Individual Review Review: Kästle FX85

[SBrown]

For what you describe, I would probably go with the non-HP in the 173.

 

[James]

Agree. The non hp just lacks a bit if you're going to really mash it on the groomers. i don't think you'll notice. You might end up liking bumps with the Fx85.
Not crazy about the Fx84 unless it's the 1st generation. You want the 85.

 

[UGASkiDawg]

Soooo..... need help picking a ski. Like all the positive reviews/user feedback of Kastle FX series. Mostly ski in CO, 6-8 days/year plus several days in the Midwest. FX84/85 seems like a good choice. I am a lvl6 skier, strong intermediate. Mostly blues-blacks (no bumps) but will ski or 'skid' bumps to make day interesting. 40yo, 165lb, 5'10" in good shape. Is FX85 HP 'too much of a ski' for me? If no, what length should I go with 165 or 173? Appreciate feedback.

Demo a pair and find out .....I'm exactly your size and the 181 is perfect but I'm not intermediate (most days anyway)

 

[Bobalooski]

Demo a pair and find out .....I'm exactly your size and the 181 is perfect but I'm not intermediate (most days anyway)

Agree. Demo. I'm 5'7, 155 and the 181 works well.

 

[SBrown]

He says he's a level 6 and skis, what, no more than 12 days a year? The 173 should be fine, don't you think?

 

[Bobalooski]

He says he's a level 6 and skis, what, no more than 12 days a year? The 173 should be fine, don't you think?

Yep! It's up to the individual, of course so always good to demo, but the 173 should absolutely work. Super stable and fun ski!

 

[UGASkiDawg]

He says he's a level 6 and skis, what, no more than 12 days a year? The 173 should be fine, don't you think?

Of course it should be fine. I could ski the 173 as an everyday ski as well but if he can demo he might as well try both.

 

[ARL67]

Any 173 with the significant tip & tail rise of the FX85/FX95 .... would that not ski like a snow-blade on groomers ???
I am 5'9" 175lbs, just a ski-hack, and found even the MX83 in 173 too short my "my" liking -> the MX83 being a ski with next to zero tip or tail rise, and a square tail that bites. The newest Kastles with Hollowtech 2.0 have a pretty big "hole" of reduced mass at the tip, hence greatly reduced swing weight, and hence very nimble.
.... what I'm trying to say is, give the 181 a go/demo before laying down money on a 173

~ Andy

 

[SBrown]

No, it doesn't ski like a snow blade. This might be the first time in history that I'm actually advocating for a shorter ski than everyone else is, lol! Anyway, the fact that he was even considering a 165 is what pointed me to the 173 and not 181. Which is the longest length in the FX85, which says something.... (Not sure what, but something....)

 

[gram2016]

Demo a pair and find out .....I'm exactly your size and the 181 is perfect but I'm not intermediate (most days anyway)

Thank you everyone for all the feedback! Unfortunately, I will not be able to demo till next season , work... and no skis to demo in midwest . Working on moving to CO in the next 1-2 years so my days on the slopes will increase significantly . Some good deals right now on 2015/16 FX85 HP (~$550 demo) so considering purchase. Cant find decent deals on non HP right now. Wish I researched more for my Feb trip. Rented some demos and liked Volkl RTM 81 163cm very much, but by day 3 wanted to go faster and do some bumps. RTM 81 was not ideal for this, and longer length or RTM84s were not available. Other demos were not liked so much. My last ski purchase was in 1999 (Volant), renting since resuming regular annual ski trips 3 years ago. Getting better with every trip so looking for ski that will help me get to the next level. Kastle website ski recommendation and it came back with 163 for 85HP. Seems kind of short as some reviewers/owners stated that they ski 'short'.

I got my ability lvl6 from this:
Skier Ability Levels
Level Six
Level Six skiers confidently make parallel turns on blue runs but do not ski many advanced trails. Level Six skiers use their poles to time turns. A Level Six skier is interested in learning to ski better on more challenging terrain.
Level Seven
Level Seven skiers ski controlled parallel turns and can ski very well on blue trails. Level Seven skiers can control their speed and rhythm on black diamond trails, but they are looking to ski on challenging trails with better style. Level Seven skiers can adjust the size and length of their turns and are learning to ski on a variety of different types of snow and terrain.

 

[James]

Can you examine the demo before buying it?
Reason being that shops are notorious for dulling the useable parts of tips and tails of skis. Some aren't bad others are round and are nearly ruined. That will make a ski feel short and weird. You can't get the tip to bite.

The 173 would be fine. I skied the 181 nonhp and weigh over 50lbs more. Did not try the hp version in 85 but tried it in 95. Great ski but I did not like the feel at all. Felt brittle. It's not just the metal as the 1st generation Fx84 had 2 thin sheets of metal and had superb snow feel.

I don't know, don't become obsessed over 1 model ski esp one you've never tried. At 6 days a year maybe demoing each time isn't so bad?

As far as the MX83 in 173 I agree it's short and there's been countless words on Kastle's moronic refusal to build that ski in 5cm increments. However on piste even in large spaces like Snowmass it's pretty awesome. Few skis have the precision and power of that ski that make high edge angles so much fun.

 

[Tony S]

[snip]
I don't know, don't become obsessed over 1 model ski esp one you've never tried. At 6 days a year maybe demoing each time isn't so bad?

This. Reading the lines from the OP and between them, there are a lot of avenues to pursuing improvement and maxmizing fun. With all respect, when it comes to skis, you probably don't know what you don't know yet. Therefore focusing on technique, boot fit, and getting on the hill more often will probably pay bigger dividends sooner than getting too involved in thinking and talking about skis, even though we know it's fun to do that.

 

[Ron]

Long term update on FX85 non metal. I continue to love this ski and have many days on it now. I just skied it at Copper in about 8-10" of fresh and tracked and was quite happy with it. More than adequately stable yet remains fun and agile.

 

[James]

Long term update on FX85 non metal. I continue to love this ski and have many days on it now. I just skied it at Copper in about 8-10" of fresh and tracked and was quite happy with it. More than adequately stable yet remains fun and agile.

So when do you use your SR 107's? Still like them?

 

[Ron]

So when do you use your SR 107's? Still like them?

LOL, I just updated my 107 review. Yes, the 107 is still a much better and more fun ski when I know there's going to be more than 6"-8" or so. The 107 is a ski that can be put up on edge or slarved as needed; its fun to play with turn shape or slash a pow turn It drifts extremely well too.

I still think there's room for a 98 Renoun though

 

[Bobalooski]

Where'd you wind up on the mount point, Ron?

 

[Read Blinn]

Haven't skied that 85 on ice, have you? I'm curious to know, because when I skied it, it was fine on the soft but useless on the frozen (unlike the HP, which was great on both).

 

[Ron]

posted on 107 thread to keep this focused on the 85

 

[Ron]

Haven't skied that 85 on ice, have you? I'm curious to know, because when I skied it, it was fine on the soft but useless on the frozen (unlike the HP, which was great on both).

My ice is probably different than your ice! But, on the little hardpack we had this season, they hold just fine.

 

[Tricia]

Soooo..... need help picking a ski. Like all the positive reviews/user feedback of Kastle FX series. Mostly ski in CO, 6-8 days/year plus several days in the Midwest. FX84/85 seems like a good choice. I am a lvl6 skier, strong intermediate. Mostly blues-blacks (no bumps) but will ski or 'skid' bumps to make day interesting. 40yo, 165lb, 5'10" in good shape. Is FX85 HP 'too much of a ski' for me? If no, what length should I go with 165 or 173? Appreciate feedback.

I'm with @SBrown on this one. 173 is the way to go considering your description of your skiing. That should be great for your current ability and be plenty of ski for you as you advance when you move to Colorado, if you keep skis longer than most of the folks around here. If not, then you'll be moving on to a 181 by then anyway.

Note: I like how your answer to - "What length should I go with, 165 or 173?" - is 181.