2019 Kastle BMX 105 Ski Image 2019 Kastle BMX 105 Ski Image 2

2019 Kastle BMX 105 Skis

The freeride world loves a ski like the Kastle BMX 105. It’s a wide, big turning ski that loves to go fast wherever it travels. The rockered tips and tails carry it up and over some of the deepest snow you can find, and the camber underfoot constantly reminds you that you are on a properly constructed Kastle ski. With a 21 meter turn radius at 181 cm, the skis prefer to make larger turns, but they can certainly be pushed beyond, and short of that radius. The large sweet spot on the skis ensure predictability and versatility. Our testers loved the intuitive character of the BMX 105, and also spoke highly of its lack of speed limit. All testers skied the 181 cm length.

Jamie Bisbee scored all 4’s out of 5 except for forgiveness which got a 3. This tells us that Jamie had a nice time on what he thought was a very well-rounded ski. His previous experience with Kastle has been primarily in the race-like products, but the BMX 105 was a new type of creation for him. “The BMX 105 was an easy short-turner given the dimensions. I could still drop the hammer and feel quite nice whenever and wherever. Not the best choice for hard pack, but then you could just get the MX 84.” Jamie makes a nice comparison, and a nice point, that the BMX 105 is not a hard snow ski, but if you happen to find yourself there, it’ll do that too.

David Raybould felt the skis performed shorter than expected, but that didn’t stop him from doling out high praise. He felt the tip was soft, hence the short feel. He thought that the ski “skids and pivots nicely. Best for fresh snow at or above the 3-4 inch level.” We love it when those conditions exist, and here at Stowe, you get that quite a lot if you’re here every day. For a consistently snowy ski area, the BMX 105 would be an awesome ski to have.

Steve Sulin gave top scores for stability, versatility, and overall impression. He especially seemed to enjoy the quality that seems to ooze right out of the Kastle products. “Hand-made and it shows. They are supremely powerful and love to go fast. Given the wider nature of the skis, they are surprisingly not bad in the bumps.” Those comments certainly back up his assertion that the BMX 105 is tremendously versatile.

Mike Thomas is a consistent Kastle lover, and the BMX 105 is no different. “This puppy rips. It’s smooth and damp, plowed through chunder with ease. Easy to steer in short radius turns, but will drive big GS turns through chop. The BMX 105 comes alive with input. They’re best for a refined skier who wants a ‘not too wide’ powder ski that handles spring mank with aplomb.” Mike makes some really great points about the BMX 105. A lot of skiers do not want a dedicated huge powder ski, and the BMX 105 fits that bill perfectly. Also, the ability of the skis to handle crud and chop was certainly a high point for Mike.

The BMX 105 holds a special place in a lot of our tester’s hearts. There’s a lot to like about the 105, including, but not limited to, its ability to pivot and smear turns regardless of snow conditions. When the terrain gets tough and bumpy, the 105 will practically smooth it out for you. They’re an incredibly stable product that is equally at home going fast through the snow as it is carving turns on the fresh corduroy.

Testers

Jamie Bisbee SkiEssentials Ski Test Headshot

Jamie Bisbee

Age: 44Height: 5'10"Weight: 190 lbs.

Ski Style: Fast and Furious, like the movie

Dave Raybould SkiEssentials Ski Test Headshot

David Raybould

Age: 30Height: 5'8"Weight: 130 lbs.

Ski Style: Fluid and strong with a technical background

Steve Sulin SkiEssentials Ski Test Headshot

Steve Sulin

Age: 43Height: 6'"Weight: 230 lbs.

Ski Style: Smooth, precise GS turns

Mike Thomas SkiEssentials Ski Test Headshot

Mike Thomas

Age: 49Height: 6'3"Weight: 220 lbs.

Ski Style: Upright, fluid, nimble, and powerful

14 Comments on the “2019 Kastle BMX 105 Skis”

Comments are closed. If you have any questions, or looking for some guidance, please email our customer service team at [email protected]

  1. GREAT REVIEW. LOVE THE FEEDBACK. I’m def looking for that one ski to rip around Stowe and out west for short chase the snow vacations. I was going back and forth on the MX 99 and this badboy but in the HP version. See ya out there!

    1. Thanks CJ!
      We’d love to take some runs this winter! That MX 99 sure is a high-octane ski! We loved the overall playful and balanced nature of the 105, no doubt.
      SE

  2. Is this non-metal ski a better choice for me or the HP version? I’m 42, 200lbs (no pack), and 5’9″. I typically ski Midwest and West. I’m looking for a daily driver out west. I’m a level 7-8 skier that usually uses groomers only to access off-piste terrain. I ski aggressively in open terrain, but I’m cautious in the bumps and trees. I’m looking to progress my skills in these areas. Which ski would help me progress?

    1. Hi Eric,

      Yeah, you’d probably really like the non-HP version. The HP is great, but it’s heavier and more demanding. If you’re still relatively cautious in the bumps and trees you’ll have an easier time progressing on the non-HP version than on the heavier ski. It should still be plenty stable for you too, it’s not like the non-HP ski is a soft-flexing noodle, it’s still plenty of ski for most people.

      Hope that helps!

      SE

  3. Hi!

    How does the 181 BMX compare to the 189 BMX? I’m 45 5’11” 220 and ski mostly Squaw. Not a super technical skier but can ski aggressively in soft snow. Thinking the 189 is the way to go since I heard they ski short but maybe the 181 is better for bumps and trees? Just concerned that they may not be long enough for powder days. Any thoughts?

    1. Hi JB!
      From simply your height, I’d recommend the 181, but everything else in your comment tells me that you should probably be on the 189. The rocker profile does make them ski a bit short, but it’s not that noticeable. If you’re in Squaw and skiing fresh snow, you’ll be psyched that you’re on the 189. Have fun!
      SE

  4. Hey, just purchased a Kastle FX85 and now looking for a big mountain ski for powder days in Tahoe. I am 5’3″ 120 lb and bought the FX85 in a 165 cm. Is the BMX 105 a good ski to consider if I enjoy the FX85? If so, which length? Does the 165 cm ski short or should I go to a 173? I am also looking at the DPS Foundation 106 (or 112) in a 168 cm or a Salomon QSt 106 in a 167 cm as other alternatives. Thoughts?

    1. Hi Tdub!
      Generally skiers who like one Kastle will like another. The 105 is a great ski, and if you’re comfortable on the 165, I’d stick to that length in the wider ski as well. The DPS has more of a short-turn nature and the QST is a great choice, but not quite the Kastle feel. Hope that helps!
      SE

  5. Hey guys,

    thanks for providing such a great forum for learning about equipment – love your responsiveness and input.

    I’m 5′ 7″ 165 lbs. and a fairly aggressive skier. I demo’d the BMX HP 105 at 173cm last year on a deep light day at Squaw and loved it. It felt plenty nimble to me (short turns on steeps and tight spaces weren’t taxing) – could be because my other skis are a good deal bigger (Armada JJ’s at 185 cm). But it charged and powered through everything too which was great.

    If it’s helpful the other skis I demo’d and liked a lot were the Head Kore 105’s. Lighter, but real stiff. Didn’t like them quite as much the BMX HP’s, but liked them a lot.

    The HP’s are pricey though.

    Am curious however if you think the BMX non-HP version would have a similar feel even with no metal. How do you think they compare?

    1. Hi Marz!
      The non-Hp version that we have here in our warehouse are surprisingly heavy. I don’t mean heavy in a bad way, though, but rather they seem damp and stable. In this light, I don’t feel that they perform vastly differently than the metal versions–although you will notice a difference at very high speeds. On the flip side, the non-HP will be quicker and more maneuverable, so there’s a silver lining for you. I’d say it’s a good mix between the Kore and the HP 105. Hope that helps!
      SE

  6. I’m an aggressive skier that skis Alpine/Squaw with some CO…23yo, 5’10” 180, I’ve been skiing 2013 Armada TST as an everyday ski for ~4 seasons. Looking for an all mountain wide everyday ski that I can also take out in powder — would the BMX 105s be too much on the non-fresh days? Would the MX 99s be too diff from the Armadas? I like what I’m on now but I’ve gotten plenty of use out of them

    1. Hi JS!
      I’d say the 105 would border on being too much for no snow day, but not out of the question. The MX 99 is one of the smoothest, most stable skis I’ve been on, and can be a chore for a one ski quiver just based on its weight and its burly personality. It’s almost like a wide groomer ski versus an all mt ski like the BMX. Hope that helps!
      SE

  7. I have a chance to get a BMX 105 non-HP at 181. I am 6’ 215 and advanced intermediate. I am wondering if it will be enough for me Or if I need the HP model. It will mainly be used for fresh snow as I have a Bonafide as a daily driver

    1. Hi David!
      I’m 6/2 220 and I would prefer the non-HP version of that ski for fresh snow. Not only do they feel burly in your hands, but they also will float better due to the lighter weight. I’ve felt that the HP version of that ski is a bit overkill for all but the most aggressive skiers. Have fun!
      SE