2021 Kastle MX88 or 83

[markojp]

The solution is simple, and Phil's advice was spot on. Buy an Augment 88. It's a brilliantly good strong ski for strong skiers. And made in Austria.

 

[Alexzn]

@markojp What stiffnesss? Augments come in 10 different stiffness levels, which I would imagine change how the ski feels completely. So it is not a replacement for the MX, or at least not without some decisions being made by a consumer.

@Philpug - i like the MX series. The first time I jumped on the MX88 I skied groomers and loose snow off trail in the morning and then did an amateur ski race in the afternoon and won (first and the only time I won anything skiing). I almost bought that ski right there. It was ridiculously fast and smooth without being difficult. My current MX99 is kind of the same, smooth and powerful without being a plank. Lighter and more shapely is the wrong change on that ski for ME, because I know enough about ski design to project how it will get the ski feel. maybe just what a lot of other guys wanted. Maybe if I demo it this coming season, I’ll change my mind ( I’m open to that of course).

and the whole “ Austrian design” thing is clearly not good for the brand. “Un-boutiquing“ Kastle puts it into the same category as many other brands that bring their stories, marketing muscle, reputation, etc. Blizzard and Nordica make terrific skis, arguably better ski per $ than Kastle any day, but some people bought Kastle because they gave something that other brands don’t provide: ridiculous stability that was for some reason still accessible. Being “different“ this year has to chip away at some of that, so for those some people it is a step backwards. Especially for MX88, which was a capstone model for the brand and arguably best ski in the world for almost a decade. I’m sure sales have slowed down so Kastle needed to make a chameg. I get it. I still mourn the evolution of the MX series. Lighter weight and more shape is not what I personally want.

but, yes, the proof is in how they ski. Hook me up with some new Kastle demos this season, then we can talk.

 

[Philpug]

@Alexzn you are right, the new Kastle might not be what you want. This is not the first time a company changed direction with a flagship model/series and went a different direction. I don't think they are un-boutiquing the brand, they are just expanding the audience. I do have another article in the works that will be released when we do a Facebook Live program with Griffin Post on just this topic, hopefully you will check on on that when we do it.

We do plan on having either a new MX83 or MX88 in the test fleet, along with the new ZX108.

 

[Philpug]

@markojp What stiffnesss? Augments come in 10 different stiffness levels, which I would imagine change how the ski feels completely. So it is not a replacement for the MX, or at least not without some decisions being made by a consumer.

Augment will be just be bringing 3 flexes over. They really have a skewed view of what soft (flimsy) and stiff mean. The 10 flex which is their "flimsy" is stiffer than a Brahma. I have flexed different numbers back to back and honestly I am hard pressed to tell the difference, it is very minute. I think any medium flex, you would be happy with. I think you would like the AM88Ti..I know you will love the AM98.

 

[Tony S]

It's not a downgrade. Let's nip that in the bud. It's a different ski.

Do you have testing notes on these skis? Apologies if I missed them.

2021 Kästle MX83

Philpug: The outgoing MX83 and MX84 were the gold standard for many of our readers as well as sales leaders in the MX collection, so the new MX83 has some big shoes to fill. Like the rest of the collection, the MX83 is all new with a level of obtainable performance that the previous generations...

www.pugski.com

2021 Kästle MX88

Philpug: It is very risky to completely redesign one of the best skis ever brought to market. The MX88 is a ski that not too long ago I billed as a "Once in a Decade" ski. It is timeless. There had been slight evolutionary changes over its lifespan, even becoming 89 mm underfoot, but 2021 is the...

www.pugski.com

Thanks, @Philpug. Helpful - I'd seen these - but I was wondering if @markojp had his own notes.

 

[markojp]

Thanks, @Philpug. Helpful - I'd seen these - but I was wondering if @markojp had his own notes.

From what I recall, it isn't as powerful feeling, but I did think it would work very well for a strong, lighter skier, or someone who wanted a bit easier ski. If you sized down in the old, you might size up in the new. I'm an outlier, but since someone mentioned them, I didn't like ths fx95 at all, liked the old 94, and thing the current 96 as the 'best of both', that knowing that anyone who loves the 95 very likely will feel lost with the 96. I'm sure this will be the same with the new 88. It might be for a different customer, but it's still a good ski. It passes my 'I could make this work' test. An apt analogy might be all the changes made to the storm rider 88... I'm sure we all have our personal preferences through the years, and Stockli seems to be doing just fine.

 

[Alexzn]

About Augment: I’m curious but just being strong is not enough, Kastle was a strong ski that was still surprisingly easy to ski. I hope Augments have the same quality.
Maybe it’s all simple: Kastle was a traditional race construction in a wider shape that was tuned to all mountain versatility. That’s why it worked so well. Augment also comes from race ski background, so maybe they got the same formula.

 

[Wasatchman]

From what I recall, it isn't as powerful feeling, but I did think it would work very well for a strong, lighter skier, or someone who wanted a bit easier ski. If you sized down in the old, you might size up in the new. I'm an outlier, but since someone mentioned them, I didn't like ths fx95 at all, liked the old 94, and thing the current 96 as the 'best of both', that knowing that anyone who loves the 95 very likely will feel lost with the 96. I'm sure this will be the same with the new 88. It might be for a different customer, but it's still a good ski. It passes my 'I could make this work' test. An apt analogy might be all the changes made to the storm rider 88... I'm sure we all have our personal preferences through the years, and Stöckli seems to be doing just fine.

Thanks for the notes. The ideal change to the MX89 for me would be if they could keep nearly all the strengths but improve it in deeper snow from being a bit less cumbersome. Like @Alexzn , on paper the changes to the new mx88 don't seem like they would suit me as well versus what I love about my mx89s.

But personal preference aside, the concern I have is if Kastle moves away from what was a fantastic and very unique ski for what it was, and replace it with just another good ski. There are a lot of good skis in the 88-90 category, but the old MX89 was special and unique for it's damp, smooth, high speed stability and unbelievable edge hold. Besides mourning the loss of a special ski that will be hard to fully replicate elsewhere (the MX89 had a unique construction), Kastle may find themselves in a battle with ski giants in that category that also makes very good skis. Suddenly they have to compete with just another good ski that may no longer standout enough and get pulverized being a smaller brand. Especially as I consider the MX88/MX89 so much of their following and brand identity.

 

[markojp]

Let's get one thing straight though, there isn't a bad 88 in the market. The truly burly one's aren't surviving because they just don't sell. Don't get me going about how disappointed I am that the 16-17 Monster 88 isn't still around. Hands down my favorite 88 of all time, but somehow I'll survive... as will Head.

 

[Tony S]

The ideal change to the MX89 for me would be if they could keep nearly all the strengths but improve it in deeper snow from being a bit less cumbersome.

Well, yeah. You've flip-flopped now. It's perfect except when it isn't. Why are you so sure this isn't exactly what they did? You know everything's a compromise. You can't have a wide GS that is great in deep snow.

 

[Alexzn]

@markojp Wasn’t the old MX88 a Monster 88 with more manners and class?

 

[Alexzn]

You can't have a wide GS that is great in deep snow.

yeah you can. You just go very very fast. ;-))(

 

[Wasatchman]

Well, yeah. You've flip-flopped now. It's perfect except when it isn't. Why are you so sure this isn't exactly what they did? You know everything's a compromise. You can't have a wide GS that is great in deep snow.

Yes, I don't think they could do it, but if that's what they were going for I'd be a little more understanding. Anyway, we can all have our opinions. Edit: and no ski is ever perfect. I never said that. In fact i stated what I think is the mx's biggest limitations. But let me be clear. I'm not flip-flopping. I'm bummed and think it's a huge mistake on Kastle's part to mess this much with one of the most differentiated skis in the market that's a cult classic and a big part of their identity. If you're excited about the new Kastle, knock yourself out. I'm not for reasons already stated.

And regardless whether or not I like the new skis, if Kastle is meaningfully more successful because of the changes, believe me I'll man up and say I was wrong.

I'm on record saying Kastle as a company will be worse off for these changes. And a decent chance they are materially worse off. And if I'm right, I hope @Philpug and @markojp remember this thread and say you know what, I disagreed but he was right. And if I'm wrong I have no problem saying I was dead wrong as I said previously.

 

[markojp]

@markojp Wasn’t the old MX88 a Monster 88 with more manners and class?

Chuckle Honestly, I liked the Monster better off piste and in bumps because of the tail design. On piste, the Monster had the same power, and the length was right (184 vs 188). Like you though, i love the MX 98 and 99. Beautiful skis, and also 184.

 

[markojp]

.

I'm on record saying Kästle as a company will be worse off for these changes. And a decent chance they are materially worse off. And if I'm right, I hope @Philpug and @markojp remember this thread and say you know what, I disagreed but he was right. And if I'm wrong I have no problem saying I was dead wrong as I said previously.

I honestly have no stake or interest
in argument, and don't mind at all if you're 'right', and won't remember or worry one way or the other if you're 'wrong'.

 

[François Pugh]

I have followed the Kastle name for quite some time. I was pleased when they made their successful comeback (it wasn't the first attempt to revive the name). It seems they stayed true to the original, and the results showed that. Now after reviving the company from the dead, they sold it off, and the new owners, it seems from what I've read, are taking it in a different direction.

Things change.

As to the changes to that MX:
No I haven't skied it either the new one, nor the old one. However, I've skied enough skis to know what changes in design do to how a ski performs and responds. The new Kastle is just doing what most manufacturers do with their class-leading cult-culturing high end performance skis: (Blizzard Bonafide, Dynastar legend come to mind) 1) develop a ski that excels at top speeds and high performance demands. 2) Once the name is made, modify it and make more money by selling it to posers who really don't have the skills to ski it and would get beat up by it if it were not made to perform better at lower speeds and when skied by skiers with lower skills.

As for the loss of the top 5% of the high speed and high performance, truth be told, 90% of the ski buyers will never ski that fast nor exert those forces anyway.

It is not a step down, but it is a pretty big step sideways.

As to the original question, 180 is not too long.

 

[Alexzn]

^QFT.

 

[Wasatchman]

I honestly have no stake or interest
in argument, and don't mind at all if you're 'right', and won't remember or worry one way or the other if you're 'wrong'.

Ahhh. Okay. There is the disconnect then and perhaps with @Philpug as well. You are mainly interested if the new model is "good"

I'm more passionate that I feel one of the more unique skis that I personally really liked in the market was changed. And not only changed, but that it's bad for Kastle. You don't care much about either other than reviewing the new ski which you feel is "good". There is the disconnect. Ah, okay. Case closed.

 

[Philpug]

Ahhh. Okay. There is the disconnect then and perhaps with @Philpug as well. You are mainly interested if the new model is "good"

I'm more passionate that I feel one of the more unique skis that I personally really liked in the market was changed. And not only changed, but that it's bad for Kästle. You don't care much about either other than reviewing the new ski which you feel is "good". There is the disconnect. Ah, okay. Case closed.

Actually, I think the disconnect might be with you, If you don't like or approve of the ski, it is bad...and really now it is is just wrong, wrong for you. It is perspective. @Alexzn and I differed on the FX generations, he liked one generation more than another and I liked the other...does than mean either was better? Yes and no, depending on persecitve.

 

[Philpug]

I had this written over the summer and it jsut came up in rotation but obviously it speaks volumes to this discussion.

Preview: - The Evolution of Kästle and the MX Collection, The Back Story

How did Kästle begin a decade and a half ago?

www.pugski.com