The Dynastar Thread

[bry]

184 MVP 94

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

[daviss1]

curious how the mfree 118 compares to the revolt 121

[SkiLyft]

curious how the mfree 118 compares to the revolt 121

I’d be interested in this too


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[shank]

curious how the mfree 118 compares to the revolt 121

Oh hey I can actually offer some thoughts on this! Cards on the table, I own the mfree and only have one day on the revolt, demoed before I’d bought the MF118 so never skied back to back. But I can say that the mfree behaves much more like a playful directional ski, whereas the revolt is a center mounted fat ski that can still charge. I get along well with the mfree mounted at recommended, but I’ve heard/read positive things from more centered skiers here who have mounted forward of the line; skiing the revolt definitely didn’t give me the impression that I’d get on dramatically better with the ski if I mounted back of the pretty progressive rec. If I ever got it in my head to spend a lot of time skiing deep days switch, revolt would be at the top of my list. As it is my preference is for a ski that will let me ski it like a traditional charger right up until I want it to release into a slash or drift, and the MF118 is a solid tool for that job.

[californiagrown]

Had Mfree108s out for half a day this weekend. Very, very pivoty and could be skied from the backseat or driven hard from the front. However i did find them awfully hooky and had multiple instances of weird tip crossing. Thinking i need to detune tips and tails a little better/further.

[Brasso]

Had Mfree108s out for half a day this weekend. Very, very pivoty and could be skied from the backseat or driven hard from the front. However i did find them awfully hooky and had multiple instances of weird tip crossing. Thinking i need to detune tips and tails a little better/further.

The 192cm? Were they hooky on just firm snow or a variety of conditions?

[DumbIdeasOnly]

^

Also did you tune them before use? My 192 pair came slightly funky out of the plastic so I had them ground flat and they were pretty perfect in LCC for a good chunk of the last week.

[TAFKALVS]

Of course you of anyone here would..

Any past skis you can relate them to/say they remind you of? What about to the LPXXL? Any gen Katana? Cochise? Etc.

Honestly it reminds me A LOT of a wider Fischer Watea 106 with more tip rocker and some tail rocker which was never really skied by most people but was a really awesome ski.

I've never skied the XXL or Katana. Probably should fix that.

I have skied the first gen Cochise. I would say better float and a little better groomer performance. Stiffer than the first gen Cochise. Having camber probably influences that feel.

Layup wise, it feels like a Dynastar... so damp but not Head damp. A nice amount of pop out of turns.

Honestly reminds me most of slightly narrower 1st gen Bodacious with camber underfoot instead of being flat. The 192 Mpro 108 is actually 110mm.

Not tip floppy and less energetic Mindbender 108Ti?

OG Armada Inviticus 108TI is another one that comes to mind.

It's not that brutal Head Monster IM103 or Race Room LP type of ski. But also not an Mfree108 super loose playful ski.

It kind of sounds like the old QLab. That comparison would be interesting.

Never skied the Qlab, but it sounded like it only made one turn shape.

-------

Here's a side-by-side, LP 105, Mfree 108, Mpro 108

[MyNameIsAugustWest]

Late to the Dynastar phanboi club but I'm all in after my first day out on the M-Pro 99. May have been the factory edges (I did run a stone over them in case there were any hanging burrs) but I am now thinking they are the perfect East Coast daily driver (at least for me). Had no trouble holding an edge on some pretty bullet proof "frozen granular" and handled the loose piles from the 3-incher we got on Sunday with ease. No trees or bumps yet but given their profile, I can't see them falling short.

[toastybroski]

Anyone have any thoughts on a volkyl m102 vs mfree 108 as a daily ski? I think my deathwish 112 are too wide.

[SnakeMagnet]

Honestly it reminds me A LOT of a wider Fischer Watea 106 with more tip rocker and some tail rocker which was never really skied by most people but was a really awesome ski.

Mint watea shows up on marketplace as soon as you speak of it...got me curious, basically looks like a lighter 105.

I need to just get out and ski before my bank account ruptures worse than my storage space.

[gaijin]

Anyone have any thoughts on a volkyl m102 vs mfree 108 as a daily ski? I think my deathwish 112 are too wide.

Two different skis. What’s the motive?

I own the m102 as my groomer zoomer in Japan but want the MF108 as my groomer/tree ski to sit between my M102 and my Renegade.

But I kinda think the FL113 is a better candidate for that role.

A K108 and a MPro 108 seems like a more comparable duo.

[toastybroski]

Two different skis. What’s the motive?

I own the m102 as my groomer zoomer in Japan but want the MF108 as my groomer/tree ski to sit between my M102 and my Renegade.

But I kinda think the FL113 is a better candidate for that role.

A K108 and a MPro 108 seems like a more comparable duo.

Maybe I just need to demo some skis? I was on 116 Bibby pros for the last 10 years but a few years ago got some Corvus free birds and can just fucking rip with them which I missed. I like super poppy skis that are playful but can also carve and handle crud well and can hit cliffs and couloirs if needed. I also liked skiing the atris when I was in Japan.

90% of the time I’m skiing crud or variable dense powder.

I live in the middle of nowhere so demoing is tricky.

[gaijin]

I don’t demo much. If you can— have at it. KC and Bandit around here demo more than any other mortal.

Perhaps once the readers understand your goals the ski will come up.

Just saying the deathwish 112 is too wide doesn’t give us much to go on.

What do you want your next ski to do? Because I want both of the skis your considering… but for different reasons. And there’s a third that I think enters my end of this conversation.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[toastybroski]

I don’t demo much. If you can— have at it. KC and Bandit around here demo more than any other mortal.

Perhaps once the readers understand your goals the ski will come up.

Just saying the deathwish 112 is too wide doesn’t give us much to go on.

What do you want your next ski to do? Because I want both of the skis your considering… but for different reasons. And there’s a third that I think enters my end of this conversation.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I haven't skied the deathwish enough now that they have real clamps on them to give good enough feedback. I just think at 112 they are too similar to my 118 wildcats and a bit short at 184.

Looks like the 192 mfree doesn't have a prodeal which is a bummer.

[californiagrown]

The 192cm? Were they hooky on just firm snow or a variety of conditions?

^

Also did you tune them before use? My 192 pair came slightly funky out of the plastic so I had them ground flat and they were pretty perfect in LCC for a good chunk of the last week.

Hooky in a variety of conditions. I havent checked flat bases yet, was gonna do a more thorough detuning job and see if that fixes it. Im not a picky guy with setup and maintenance (i might get a tune every couple years on the DDs, never on the pow skis) so the last thing im look for is to pay 20% of the purchase price to get them tuned and ground straight out of the box. I shouldnt have to pay $$$ to unfuck a brand new pair of skis from a major raceroom manufacturer.

[2FUNKY]

Detune the taper in the tips a lot. Ski them. If still not to your liking lightly gummy the first 2-3” of the side cut.
I detune the shit out of anything on my skis that’s not sidecut. So any taper reverse side cut gets the stone. These skis are not hooky in anything.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[californiagrown]

Detune the taper in the tips a lot. Ski them. If still not to your liking lightly gummy the first 2-3” of the side cut.
I detune the shit out of anything on my skis that’s not sidecut. So any taper reverse side cut gets the stone. These skis are not hooky in anything.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Yep, im on board with that plan. Detuning is like salt, you can always detune more, but cant get that tune back (unless you actually go back and tune the edges which im not going to do...). Im guessing i just didnt detune enough, and or far enough.

Also, gummy stone? Im not that fancy. I have a file and some river rock in the backyard.

[slcdawg]

I'm currently looking for a similar low to mid-tide ski and have wondered if the MF108 might work in this spot. No demos anywhere near me, so interested in thoughts beyond "best ski ever!" that the MF108 seems to earn. What makes you want to go skinnier? Better groomer/hard snow performance or just less ski to move around when the surface area/length aren't required? Some here seem to be pondering the new QST 106 for this role - wonder if it's different enough to warrant consideration? What about something like the Enforcer 104?

I'd be interested in a mf108 qst106 comparison. Two skis on my shortlist.

[Bandit Man]

Detune the taper in the tips a lot. Ski them. If still not to your liking lightly gummy the first 2-3” of the side cut.
I detune the shit out of anything on my skis that’s not sidecut. So any taper reverse side cut gets the stone. These skis are not hooky in anything.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

This should be quoted like scripture. This is the path to enlightenment and hooky-free skiing.

[detrusor]

Tunes from the factory sure have gotten better over the years. However, I always get my new skis ground flat so I know where I’m starting from. Totally worth it.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[bodywhomper]

Looks like the 192 mfree doesn't have a prodeal which is a bummer.

I think I saw them on the form in November. Maybe they sold out

[SeatownSlackey]

like others, i always detune rocker/reverse section of tips/tails. zero need for sharpness there and I'm aggressive using a file and coarse diamond.

zero hook on my 192s MF108s

[SeatownSlackey]

just looked and yes looks like 192 is out of stock on the DLL pro site

[D(C)]

I got my first day of the season in on my 192 M-Free 108s. I quickly remembered why I like them so much.

…

So what’s the narrower version?

What about the M-Pro 90 or 99 in 186? The tip shape and profile looks remarkably similar to that of the M-Free 108 (which should help the ski be pretty smooth into turns of varied shape), and if you the math on the M-Pro mount points, there’s about the same amount of distance to the tip as the 192 M-Free 108s. Could they be like a narrower 192 M-Free 108 with the twintip tails chopped?

Also, other than a few mils of waist width, is there much difference between the M-Pro 90 and 99?