publication. It's nice to hear the straight-scoop instead of the usual sales pitch you get from the ski reviews in magazines.

 

As far as Kastle, I get the impression that they are not the most forgiving skis. I have never been on a Kastle, but based on your information, is it correct to assume that they are not geared towards the intermediate skier? 


Thanks for the kind words!  I could do "sales pitch" reviews that many mags push, though, if you prefer. I would have to get creative though, as I need to think of 100 different ways to say "duudddde, this is the best ski ever; it has XYZ technology and sick graphics. Buy, it bro!". 

 

If you are a real intermediate, then I suggest the Kastle LX line.  It isn't wimpy whatsoever, just it has a tapered sidewall, similar to what you find with a Sultan 80 from Dynastar, and less beefy construction, which makes the ski more malleable at slow speeds and also quite a bit more forgiving of incorrect input.  I think of them as kind of geared toward the more typical K2 earthquake series customer, whereas for the MX series, you are correct that they are really geared toward advanced skiers and up; for example, people who maybe would be looking at the old Head Monsters, Blizzard Magnum 8.1/8.7 or Atlas, Elan freeride or 82XTI; that sort of customer who typically buys a laminate, vertical sidewall ski with metal. 

post #6 of 19

umm ... one minor point ... 911s still have their engines in the rear.  They've just developed new ways to stop them spearing off into the scenery backwards.

 

As for me, I'm still trying to develop ways to stop myself spearing off into the scenery backwards.  I'm thinking a pair of MX78s might help ...

post #7 of 19

^^^^ Yeah, more or less. I tend to call the water cooled versions, when the engines' CM was moved forward so less was behind the axle and thus less snap oversteer, mid engines. I guess that they're still "rear" although I honestly don't know what the difference is between a modern 911 and a modern Boxster (whose engine is also well behind the mid point of the car, or axles, and in fact overlaps the rear axle, but is called a mid-engine). Automotive designers here? 

post #8 of 19
Thread Starter 

Forgot to mention that I already did a short review of most of these, but was able to get on more skis later, with more feedback,hence the more complete reviews.  More to follow, now that we have a full demo ski lineup from Kastle, and we are skiing here.

post #9 of 19

Have you had a chance to get out on the regular camber 187 MX 108 for comparison to the tip rocker version? I'm wondering how much stability they give up and how much nimbleness is gained.

post #10 of 19
Thread Starter 

No, I have yet to even get my personal MX108's.  I didn't ski the old one.  Did they even change it?  

post #11 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

No, I have yet to even get my personal MX108's.  I didn't ski the old one.  Did they even change it?  



Yup, the new one has an early rise tip. The old one, last season's and before, have traditional camber. I got a pair of the trad camber ones this year and like them a lot, though I think the early rise would be nice in tight spots. Having seen it, it looks quite subtle so I'm wondering if it's enough to make a difference or more of a "marketing" rocker - though Kastle seems like a company less likely than others to implement designs for the sake of pure marketing.

post #12 of 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

No, I have yet to even get my personal MX108's.  I didn't ski the old one.  Did they even change it?  



I haven't seen mine either. 

post #13 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by D(C) View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

No, I have yet to even get my personal MX108's.  I didn't ski the old one.  Did they even change it?  



Yup, the new one has an early rise tip. The old one, last season's and before, have traditional camber. I got a pair of the trad camber ones this year and like them a lot, though I think the early rise would be nice in tight spots. Having seen it, it looks quite subtle so I'm wondering if it's enough to make a difference or more of a "marketing" rocker - though Kastle seems like a company less likely than others to implement designs for the sake of pure marketing.


Well, the 98 skis much different than the old model, with that rockered tip.  The flex is quite a bit softer as well.  It would be a safe bet that the new MX108 will feel shorter and quicker with the same tip.  I like that idea, as 187cm is longer than I usually ski them in.  

post #14 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philpug View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

No, I have yet to even get my personal MX108's.  I didn't ski the old one.  Did they even change it?  



I haven't seen mine either. 


There is still a chance!   I heard if we don't see them by Christmas, then probably not.

post #15 of 19

dawgcatching,  thank you for the excellent info.  I've been skiing the MX78s for the last two seasons and have absolutely loved them.  This season I'm interested in picking up a couple of new skis and I've been seriously considering the Kastle RX12 and the FX94.  Have you had a chance to ski the RX12 yet?  From some, I'm hearing that the MX78 and RX12 are so close that it's not worth it, but one of my favorite aspects of the 78s is how amazing they are at speed carving up the groomers early in the morning on the weekdays.

 

Any additional thoughts you have on the comparison between the FX94s and the MX88s or other similar options will be appreciated as well.

post #16 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSM126 View Post

dawgcatching,  thank you for the excellent info.  I've been skiing the MX78s for the last two seasons and have absolutely loved them.  This season I'm interested in picking up a couple of new skis and I've been seriously considering the Kastle RX12 and the FX94.  Have you had a chance to ski the RX12 yet?  From some, I'm hearing that the MX78 and RX12 are so close that it's not worth it, but one of my favorite aspects of the 78s is how amazing they are at speed carving up the groomers early in the morning on the weekdays.

 

Any additional thoughts you have on the comparison between the FX94s and the MX88s or other similar options will be appreciated as well.

Ooohhh, RX12: I am waxing my pair, getting them ready. We are currently getting hit with a storm (11 inches already) which could quickly turn into 30-40 inches of very light snow, so I will have to get back to you on that one during the next dry spell.  If it keeps snowing, they aren't going to see the hill for awhile.  But they look gorgeous, have the stiffer (but floating) plate, and are very similar in flex to the MX78, only slightly stiffer.  From what others have said to me, they are quite good in bumps (the MX78's equal) and even better on hard snow. 

 

I don't really have anything to add to the MX88/FX94 debate.  The FX was a great ski, it felt more like the way a Fischer Motive feels: light, grippy, agile, but not hugging the snow in the way the MX88 does.  The 88 is going to ski similarly to the 78, but wider, more forgiving in chop, larger turn radius, that sort of thing, and I find it to be better at high speeds.  I would prefer the MX88 for resort skiing, and there are others who would disagree with me, I am sure. I was going to mount up a pair of FX94's for the demo fleet, but we have already sold through. I do have a few pair of MX88's left, so one gets mounted up a demo (in my size, of course) instead.   

 


 

post #17 of 19

Thanks for the PM on the RXs.  I'll give you call later this morning.

 

In addition to the FX94, I'm also considering Ski Logik's Ullr's Chariot ... actually leaning in that direction.  Any experience on that ski?

post #18 of 19

I recently picked up a used pair of FX94s and didn't like them as much as I thought I would.  The MX series is probably more my cup of tea.  As soon as I have enough posts to start a thread, I'll put up an ad on the gear-swap forum.  $650 with Jasper bindings.  Can send pics if anyone is interested.

Cheers,

post #19 of 19
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pvonhaam View Post

I recently picked up a used pair of FX94s and didn't like them as much as I thought I would.  The MX series is probably more my cup of tea.  As soon as I have enough posts to start a thread, I'll put up an ad on the gear-swap forum.  $650 with Jasper bindings.  Can send pics if anyone is interested.

Cheers,



That is a great price! You will sell them in 2 seconds.  I would ask at least $800.....

 

The MX is more my favorite, too. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2011 Kastle ski reviews