Review: Dynastar Legend 105

[bluesbrother49]

^^^ It's just planing the sidewall back in order to be able to tune the side edge properly. Not a big deal.

Thankyou El Chupacabra

[Bertier]

So day 3 ended like this:



I noticed the diecut base sections weren't 100% flush (the "V" shaped part felt barely raised) but didnt think much of it. Today I was pushing backwards out of a lift line and this was the result... Not that stoked considering the quality I've gotten previously out of my XXLs. Props to Teton Village Sports for helping me out - they're going to attempt epoxying it back down, and if it doesn't hold I'll be on the phone with the warranty department.

[rug wheelie]

Don't treat the wood sidewalls with silicone. The wood needs to breath the entire length of the wood sidewall.

Here is the scenario:

1. Treat the wood sidewalls with silicone or other creating a waterproof layer on the surface. It will penetrate the wood sidewall but only a few millimeters. It will never saturate the entire piece of wood.
2. Damage the wood sidewalls (cut, scratch, dent, etc.) while shredding the gnar!
3. The damaged area will now get wet and the moisture will expand beyond the area of damage.
4. The moisture can only exit the way it came in – through the damaged area on the sidewall.
5. The wood sidewall will never completely dry and the moisture will continue to creep and will eventually find its way to the core of the ski.
6. Eventually this could cause the wood to rot and/or cause the ski to delaminate as it cycles from warm to cold.

The warming and cooling cycle is the primary factor that makes sealing or treating your wood sidewalls a bad idea.

[Jethro]

I could be wrong, but I think silicone treatment repels liquid water, while allowing water vapor to escape. Not unlike gore-tex. Silicone does not create an impermeable barrier like a varnish or urathane treatment.

[splat]

^^^ It's just planing the sidewall back in order to be able to tune the side edge properly. Not a big deal.

Always been referred to as planing the sidewalls. A good edge always skis better. Especially when you need it. Dude in that vid didn't waste a stroke. His panzer file moves were good. Race dude at the local shop showed the new tech how to do that on a pair of my skis last year and the dif was immediate ecstasy. I've noticed how some shops only bevel the bottom quarter of the edge on their sanding belt edge bevelers to keep from fouling the belt on sidewalls. Ceramic stone bevelers seem to be able to power through whatever sidewall they hit enough to catch the whole edge. But nothing beats a hand bevel like the one done in that vid.

[El Chupacabra]

Always been referred to as planing the sidewalls. A good edge always skis better.

For clarity: I meant "not a big deal" as in "not going to damage your skis."

It is a good idea to plane back the sidewall if your edge tuner is otherwise going to hit the sidewall, and not allow for full contact along the metal edge. A sidewall planer is set at a steep angle (like 7*); the edge tuner is at 3* or less (2* and 1* seem to be most common).

[Meathelmet]

First day on the skis: wtf!?

Tested on the shittiest snow in the alps: crust,concrete & cartong. With some sastrugi and breakable crust thrown in.

Some said the skis are "soft, neutred lp's"... Well, hmm??
They have felt now like amped up and pissed of im103s. In a good way. Feels quite a bit stiffer and more handfull than 180cm maroon explisivs & 183 im103s. Prolly due to the sidecut and how well they react to input. Occasional soft spot was a bliss but all the hard stuff...shiiiit!

I like.

[arild]

Rocker and overall pics of the 192 (now with inserts, yay):





Sorry about their orientation
Shitty fucking cell phone cam.

[Meathelmet]

Hehheh... you are sooo getting your arse kicked! Better prep your legs!

How is things shaping up in the north,btw? South norge has stolen all the galore and heard very little from the north.
Tamok? Lyngen? Narvik/riks?

[arild]

All is shit, my friend. Dust on ice in the streets, no new downpours for a few days, and I haven´t been skiing so far this season. These skis should be perfect for whenever it actually snows (just a bit, I don´t need much). Really, though, the 192s feel a lot softer than the 184s (from shop hand flexing).

I do squats to prepare anyways..

[Eremitten]

A helpful tool for reviewing snow conditions in Norway.
http://senorge.no/mappage.aspx

Narvik is really bad conditions, a slightly bit better at riksgransen but more windy and the topography does not allow much snow accumulation.
Heard some rumors about "some" new snow in tamok.

I had the opportunity to try my new lp105 and it feelt quite easy to ski compared to my old volkl explosive.

[Yardsale81]

You legend pro riders got any snow yet, we finally did in the PNW. Any more reports on the LPR 105 would be great to hear.

[bradski530]

After three days on my new 105s (and my first time with locked heels in three seasons) I can say a few things.

First, about me:

5' 9"
155 lbs
20

Current quiver - 176 LPR (97 underfoot) w/ hammerheads, 184 LPR 115s w/ Axls, and now the 192 LPR 105 with Pivots.

These skis kill it. I skied Steamboat this past weekend and these skis do it all. They're a blast on groomers and you'll surely be skiing past everyone in sight if you really open the skis up. They also did great in trees, bumps, dropping cliffs, and everything in between.

This is my only alpine setup presently, and it is a great quiver of one. From hard pack to fresh snow, these skis will handle anything I throw at them with aplomb. Super stable and fast.

[jumpturn]

Yeah, I got some 184 cm LPR 105s as a Chamonix "piste" ski. They kill it, but they are kinda heavy with the marker Barons.

[Yardsale81]

Thanks for the updates, I have checked them out in some shops and they seam like they would be rippers. They hand flexed a little softer than I expected, but seem kind of damp and heavy, just the way I like them.

[Meathelmet]

Review


Yo.


What is weird that Arild said the 184s feel stiffer than the 192s. The Friflytt.no charts show that the LP105s should be quite a bit softer than elan1010s and head im103s.
BUT, side by side testing with the skis (i had the elans and still have the 103s) the LP105s are difinately stiffer than the 1010s and as stiff as 103s!!! Ok,ok, the 103s are 5 seasons
old and have lost their stiffness,but still.

[ulty_guy]

Hola hombres, these day be had cheapo end of season now so I was hoping for a bit more input....

I had the 100 underfoot, traditional camber, 184cm versions and found them to be a bit of a handful for me to ride every day and they didn't really float at all. Anyone skied both? Are these a lot more user friendly or just a bit of rocker added to the equation but basically the same ski? Also, the 115's are on offer as well and in the super handflex test they seem a bit rounder and not as beefy, does that play out on the snow?

[arild]

Had a run today on my 192s on a topptur in the Kvaløya general area. Keep in mind, this was my first skiing day of this season, with new boots, tired skills and all that. Conditions were wind crusted, cruddy and some packed powder in places. Good for a ski test, imo.

Height/weight: 176cm/95kg.
Binding location: On the line, 81 or 82cm from the tail (can´t remember), s916s at 310 BSL, DIN 12 toe and heel.
Experience and form: 23 years of alpine skiing, good but rusty skills, seriously out of skiing shape at the moment. I like to go fast, don´t need powder at all to have fun on skis, and enjoy the occasional huck, as long as it´s at speed and it doesn´t interfere with my line choice.

Similar skis I´ve liked: OG B-Squad 189s, Surfboard graphic LP 186s, XXL 194s.
Similar skis I´ve hated: 08 Völkl Mantras.

Impressions:
Very, very stable at speed. Feel a lot stiffer when skiing than their flex should indicate, and I´m not quite decided yet whether I like this or not - this is for the tail, for the most part. Speaking of the tail; these grab. Can´t wait till I´ve killed the camber after 50-60 days, and I´m going to detune the living shit out of the tails. Too much sidecut back there, I think. A bit too much effort getting them into a slarve, and they feel a bit like the Mantras in that respect. For comparison, I think the OG Squads felt better when skiing fast and dropping speed in pow, with less camber underfoot, admittedly no rocker, but a long ass nose that can be driven to float.

Squad dims vs LP105 dims: 130/104/117 vs 132/105/122. On hard snow, these skis feel very, very similar. Stable as fuck at speed, and in general nice feeling skis. The Squads have a longer SG radius of 35m vs the LP105s, which sport a GS like 27m. For me, the LP105 should have had either a wider waist or a narrower tail to generate a longer radius, thus providing a more slarve friendly ski.

Enough of that; The waist feels just right with typical coastal Norwegian mixed conditions; narrow enough to have fun on shitty snow, wide enough for moderate amounts of float. The nose and its so called rocker; much the same. Just enough, which is good. The nose doesn´t start flapping at mach foo speeds either, so that´s a definite plus in my book.

A pretty heavy setup to haul upwards, I even had Trekkers on them.

Bottom line: A great mixed/all conditions ski, but with some reserved enthusiasm towards the tail section. Will report back after detuning the tails, thinking that will do the trick to make them more fun. Beefy construction, classic DStar feel. I rather like them, so far.

[Meathelmet]

Had a run today on my 192s on a topptur in the Kvaløya general area. Keep in mind, this was my first skiing day of this season, with new boots, tired skills and all that.

Speaking of the tail; these grab. Can´t wait till I´ve killed the camber after 50-60 days, and I´m going to detune the living shit out of the tails. Too much sidecut back there, I think. A bit too much effort getting them into a slarve, and they feel a bit like the Mantras in that respect.

Heh.. Daddy got finaly to the slopes!! Whoo!


About the tail, I have to say I personally have totally different opinion in that.
I found out that the tails released easily. Good grip, support but just a touch of an ankle and tail was free. Absolutely no hookiness.
And I skied in about the most horrible & hooky conditions ever. Ice,firn,sastrugi etc..

But, I noticed that it could show some of that tendency if I ended up in the back seat. Had one run of about 2000m vert and at the end of it, I really had to concentrate to
keep my weight on the tips. Ok, granted, 105s are not slarve machines, not even remotely...
But the skis were on a totally different planet than my previous elan 1010s (first gen) that were a nuisance in those kind of conditions. Almost identical shape on those two skis, elans being 5-6mm wider.
Perhaps I had duller tails, cant remember if I detuned them or not. I did detune the front part of the tips though, found that they were too sharp and would snag.

[Meathelmet]

Are these a lot more user friendly or just a bit of rocker added to the equation but basically the same ski?

Havent skied the 100mm but have the 176cm 97mm and skied the 186cm/97cm. I would say that the 184s are about the most demanding skis I have skied, including the im103s.

As said, cant give a direct comparison to the 100mm but if you are looking for a easy, mellow ride, look further... 105s seem to be quite bottomfeeders as well, unless the snow is very supportive. Well, compared to more modern & softer rocker boards.

But,nevertheless, totally love the skis. They are like a sportscar without any of that eps/abs shit.

[arild]

Heh.. Daddy got finaly to the slopes!! Whoo!


About the tail, I have to say I personally have totally different opinion in that.
I found out that the tails released easily. Good grip, support but just a touch of an ankle and tail was free. Absolutely no hookiness.
And I skied in about the most horrible & hooky conditions ever. Ice,firn,sastrugi etc..

But, I noticed that it could show some of that tendency if I ended up in the back seat. Had one run of about 2000m vert and at the end of it, I really had to concentrate to
keep my weight on the tips. Ok, granted, 105s are not slarve machines, not even remotely...
But the skis were on a totally different planet than my previous elan 1010s (first gen) that were a nuisance in those kind of conditions. Almost identical shape on those two skis, elans being 5-6mm wider.
Perhaps I had duller tails, cant remember if I detuned them or not. I did detune the front part of the tips though, found that they were too sharp and would snag.

Yep. I think thats what happened. Going to get out next week again, and keep my attention and weight towards the front of the ski. Aaaaand Im really out of ski shape.. :-) In t-town anytime soon,meat?

Norsk.

[Meathelmet]

Yep. I think thats what happened. Going to get out next week again, and keep my attention and weight towards the front of the ski. Aaaaand Im really out of ski shape.. :-) In t-town anytime soon,meat?

Norsk.

Ja! Planning to head up north in the turn of may, maybe right before the comp. Do some turns/tours there?

But first, off for a 2 week roadtrip to the alps in two days...gotta test the LP105 with dyna+duke inserts there...

[arild]

Ja! Planning to head up north in the turn of may, maybe right before the comp. Do some turns/tours there?

But first, off for a 2 week roadtrip to the alps in two days...gotta test the LP105 with dyna+duke inserts there...

Oh, definitely! If you´ll suffer me and my gram chaser setup for a few hours, I´m all in!

[arild]

Continuous review of the LP 105s..

Day two on these, conditions were excellent. About ten runs. Snowy weather, probably 15-20cm, 25cm in spots. Did a tweak on my boots - put the forward lean shim back, mainly, and that might have helped, or it could be that I was aware of my own shortcomings from my first day skiing this season and adjusted properly.

In any case, they ripped. Stable going mach looney on the piste, ripping long GS-like turns (at least that´s what they looked like in my head), and continuing that trend when going off piste. What minimal amount of tip rocker there is on these skis actually come a lot to life when going fast in the fluff. Helped varying the turn shapes in tighter spots, too, and I could frankly say I don´t need another pair of skis. But of course I do.. These are now my long sought-after everyday skis, all purpose machines. I considered the Blizzard Cochise 193, the BD Zealot 192 and this before I decided, mainly on a great deal. Glad I got them, but would probably be happy with either one of the Blizzards or BDs.

I found out my mounting point (82cm from tail) is actually 1cm back of the recommended line on most people´s 192s. Not mine, though. I would honestly not change it, neither forward nor backward, and they feel just right where they are.

So, anything Dstar could fix on these? I´m going to compare with the Cham 107s.

Tip taper: Fixed on the Chams.
Sidecut: "Fixed" - that is, they´ve shortened the sidecut radius with the introduction of tip taper. Still a skeptic. Dstar could´ve just increased the length of the nose, keep the tip taper as they´ve designed the Chams, and keep the effective edge length. Overall, make a longer ski, by 5 or so cm, ending up at 195-196. Maybe the athletes get those? Congrats to Reine winning the whole FWT.
Tail: Now that I got used to it really being there, along with the aggressive amount of camber and all that, I cannot say I would want the tails fixed at all. Stable landing platforms, correcting any idiot landings and whatnot. Time will tell if Dstar screwed the pooch there, but judging from the reviews, they didn´t.

Bottom line, as of now, two ski days in: I love these skis. Burly, speed friendly, all round awesome. Demanding, yes, but they can be tamed quite easily. Looking forward to having these in a central quiver spot the next couple of years.

PS: skied straight over some exposed rock, nothing was done to the bases. Good stuff.

[bennettc14]

Going to pull the trigger on a pair of these this off season. Can't decide on if I should get the 184 or 192. I had 187 XXLs for a couple seasons and felt the length and flex was perfect, had no desire to step up to the 194 especially on the EC. Now that there's some tip rocker the 192s might be fine. Was anyone else torn between sizes?

I'm 5'9 170