The Dynastar Thread

[DigSki]

I will never for the life of me understand what would make skis good in the "steeps"? I ski steep shit with varying styles- slashy and slarvey and playful, billygoat and jump turny, fall line and chargy fast, sometimes i like to see how aggressively i can rail short-medium turns. And how i ski is usually determined by snow quality and conditions... along with how a ski will perform.

Right, as most people do. So asking if it's good in steeps is asking if it's reliably good at those things when edge angles and consequences are high.

Let me give you an example. QST 118 is great in steeps in good snow - it's very maneuverable, so you can slarve, slash, hop turn, charge fall line or arc turns. It's also a really easy ski to flick around, so you can make quick adjustments to turn shape very easily or shut it down quickly. It doesn't have great edge hold, so when things are scraped / firm it gets sketchy in steep terrain. You can slash and slarve, but if terrain is really tight it's tough to trust that turn is going to happen when you want it to happen. It also gets knocked around a bunch, so if you're charging fall line it's a bit sketchy since you'll be in the air going mach looney.

[jackattack]

Thanks for the comparison. My PB&J's are 188's from 2011-12. I am looking at the 182 in the Mfree, how is it different from the 192?

I skied off the Gemstock last March on 192 mfree 108's mounted with tectons and I didn't die.

[waxoff]

LP105


there,


It had to be said,


It's the new,


RX,


yeah!

[Hood26]

The 182 MFree 108 is no slouch. Some argue it has a softer tips, but my fat ass has never gone ass over tea kettle when getting over the handlebars.

I have a great amount of trust in my Mfree edges and all over the good the bad and the ugly snow. I highly recommend a pair in a size that fits you.

[detrusor]

Lp105 ftmfw


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Benneke10]

It is one of the things that I love with BMTs - the shovels are actually fairly stiff. (besides, a mtour will still not out perform bmt94s ).

BMT 94 shovels are pretty stiff but the BMT 109 shovels are kind of soft, both ski amazingly well. Yeah I doubt the mtour will outperform the BMT94 in most conditions but they have a lot more surface area and are also lighter so I would imagine them doing better in pow.

[Benneke10]

M-tour 99 got a very good review in FriFlyt.

Not really in the market for a 100mm ski, but if the 90 is the same construction and geo it’s tempting.

Anybody know?

Can someone share the review? Looks like it is restricted on their site to subscribers

[2FUNKY]

I will never for the life of me understand what would make skis good in the "steeps"? I ski steep shit with varying styles- slashy and slarvey and playful, billygoat and jump turny, fall line and chargy fast, sometimes i like to see how aggressively i can rail short-medium turns. And how i ski is usually determined by snow quality and conditions... along with how a ski will perform.

No kidding. It’s the indian not the arrow.
Slcdawg, if you’re a smaller guy, get the 182 Free108. They are softer than the 192 but not much and perfect for lighter dudes, built that way for a reason. They ski steep shit just fine and are a blast everywhere. Punch way above their specs in pow and rail groomerzz. I have zero time on the MPro 108, I will this winter, but listening to friends who ski similar to myself, they are a stiffer more engaged ski than the MFree as they should be. I would own a pair but have another super rad ski in that slot.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[kid-kapow]

BMT 94 shovels are pretty stiff but the BMT 109 shovels are kind of soft, both ski amazingly well. Yeah I doubt the mtour will outperform the BMT94 in most conditions but they have a lot more surface area and are also lighter so I would imagine them doing better in pow.

actually no - regarding the bmt109. The flex comes from the center part of the ski, not the tips/shovels. Compare these

with this

BMTs rely more on the shape and the center bending to turn, whereas MTours are stiffer underfoot, but have way softer shovels (that you bend in order to turn). That is the thing that I like so well about BMTs, you can really lean into them (at least from my slightly more upright/centered if still directional technique).

So yeah, I''ve had a pair of BMT109 186s that were kinda softish (so they can def have softer shovels when broken in), but they will still not produce the super abrupt turns an overly pressured softer shovel ski will imho.

Sure, adjust to the ski and imho / yemv and all that, though I have grown fond of ski that require relatively little adjusting to. Not to derail the thread with lots of volkl graphs or anything...

hm, it just struck me how similar BMT94s and MTour99s are, besides a 4mm difference, their constructions, flex patterns and rocker profiles - but they still seem like they could ski somewhat similarly. It kinda makes me even more curios to try the latter as the camber and flex pattern might actually kinda even out the differences, a bit at least. Though, perhaps not according to this review:

[Shorty_J]

Kid-kapow... What site are those flex profiles from again?

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[optics]

Obvious answer: buy the Mfree 108s I have posted in GS.

Ski them for a season,if you hate them, sell them for not much loss. You probably will not hate them.

[kid-kapow]

Kid-kapow... What site are those flex profiles from again?

They are as far as I know made by Endre Hals of Evi Skis for the Norwegian ski magazine FriFlyt.

Just use the photo search function in google, type the ski model + skitest ( for instance "M tour 99 skitest" - not ski test like the proper spelling would be) and quite often this kind of a pic will pop up.

They tried to publish all the tests in both Norwegian and English on skitest.com as something one could pay to read, but I do not think it gained a lot of traction. The English section used to be free. The translations were a bit... inspired at times.

[slcdawg]

Obvious answer: buy the Mfree 108s I have posted in GS. .

If they were a little shorter...

[Bandit Man]

If they were a little shorter...

My 150-lb, 5’ 9” ski buddy skis my 192’s with no issues. He says they are easier to manage than his 184 Katana K108’s. Just another data point.

[Bandit Man]

That brings to mind a question. I know I have seen some folks who bought the 182 MF108 say they “wish they had gone longer”, but are there any Mags out there who bought the 192 that “wish they had gone shorter”?

[DumbIdeasOnly]

Thanks for the comparison. My PB&J's are 188's from 2011-12. I am looking at the 182 in the Mfree, how is it different from the 192?

I haven’t been on the 182 because at 6 ft 220 I thought there was no chance I wanted the shorter one given the shape, but Blister has a write up comparing the 192 and 182. I mostly agree with what Dylan and Luke thought about the 192.

My custom stiff PBJ feels much more like a substantial park ski than a playful all mountain ski if that makes sense. I’d need to have skied them back to back to have a deeper comparison than observing they feel less similar than you might guess.

[kc_7777]

My 150-lb, 5’ 9” ski buddy skis my 192’s with no issues. He says they are easier to manage than his 184 Katana K108’s. Just another data point.

Another data point that the K108/M102 are cumbersome at times? Haha

Is it just me or do more people seem to be coming out that the K108/M102’s skis can rip but M-Free type skis are more fun and still rip.

Every bubble has to burst at some point ….just like the stock market.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Hood26]

As far as the length of the MF 108, I know they both ski differently, but the right size is dependent on skier age, strength, ability, size and also the following:

182cm for a work ski (patrolling, setting rope lines, pulling sleds) short steeps @smallish resorts, chutes and generally narrow and tight terrain.

192cm for free skiing, wide open, big resorts, big bowels, or just if you like longer and big skis.

The 182s aren’t whimps and the 192s aren’t planks, so both are great pairs of skis just different but similar tools for different folks; try them both to know which size is right.

[Shorty_J]

My 150-lb, 5’ 9” ski buddy skis my 192’s with no issues. He says they are easier to manage than his 184 Katana K108’s. Just another data point.

I skied with another mag this year and my K108 in a 177 had a longer sidecut/effective edge than his 192 mfree.

So that seems very believable.

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[gaijin]

I’m not jibby much anymore. But the MF108 is appealing for the transition days between groomers, crud, and trees.

Still kinda think a flat cambered FL113 will be even better for this role, though.

The M102 is a carving ski. Why gen 1 had a carbon tip is now beyond me. It’s a great ski. But is trying too hard to do it all.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[phatty]

Has anyone used the MPro 90 or 99 as a groomer oriented ski? Looking to add something at the skinnier end of my quiver.

[GoldMember]

Has anyone used the MPro 90 or 99 as a groomer oriented ski? Looking to add something at the skinnier end of my quiver.

Yes. I have both. The 90 for our closest mountain (Mt. Spokane) and the 99 for Schweitzer. I have passes at both and don't want to slog skis, boots, etc. back and forth so went with the 90s for MS as the snow conditions are more geared toward groomers than Schweitzer.

Both skis are great groomer skis with good torsional stiffness for hold. The 90s are better in bumps whereas the 99s are probably a little more versatile for skiing chopped crud or deeper snow. Both perform well, though and I'm very happy with the purposes I've assigned them. What are you thinking in terms of your question?

[phatty]

Yes. I have both. The 90 for our closest mountain (Mt. Spokane) and the 99 for Schweitzer. I have passes at both and don't want to slog skis, boots, etc. back and forth so went with the 90s for MS as the snow conditions are more geared toward groomers than Schweitzer.

Both skis are great groomer skis with good torsional stiffness for hold. The 90s are better in bumps whereas the 99s are probably a little more versatile for skiing chopped crud or deeper snow. Both perform well, though and I'm very happy with the purposes I've assigned them. What are you thinking in terms of your question?

I have family with a place at Deer Valley and end up groomers for much of my time there. Also when Alpental hasn't gotten snow for awhile, it ends being a bit more on the bumps and groomed. Sounds like the 90s may be what I'm looking for. They won't come out on days with fresher snow as I have better skis for those days.

[GoldMember]

I have family with a place at Deer Valley and end up groomers for much of my time there. Also when Alpental hasn't gotten snow for awhile, it ends being a bit more on the bumps and groomed. Sounds like the 90s may be what I'm looking for. They won't come out on days with fresher snow as I have better skis for those days.

One caveat; I tend to like narrower skis than a lot of guys around TGR from what I read. For example, my deeper powder skis are x106 Legends so YMMV.

[D(C)]

Has anyone skied both 180 and 189 M-Free 118s? I am on 192 M-Free 108s and they are great for most things, but I am tempted to grab something for big pow days.

To ski deep pow all day at Whistler, it usually needs to be a storm day (on clear pow days, things get tracked out pretty fast, and the 108s are great). So for lower speed skiing in the trees, I am wondering if the 180 118s would be more fun than the 189s.

I’m 5’8” 170 lbs.