Individual Review Kastle FX95hp review

[Alexzn]

Due to apparent Pugski limitations on message size, it will be posted in two parts.

PART 1: INTRO, SHAPE, and DESIGN.

There is no free lunch, even for a Kastle's latest $1K+ all-mountain "sword."

So, for the past couple of weekends, I have been getting acquainted with a certain black-and-blue ski that seems to get a lot of excited buzz this season and consistently floats to the top of most of the tests and rankings this year, FX95hp. I have to thank Scott (@dawgcatching) for a lot of good advice and subtle encouragement. Scott is a known source of all things Kastle, from information all the way to the actual skis, and he probably knows the Kastle lineup as well as the guys back in Austria. I am evaluating this ski strictly as a daily driver, meaning that this is a ski that I would choose to ski 90% of conditions 100% of the time. At $1,199 MSRP, not many people would consider it as a niche ski in the quiver, so this is the ski that is expected to get a lot of snow time on any given season. I am 6ft, 190lb, and I am on 189 length. I am quite used to skiing a 187 Bonafide for the last 4 seasons, so that’s the ski that in my mind naturally falls into a reference position. Whether you agree with it or not, the Bonafide has been the benchmark all-mountain ski for the last few years, so it's a fair comparison despite the obvious price point differences (more on that later).

Design and construction. It's a Kastle. Fit, finish and materials are impeccable, the graphics are distinct, tasty and look very good on snow. You get what you pay for there. The construction is wood core with metal ( it's an HP) with partial rubber dampening under edges (unlike the full rubber in the MX series, this is according to the Kastle website of course). The shape is a lot more interesting, this is where a lot of action is happening for this ski. The two most remarkable features are the strikingly narrow shovel with a lot of taper ( a lot of that impression is visual though due to the hollow tech cutout), and the tail that is nominally flat but has a sizable upturn. The impression is almost of a five-point ski, more on that later. Despite the unique look, the geometry is actually very close to the Bonafide, just a mm here or there. Here is the overlay of the two ski silhouettes with the arrows marking the front contact points:

I only put it side to side physically with an old original Bonafide and there the contact point differences are even more dramatic. ( the 2016 Bonafide has more taper up front). The Bonafide the tail curves upwards almost imperceptively from the contact point all the way to the end, and for the FX it maintains healthy normal camber up to the contact point and then juts up significantly.

It is also rather interesting to see how modern all-mountain skis all seem to converge to a fairly common shape. Here is the comparison of the skis that I would consider the leading contenders to the all-mountain crown. The similarities in the shapes are unmistakeable, especially if you compare with with a mythic all-mountain charger from the previous generation, Kastle MX98, which in comparison looks almost rectangular.

See Part 2 for the skiing impressions and conclusions...

 

[Alexzn]

PART 2: SKIING IMPRESSIONS

Choppy, refrozen, cut-up snow, crud, spring glop and everything in between. This is what this ski was made to ski and unquestionably it excels at it. There is no way this tip can get hooky, it just slices through junk snow with almost uncanny neutrality, smoothness and ease. You can drive this ski as hard as you want, it just won't care. My legs start to shake in my boots way before this ski starts to shake. Credit that to a medium-stiff flex and a very solid amount of torsional stiffness. Even when I first had the ski on, I could feel that torsional stiffness, something I never felt on my other skis.

On the snow it's pretty uncanny how the ski has a strong platform and yet is remains super-tossable side to side. The run that gave the "aha" moment was Classic Chute, where I faced a bit of manky snow over edgeable ice on the upper funnel leading to the choke. The turns up in that section felt very stable, just like on the Bonafide but with a significantly,more noticeable tail platform. As you enter the choke the chute narrows, and that's where I always had to work to throw the Bones sideways, but this time I just had to flick the FXs and they were already across the fall line. Then you get out to the apron where you need to let it run over uneven snow and slough, and the ski handled that too, no deflection. Same behavior on the wind-buffed North Bowl. Skiing a lot of uneven snow at Alpine was the same, the FX is just unflappable off piste.

The big difference with the Bonafide is that the Bone more or less bulldozes over much of the snow. You have to drive the FX through that snow, despite all the taper and rocker it still likes to be on edge. That's a good thing, as I discovered last Sunday when I had to get through sheer ice on the way to windbuffed Headwall face. After one timid "power slide" I tried to actually turn on the next run and discovered that skis actually bit and held. From that point on, it was just point it straight done the face, make two turns and hit the windbuffed section with speed. MONEY. Silverado's Far Side chutes always make my pulse quicken, but the FX was again very solid in short swing turns through the wintry chalky snow there.

Here you can see how the shape of the FX looks decambered - you can really see the rocker in tip and tails:

In the other picture you can see how the tip taper plays with the soft spring snow. Compare that to how the Bonafide tips look in (admittedly fluffier and lighter) powdery snow. FX clearly starts working a lot farther from the tip than the Bonafide does.

Chutes, trees, bumps. I consider the ability to "get shorter" in hard places a hallmark of a great all mountain ski. This is what sold me on the Bonafide several years ago when they came out. Technically, it means that the ski needs to have the ability to set an edge, hold it, but still be able to release it easily when the skier calls for it. The FX95 definitely excels at it, and arguably does it even better than the Bonafides. This quickness makes the FX is much more fun in the trees, almost like my DPS 112RPs. I am not necessarily a great bump skier, but they were fun and downright enjoyable to ski, which is a pretty high praise for a 189 cm stiff ski with metal.

Groomer performance and carving. This is where things get somewhat complicated. It's not that this ski cannot hold an edge, there is plenty of edge hold and you can set that edge and ride the sidecut for as long as you want, and the impression is pure power. It is a Kastle after all. But carving is not about riding the sidecut, it's about controlling the radius of the turn by managing the front pressure, it's about loading the tips and feeling the ski pull you across the fall line. The FX has a big taper on a relatively stout shovel that is not wide relative to the rest of the ski. That's not exactly the recipe for quick and strong tip engagement. As the result the ski feels like a shorter slalom ski with a long sidecut and not enough tip. It's still an extremely capable carver but a reluctant one at the same time- you need a fairly aggressive loading of the tips to make it turn and you need to stay on those tips( just like a GS race ski), otherwise the FX would nudge you into its preferred medium-large 20m+ turn. The FX tail on the other hand is pretty energetic. Again, if you stay on top of that ski and put some energy, you get precise fun energetic carves as befits a Kastle, but it's a poor leisurely carver, without much of a shovel it likes to straighten the turn and just make you ride the sidecut.

A quick aside, this ski is not above kicking you if you get sloppy, my third turn on a super-nice morning groomer, I somehow manage to get on my uphill edge and was spinning circles on my back on the snow in no time after that. Ouch. That taught me to pay attention to the skis right away.

The Bonafide is a bit of a different beast, the top end performance is not as sharp but it's much easier to access, so the overall feeling is of a more " carvey" ski. The tail on the FX95hp is much stronger, making the good carving turns exciting, however the bigger shovel of the Bonafide makes it easier to engage and thus more tolerant to technique variations. The Kastle is a higher end carver due to a higher quality construction, with better edge hold, more energetic flex, and as the result it feels quicker, but it takes significantly more work or more angles (at least for me!) to unlock that potential.

Powder. Not much of that kind of snow so far, aside from a few runs at Alpine and Squaw, but it's clear that I would much prefer a dedicated powder ski such as my 112RPs in real deep powder. The float is not only about having rocker, it's also about the size of the shovel, and this again where the tapered and somewhat skinny tip does not bring any advantages. It's definitely a "sword"- a slicer that likes to ski in the snow rather than over it. The shape of course starts to play a huge role in that snow and the skis turn on a dime, just don't expect monster float. The Bonafides have more float due to a wider shovel but are somewhat less maneuverable and feel a bit bigger in comparison.

Length. 189 FX definitely ski like a 185, or even a tad shorter, so if you are a heavier guy like me, you can buy long. Good for your ego too.

Conclusions. The FX is a hard ski to categorize. Most modern manufacturers approach a modern all mountain ski from a carver side of things and then try to adapt the design to skiing off piste. I feel that Kastle has started with the off-trail five-point design and tried to adapt it to the hard and mixed snow conditions. In the past there have been several largely failed attempts to adapt that five point sidecut design to a no-compromise all mountain ski ( Wailer 99 from DPS being one, Rossi S3 being another to some extent). Kastle may have finally nailed the formula. It is not as revolutionary as the Bonafide was when it first came out, but it's a step forward and it brings some qualities to the table that other skis don't.

It's not an easy ski to ski, or, at least, not easy to ski properly. People with impeccable technique (aka @Holiday) should find it easy from the get-go, and enjoyable from the start, I had to get my game up a bit higher before I started enjoying it. The Bonafide is not as refined, and is somewhat "truck-ier", but paradoxically it's easier to get performance out of. You can get higher performance out of FX but you ( or at least I) have to work to get there.

So, what's the value proposition? If you ski less than 25 days per year, it's hard to justify the additional cost of the FX, especially if your edging and driving skills are not up to snuff. The Bonafide is plenty of performance and is much cheaper. I would even look at the SR95 Stockli before looking at the FX, its power felt a lot more accessible. However, if you ski more days, have solid race background, or just want to challenge yourself to get on one of the most exciting skis in the segment (and the next evolution of an all mountain ski design), the value proposition starts to look rather compelling. Just make sure your technique is up to it.

 

[tromano]

Great review. Well worth reading; even for a guy who would never buy this ski.

 

[UGASkiDawg]

Interesting and thorough review! Thank you! I was reading along and with you until the groomer section and the comparison to the Bonafide. I'm certainly no great skier and I am often out of balance and with bad technique. I have spent 3 full days on various versions of the Bonafide and have never really figured it out. I always felt like it skied like a 2x4 ( I know that's blasphemy to many on here) and I felt like an incomplete skier because I couldn't get it to perform. I got on the FX95HP at last year's SIA demo and immediately felt like a hero for the few runs I had it. I got on it again this year at SIA and felt the same way. I bought a pair last weekend and spent a half day on them on Sunday. My impression of them is of a supremely easy and relatively forgiving (for a ski with metal) ski that just steps up its game when you do. I'm 5'10" 165 and on the 181 although I liked both the 181 and the 173 when I demoed them. They just slither through the bumps if you stay balanced and square to the fall line in both sizes.

Thanks again for your thorough review and I just found my impression of them on piste especially compared to the Bonafide to be so different. I've always felt inferior because I couldn't understand the Bona fide but this ski was just wow immediately. I almost got the SR95 instead.....still not sure why I didn't other than I got better deal locally on the Kastles which isn't very hard as Kastles are much easier to find than Stocklis.

 

[Scrundy]

Felt the same way about the Bonafide, I couldn't bend it,2x4 is a good way to put it. I seem to like the flex of Kastle and Stockli,a kick in the wallet but IMO worth the price.

 

[ARL67]

Great review, thanks !

I decided to keep my FX94 for its groomer virtues for where I ski 90% of the time
I never got to ski the FX95-HP, but I ventured wider and acquired the BMX105-HP 181cm ( and also the DPS 106 Foundation 185). Scott also did a superb review comparing the FX95-HP / BMX105 / BMX105-HP over at Epic.

Did you get any time on the BMX105 or HP to add thoughts against the FX95's ?

I've had 2 days on mine and so far so good, but only groomer duty.
I know what you mean about the Kastle narrower shovels, and a bit more conscious effort to work the tips.
I fooled around with mount point on mine ( both BMX105 & DPS ) , via my demo bindings, and certainly a cm +/- can alter the feel of shovel engagement, for my ski style/mechanics.

 

[UGASkiDawg]

So I'm trashing the Bona fide in this thread and Vail in the CO conditions thrwad, maybe I should go into the tires thread and trash Subarus. Then I'll have the trifecta and who knows what will happen to me.

 

[givethepigeye]

Did you ski the "non-HP" version? If so, how do the two compare?

 

[Alexzn]

Interesting and thorough review! Thank you! I was reading along and with you until the groomer section and the comparison to the Bonafide. I'm certainly no great skier and I am often out of balance and with bad technique. I have spent 3 full days on various versions of the Bonafide and have never really figured it out. I always felt like it skied like a 2x4 ( I know that's blasphemy to many on here) and I felt like an incomplete skier because I couldn't get it to perform. I got on the FX95HP at last year's SIA demo and immediately felt like a hero for the few runs I had it. I got on it again this year at SIA and felt the same way. I bought a pair last weekend and spent a half day on them on Sunday. My impression of them is of a supremely easy and relatively forgiving (for a ski with metal) ski that just steps up its game when you do. I'm 5'10" 165 and on the 181 although I liked both the 181 and the 173 when I demoed them. They just slither through the bumps if you stay balanced and square to the fall line in both sizes.

Thanks again for your thorough review and I just found my impression of them on piste especially compared to the Bonafide to be so different. I've always felt inferior because I couldn't understand the Bona fide but this ski was just wow immediately. I almost got the SR95 instead.....still not sure why I didn't other than I got better deal locally on the Kastles which isn't very hard as Kastles are much easier to find than Stocklis.

Thanks! It's difficult to pinpoint the reason for the difference without seeing you ski. The FX have a much stronger feeling tail, which may account for the differences. I felt that everything in the FX starting 30 cm from the tip down was superb, so maybe if you ski the ski from the center you may feel how you feel. The turn finish on the FX is superb, it's just the shovel that needs attention. You are probably similar size to dawgcatching, so he may have more insights. I am 6ft 190lb so I have no problem bending the Bonafides. I am a fairly lousy technique model, although spending some limited time on the masters race course for the last couple of seasons has improved my carving skills considerably and calibrated my expectations of carving performance.

 

[Alexzn]

Did you ski the "non-HP" version? If so, how do the two compare?

no I didn't. I'm 6ft 190lb, so I tend to gravitate to skis with metal.

 

[givethepigeye]

I'm a little taller and a tad lighter - like metal as well, but looking at 105's. The 189 + metal just seems well......heavy

Edit - just looked it up - 0.28 lb per ski more

 

[Alexzn]

The 189 + metal just seems well......heavy

FX series is supposed to be the "backcountry" series for Kastle. Even though Chris Davenport lugs them up all the 14-teeners, there is not much backcountry about these skis They are actually not too heavy compared to the rest of the genre species.

 

[Josh Matta]

Interesting and thorough review! Thank you! I was reading along and with you until the groomer section and the comparison to the Bonafide. I'm certainly no great skier and I am often out of balance and with bad technique. I have spent 3 full days on various versions of the Bonafide and have never really figured it out. I always felt like it skied like a 2x4 ( I know that's blasphemy to many on here) and I felt like an incomplete skier because I couldn't get it to perform. I got on the FX95HP at last year's SIA demo and immediately felt like a hero for the few runs I had it. I got on it again this year at SIA and felt the same way. I bought a pair last weekend and spent a half day on them on Sunday. My impression of them is of a supremely easy and relatively forgiving (for a ski with metal) ski that just steps up its game when you do. I'm 5'10" 165 and on the 181 although I liked both the 181 and the 173 when I demoed them. They just slither through the bumps if you stay balanced and square to the fall line in both sizes.

Thanks again for your thorough review and I just found my impression of them on piste especially compared to the Bonafide to be so different. I've always felt inferior because I couldn't understand the Bona fide but this ski was just wow immediately. I almost got the SR95 instead.....still not sure why I didn't other than I got better deal locally on the Kastles which isn't very hard as Kastles are much easier to find than Stocklis.

The Bonafide is a plank. I have not skied on the new Kastle but have skied on the carbon and non carbon bonafide in 173,180, and 187. I actually do not think they are that demanding( I have skied them from any weight 170-200lb) but they can feel dead at slow speeds and can be handful in really sharp bumps. With that said the Bonafide(and the majority of the flipcore skis) have amazing edge hold for their rspective sizes assuming you can be centered and patience and really load up the outside ski. If you ski it like a big fat race skis it works better.

 

[givethepigeye]

FX series is supposed to be the "backcountry" series for Kastle. Even though Chris Davenport lugs them up all the 14-teeners, there is not much backcountry about these skis They are actually not too heavy compared to the rest of the genre species.

Thanks - I have long tibia's, don't fit on most rests - so "kinda heavy" gets REAL heavy around 2pm. Great review BTW

 

[WadeHoliday]

Nice review and comparison thoughts, Alex!
like the complimentary comment, but my technique is far from impeccable... !
working on stuff, though, getting better I hope (although skiing too many demo skis with Dawgcatching last week wasn't good for the work i'm doing)

I can see your thoughts on the slower tip engagement. I also feel this ski rewards less driving the tip, and more skiing from the arch, even toward the back of the arch. I like that, as that was something a canadian coach I worked with last year wanted me working on anyway, move back from skiing the shovel so much, ski more under foot, and the new fx rewards that.

on carving, good explanations. I find I like to try to get them out from under me quickly, and they come alive in groomers, get em out from under you quickly and they start to work well. as you said, still not a groomer ski. bone better, motive 95 better, fx95 favors making funky snow and off piste more playful, not adding excitement to groomers.

I also think a problem with the fx 95 is it makes quivers tougher... getting used the solidity under foot and the forgiving tip and tail mean skis without the "hook free" design can feel a bit annoying at times.

Thx for the review.

Cheers,
Wade

 

[Ken_R]

I would love to try an Fx95. Sounds like a ski I would like. Im 6-2 180 so I might be between sizes. I ski mostly off trail (alpine bowls, trees, bumps) but like and appreciate decent groomer performance.

 

[Alexzn]

@WadeHoliday, can you elaborate on this "skiing from the arch" concept? I am probably still getting used to that ski, but I find that the most effective turning technique for me is trying to move the body down the hill and change edges at the upper part of the arch, then the ski comes alive. If I try to force the tip to initiate the turn, I have to be on that tip very aggressively. It's almost like the ski required the "new school" style where you just push it out from under you and just let the sidecut and rocker do the turn. A friends' son who used to be a fairly good competitive freerider, claims that its the easiest way to ski. All my efforts to learn how to carve properly on race skis of course clash with this idea. But the FX95 definitely skis like a "funshape" sometimes, as it has a pretty big rocker up front...

BTW, what was your impression of the factory tune on your pair?

 

[WadeHoliday]

I thought the factory tune was good. after a day, I touched up the side edge w/ my stones and I liked it better though.

I just think about the arch as the balance point, basically skiing more in the center of the ski as opposed to skiing the shovel often. the tip on this one engages later, as you said, so skiing it more under foot, less tip pressure. almost like a ski that is mounted forward a bit.

 

[Alexzn]

Less tip pressure? I thought it needs more tip pressure. I also had an impression that all Kastle mounting points are a bit backward relative to most other skis. Hmmm... I will experiment this weekend and pay attention. Thanks for the note on the tune.

 

[givethepigeye]

I know this is a FX95 thread, but I ended up getting on a pair of the 105's non-metal in 189 on Monday in JH. Nice boot deep blower and the skis were fantastic. Very nice tip and tail mods. Skis shorter than 189 for sure, not any longer than my FX104's at 184. The challenge was after a couple of hours, I was wanting a little more "omph", some metal to blast through the piles, so I went back to my 104's - those first couple lines down RV bowl though....basically skied RV, Cheyenne, up Sublette, Tensleep, traverse right to top of Expert, then down - so pretty good representation.

I guess my main point is: that if you are used to metal, and a bigger person, you should maybe stay with the HP version, IMHO, Although I would be plenty happy skiiing the non-metal version early on any day with new snow. Assume this would translate to the 95's.