Thread: Dynastar Legend Pro Rider 105 vs. K2 Sidestash

Anybody ridden both of these skis and have some insight on their differences?

I've ridden 181 Sidestashes and loved them. Do the 105s ride pretty similarly, or are they a burlier ski?

Any info helps greatly. A quick search turned up some helpful information but no direct comparisons.

The 105s are pretty burly and damp riding. I love them myself, depends on what you want in a ski.

I've been riding 185 Motherships as daily drivers, but want a slightly skinner, flat-tailed daily driver so that the Motherships can be retired from that position.

The Motherships were totally manageable even in tighter terrain for me, but I'm just getting nitpicky and looking for a ski to complement them.

My logic currently looks something like this... if Sidestashes and Motherships (both with two layers of metal) ain't a problem, then I don't imagine the Legend Pro Rider 105s being too different. I could be entirely wrong, which is why I'm asking. Just trying to not get myself in over my head here.

Also... if anybody can find the 105s' weight that'd be super helpful. I can't find the damn number anywhere... besides shipping weight.

Originally Posted by arild

The 105s are pretty burly and damp riding. I love them myself, depends on what you want in a ski.

Mounted with 916s, my 192s weigh about 10kg, so just around 11lbs per ski mounted (more or less, 1 pound=0,46kg). I wouldn´t by any measure call them nimble, they are daily driver chargers, and ski much like what you´d expect if you put a slight front rocker on an OG LP 194. Can´t decide which one is friendlier, but the 105 is pretty awesome no matter how you see things.

Skied them both, I almost bought a pair of the LPR105s. Before I go too in-depth though, I believe that Dynastar is going to the Cham series next year, which I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) will be replacing the much loved legend series. I've skied that as well, and am a believer in the Cham .

I would say that the 105s are burlier than the sidestashes. However, the Sidestashes are designed with different thoughts behind them than the 105s.

Dynastar's thoughts behind the 105s lie mostly in line with it being a hard-charging, big-mountain weapon. Aurelien Ducroz has skied on around the same design and idea for quite a while now, sticking with a 98mm waisted LPR for a while, then when dynastar softened and rockered the tip on the 105, he went to that version. Less touring oriented, and more charging oriented, the LPRs happiest place is to be in steep, exposed, chamonix-type terrain. the 105s have two sheets of titanal in them, a wooden vertical sidewall construction, and camber running through most of the ski except for a slight rocker in the tip. The LPRs have had a history in the past of requiring a fairly strong skier to really ski them well.

Ideas behind the sidestash (as the name would imply) steer it more towards a sidecountry or out of bounds ski. The rocker in the sidestash is quite a bit further back than the 105. The sidestash really shines and is at home when skied in shallower powder conditions (think east Vail type terrain) than exposed steep conditions like the 105 prefers. With that being said, the sidestash can still perform well in steep terrain, I think you'll find that it may want to turn slightly more than the 105 would though. The Sidestashes also have a cap construction running through them, reducing swing weight and probably making them easier to tour around in.

Main differences I've noticed in the skis: LPRs are much easier to straight-line and charge on, track well across the fall line and require a bit more out of the skier than the sidestashes do. However, the sidestashes are a but easier to ski on and fit the bill touring-wise than the 105s do. More rocker in the sidestashes means that it requires less effort on my part to get the ski to plane. Steep terrain, I'd prefer the damp 105s to the sidestashes, but in deeper pow, I'd rather be on the nimbler, more rockered sidestashes.

If you're thinking about getting a ski that fit's a little more middle of the road between the 105 and the sidestash I'd consider looking at the Cham 105/127, the rossignol squad 7, and the Sideseth for next year's ski.

"I think you'll find that it may want to turn slightly more than the 105 would though'

^^ This is key. Sidecut on the Sidestash is reported at about 22m. Not sure on the 105 but I'm guessing it is around 30-34m. I skied the 105 early season day when avoiding rocks, bumps and other skiers was key and the 105 was not the right tool for the job (for me). I wish I had gotten back on it in good snow and been able to open them up a bit. I skied the K2 in soft spring conditions and it was effortless. Not a charger at 181cm (maybe at 188?) but it arced turns all over the mtn with ease. Two very different skis IMO

27mR on the lp105 192s. Pretty much the same as on the old 186lps,and very similar to arc. Theyre more like the classic big mountain skis of five or six years ago than a resort ski. I plan to ski mine until they fall apart.

Norsk.

finally got back to civilization to read these responses. thanks for the help, everybody.

i'm leaning toward the sidestashes because they'll be a better complement to my motherships. my two options are 181 or 188, but i find myself desiring something right between the two lengths

Originally Posted by .jon.

finally got back to civilization to read these responses. thanks for the help, everybody.

i'm leaning toward the sidestashes because they'll be a better complement to my motherships. my two options are 181 or 188, but i find myself desiring something right between the two lengths

If it helps, I'm 62, 175, 6 ft even and ski slower than molasses and I use 181's daily. Another 3 inches might be nice, she said.

FWIW, the Sidestash 181 is the same length as the LP105 in a 184 (Dynastar measures along the base, K2 measures with a straight tape from tip to tail, at least that was the case two years ago). Good luck with your choice.

Originally Posted by arild

FWIW, the Sidestash 181 is the same length as the LP105 in a 184 (Dynastar measures along the base, K2 measures with a straight tape from tip to tail, at least that was the case two years ago). Good luck with your choice.

very true. my buddy's 181 sidestashes are about a centimeter longer than my 183 TSTs. and they ski even longer because of the flat tail and having less rocker than the TST.

K2'S FOR THE MUTHAFUCKIN WIN!

love my backlashes, still. do everything very well. so smooth

rog

Compared to 192 big dumps, and 194 b squads, the 192 105s could be called nimble. Sick skis.

LEROY!!!

hi

rog

Sidestashes (OG, think they've changed a little) kinda kicked my ass. Maybe it was me.

case closed. i just pulled the trigger on 181 sidestashes

what it came down to was the sidestashes being a better complement to my 185 motherships, and having skied and loved the sidestashes before. maybe i spent too much time searching around when i already knew what the best ski i've ever ridden is. thanks again to everybody for the responses

Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn

Sidestashes (OG, think they've changed a little) kinda kicked my ass. Maybe it was me.

I have the first year. newer ones have a little more tip rocker