Has anyone skied on or tried the Volkl Kanjo. I demo'd these skis on our current corn/sugar snow/hard pack and was very impressed. Much improved over my current 8 year old Dynastars. These skis are related to the Kendo with less metal and a slightly narrower profile and much lighter. They're supposed to be an all mountain ski. No powder or deep crud to ski in but they railed turns on the hard pack. Your thoughts would be appreciated.
Might find the 2018 review when the Kanjo was newly released of interest. At 84 underfoot, should be a good all-mountain ski. That's based on how my ski buddy (older, advanced/expert since high school) used the RTM84 in all sorts of snow conditions out west from groomers to 15 inches of powder. He eventually went to skis that are 90 underfoot.
Between Kanjo, Kendo, RTM and Mantra the range of choices is dizzying.
Have the Kendo from two years back, 90 underfoot. Absolutely love these skis, they handle hard pack well, do well in crud, and turn heavely in fresh snow and powder.
What they don't do well is tight bump runs, you'll have to skip a bump or two as you turn. But as I get older I'm ok with that tradeoff!
The slight rocker in the tip/tail is excellent once you get into snow that allows you to slide vs carve.
I moved up to this from an AC20, which was a hard pack carver. I'm good with 90 underfoot, although in really deep stuff I've desired something in the 110-120 range. I only ski out west a week a year, so it's difficult to justify a powder ski for so few days. Maybe when money grows on trees..
I decided to buy the Kanjo (what the hell is a kanjo ?). I like it because it is a lot lighter than the Kendo which has 2 layers of titanal. The Kanjo just has a band of titanal. As an aging geezer, I was glad to shed my very heavy Dynastars. I also think the Dynastars were worn out....they lost their zip after close to 300 ski days.
Well even though you bought them I'll give you some confirmation :)
I demoed both the Kanjo and Kendo (along with others) this Decemeber in Vermont. Loved them both but thought the Kanjos were more versatile for Mid Atlantic skiing. To me the Kendos need "more mountain", I'm not a fast skier but the Kendos made me want to go fast and wanted more open space for longer radius turns. If I was younger and had bigger places to ski I would have went with the Kendos.
I've loved the Kanjos so far this season and they've handled everything I've encountered with ease. Plus they are so light that I end up skiing much longer than I typically would on my previous heavy Salomons.
Nice that I stumbed on this thread. I just bought a new 2019 pair (182cm) at what seems like a great deal. All descriptions fit me, ready to try downgrade my bigger, heavier Kilowatts. I want to ask - after another year, how do you like these now ?
Like the Kanjo's because they are light but still have titanol layer. Because they are light they don't handle heavy crud very well. I switch to my Kastle's which have 2 layers of titanol and are beasts in crud. Otherwise, the Kanjos do well on hard pack and typical east coast conditions. I am happy with my purchase.
Thanks! Are you saying the 'heavy crud' we get around here is a problem, or the post storm crud out west ?
My goal was to buy something different rather than more of the same. It's not really a replacement unless it works out great. I'm jazzed about it. And fortunately, they were inexpensive enough that changing them out would be no big deal.
The experience I was relating was skiing in heavy crud at Okemo resort after the temperature soared to 70 degrees back in early March. My Kastle MX88's were much better in that heavy, slushy crud. I have not yet skied at Western resorts with my Kanjo's. As I approach old geezerdom, I appreciate the lightness and playfulness of the Kanjo. Having heavy boards hanging from my knee joints on the lift is no longer comfortable. Lighter skis mean less tired legs at the end of a long ski day.
ok that's extreme conditions. I'm not worried about that. Thanks and happy trails.