I think
@Tony S picked up some FX85s last season too. Maybe too much quiver overlap?
I like the FX 84s a lot. That's why I bought them. (I had demo'd them a while back.) In particular they are very sweet on groomers - where they have an exceptionally smooth "easy GS" quality - and in lower angle bumps and crud where speed can be maintained. FOR ME, at 5' 7" 130lbs, they turned out to be a little too much ski in steep, troughy bumps, steep skied-out trees, etc. Since I already own groomer skis, this niche in my quiver needs to be filled by something that is really good at bumps. Therefore when a pair of 165cm FX 85s (non-HP) crossed my bow at a very low price, I snapped them up. So I need to sell the 84s, however reluctantly.
For those who have not tried both, there is a HUGE difference in how the two models ski. Honestly the 165cm 85s ski like a 160, while the 168cm 84s ski like about a 170. (In hindsight I do wonder whether I should maybe have gone to the 173 in the 85.) Basically if you want a slithery agile mogul ski you want the 85. If you want more of an all-around crusing-biased "do anything" ski, you're better off with the 84.
@James refers to them as "MX Lite," and IMHO he is spot-on with that. (I know this description of the FX 84 contradicts what some other reviewers, such as dawgcatching, have said. I attribute that to skier size and to terrain. Dawg skis at Bachelor, where the terrain tends toward the open and not-too-steep and a bit cruddy. That suits the 84 very well. By contrast I ski a lot at places like Saddleback, where things tend toward the narrow and the steep.)
