Page 124 of 132 FirstFirst ... 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 ... LastLast
Results 3,076 to 3,100 of 3281
  1. #3076
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    336
    Not my sale but could potentially facilitate:

    Dynastar M-Pro 105 Pro Rider 192cm $375 Brand New

    https://classifieds.ksl.com/listing/70768606


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  2. #3077
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    976
    Thinking of selling a pair of M-PRO 105. Couple typical scratches on tips and bases, some shots filled but nothing too serious. One ski had cracked sidewall right underfoot that I filled with epoxy. Mounted with Pivot 15 for 305mm BSL at +1 from recommended which is still -12 from TC.
    $200 flat or $400 with Pivots. Located in SLC.

    Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

  3. #3078
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Kootenays
    Posts
    387
    mounting some 194 xxls with dukes, kind of lighter guy at 6ft 160lbs, mount at +2? or+1?

  4. #3079
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    625
    Quote Originally Posted by Skiwurrel View Post
    mounting some 194 xxls with dukes, kind of lighter guy at 6ft 160lbs, mount at +2? or+1?
    6'3'' 180lbs, tip driving non-centered skier, mounted +1.5, 194 xxls that are beat to shit with 30+ holes in each

    ive skied them at +3ish and now at +1.5ish and far prefer them back, would go +.5 if werent swiss cheesed

    the clown shoe tip and flat tail makes them ski a little shorter up front than they look imo
    i find them easy to engage to turn, but harder to release when locked in and skid out instead of finish my turns if get lazy

    being a little shorter and maybe you dont ski as over your tips as i do i could see liking +2, but +1 would be my choice

  5. #3080
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    327
    Quote Originally Posted by Skiwurrel View Post
    mounting some 194 xxls with dukes, kind of lighter guy at 6ft 160lbs, mount at +2? or+1?
    I demoed the 194's at snowbird way back when, and ended up buying the 187. Used to be a similar size to you when i rode them regularly, but am now a good bit heavier. Take this with a grain of salt since it's the 187, but i moved from on the line to -2 since i always wanted more float and i think gwat was hardcore championing the -2 mount on all big dynastars. I don't remember what the rearward mount gave up in terms of versatility anymore but I don't think it was a lot, but it definitely helped with the float. This was just before tip rocker took off so to me stuffing a tip on a chop destroyer is a mortal sin, so I preferred the rearward mount. I would say if you have any more modern skis and are used to tip float that we are spoiled for nowadays then avoid going too far forward if you intend to use these often in deeper chop, even on the 194

  6. #3081
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    9,430
    Quote Originally Posted by Skiwurrel View Post
    mounting some 194 xxls with dukes, kind of lighter guy at 6ft 160lbs, mount at +2? or+1?
    Youíre little taller and a lot lighter than me and I loved my 194ís on the dot. I can drive tips or ski centered and really didnít like them much more forward of the line and hated them back. The 187 was pure shite behind the line. These are not known for float but as chop missiles, and that they do real well. I also donít ski on my inside ski with the down hill one outriggered so who knows.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  7. #3082
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    327
    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    I also don’t ski on my inside ski with the down hill one outriggered so who knows.
    Yet

  8. #3083
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    North Van
    Posts
    3,671
    After a few days on my M-Pro 99s, they are up for sale, and I got a pair of M-Free 99s.

    My 192 M-Free 108s are awesome in how they are able to charge but can also be skied slowly, but are just a bit big for when you canít ski full-throttle. I got the M-Pros as a narrower ski to complement them, but the flat tails are a bit much for sneaking into the trees to find stashes (though I did like them overall). I am hoping the M-Free 99s will be the little brother to the M-Free 108s that Iím looking for.

  9. #3084
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    1,267
    Quote Originally Posted by D(C) View Post
    After a few days on my M-Pro 99s, they are up for sale, and I got a pair of M-Free 99s.

    My 192 M-Free 108s are awesome in how they are able to charge but can also be skied slowly, but are just a bit big for when you canít ski full-throttle. I got the M-Pros as a narrower ski to complement them, but the flat tails are a bit much for sneaking into the trees to find stashes (though I did like them overall). I am hoping the M-Free 99s will be the little brother to the M-Free 108s that Iím looking for.
    Please update when you get some time on them. Iím trying to figure out which direction to go for MF108 little brother too.

  10. #3085
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Kootenays
    Posts
    387
    Thank's for the advice y'all! ended up going +1 to fit in the mount between holes, hopefully rockn we shall see. It's funny some chargers with similiar build i have liked +2 being right over top of the skis, and some like the boneshaker were so shit from that point you could only steer them well from -2

    Ya had a pair of 187s before and went over the bars a few times pinning it and submarining. Actually snapped one in an avy! somehow popped out solo unscathed . going back for redemption on the 194s!

  11. #3086
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vacationland
    Posts
    5,532
    Quote Originally Posted by D(C) View Post
    After a few days on my M-Pro 99s, they are up for sale, and I got a pair of M-Free 99s.

    My 192 M-Free 108s are awesome in how they are able to charge but can also be skied slowly, but are just a bit big for when you canít ski full-throttle. I got the M-Pros as a narrower ski to complement them, but the flat tails are a bit much for sneaking into the trees to find stashes (though I did like them overall). I am hoping the M-Free 99s will be the little brother to the M-Free 108s that Iím looking for.
    I did similar, probably skied the mPro 99's for over a month and sold them in favor of the mF99. I have the 108's too.

    For all the talk about the mPro 99 being precise and demanding I didn't see it, I'd rather run a Bonafide or M6 for that spot in the quiver. And as fun as the mF99 is I'm back to wanting the ski I got the mPro for in the first place. Mfree 99 isn't the greatest DD here in the EC, it's killer in 2-4" of soft and it ruled for spring skiing last year.

  12. #3087
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Spokane/Schweitzer
    Posts
    6,618
    Quote Originally Posted by ticketchecker View Post
    I did similar, probably skied the mPro 99's for over a month and sold them in favor of the mF99. I have the 108's too.

    For all the talk about the mPro 99 being precise and demanding I didn't see it, I'd rather run a Bonafide or M6 for that spot in the quiver. And as fun as the mF99 is I'm back to wanting the ski I got the mPro for in the first place. Mfree 99 isn't the greatest DD here in the EC, it's killer in 2-4" of soft and it ruled for spring skiing last year.
    Hmm...to each their own. I have MPro 99 and 90, x96 Legend and x106 Legend. I wasn't too sure about the 99 at first but after several days on them, they've become my favorite. I ski them on virtually everything except for deeper snow which I reserve the 106 for. Out of probably 60-70 days this year, the 99s will be the ski of choice for at least 50 of those, likely more. Disclaimer: I've never skied the Mf line so can't compare. I should try them but then it's another choice that has to be made...

  13. #3088
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vacationland
    Posts
    5,532
    ^^I ski in Maine where it's firmer than firm most days hence the Bone/M6 peference over the mPro, I think the mPro had too much taper and splay for our terra firma as a DD.

    Of course I could just dust off my Super Bro's...

  14. #3089
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    9,430
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldMember View Post
    Hmm...to each their own. I have MPro 99 and 90, x96 Legend and x106 Legend. I wasn't too sure about the 99 at first but after several days on them, they've become my favorite. I ski them on virtually everything except for deeper snow which I reserve the 106 for. Out of probably 60-70 days this year, the 99s will be the ski of choice for at least 50 of those, likely more. Disclaimer: I've never skied the Mf line so can't compare. I should try them but then it's another choice that has to be made...
    You will sell the X106 if you pick up the mfree108. I did.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  15. #3090
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Spokane/Schweitzer
    Posts
    6,618
    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    You will sell the X106 if you pick up the mfree108. I did.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Yeah but the issue is that I really don't ski the 106 very often as it's really for 12" or more new. So, the 108 might suffer the same fate and I'm not sure I want to spring for some skis that sit in the locker for all but about 5 days in a season. Besides, I really like the 106 and kinda hate to part with them. So many skis, so little time...

  16. #3091
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vacationland
    Posts
    5,532
    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    You will sell the X106 if you pick up the mfree108. I did.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    I did this too

  17. #3092
    Join Date
    Dec 2022
    Posts
    1

    MFree 99

    Thanks everyone on here and other threads for feedback on the mfree 99's, I ended up grabbing a new pair 188's on ebay a few weeks back. I got 2 days in at snow summit (big bear/socal) this weekend. I'm 5'10 ~170lbs and mounted on the line.

    Coming from a 2014 or 15 178 j skis allplay, I'm really liking how they feel so far on the groomers. Definitely stiffer and more stable than the allplays but still fun to pop and butter and play around a bit. Took them into any little washed out tree skiing available and they seemed agile enough for whatever I needed them to do. Looking forward to longer runs and more challenging terrain to really put them to the test, but really happy with the purchase so far

  18. #3093
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    2,045
    Anybody been on next years M-tour 108 F-team? Besides having a stupid name, theyíre a near identical shape to the m pro 108, but a feathery 1.4kg/ski at the 179 length. And with the dynastar basalt/PU combo I assume they arenít shite on hard snow.

    Iím tempted to add them to my pre-season order

  19. #3094
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Sun Valley, ID
    Posts
    2,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Climber Joe View Post
    Anybody been on next years M-tour 108 F-team? Besides having a stupid name, theyíre a near identical shape to the m pro 108, but a feathery 1.4kg/ski at the 179 length. And with the dynastar basalt/PU combo I assume they arenít shite on hard snow.

    Iím tempted to add them to my pre-season order
    Got a link to this ski?

  20. #3095
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    4,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Climber Joe View Post
    Anybody been on next years M-tour 108 F-team? Besides having a stupid name, theyíre a near identical shape to the m pro 108, but a feathery 1.4kg/ski at the 179 length. And with the dynastar basalt/PU combo I assume they arenít shite on hard snow.

    Iím tempted to add them to my pre-season order
    nope, but I've been told it exists in 179 and is expected in 186.

  21. #3096
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Sun Valley, ID
    Posts
    2,399
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    nope, but I've been told it exists in 179 and is expected in 186.
    186 would be great.

  22. #3097
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    North Van
    Posts
    3,671
    Is the 186 a 192 M-Free with the tail chopped?

  23. #3098
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Location
    Queen City
    Posts
    716
    Any idea if they will restock 192s mfree in the pro shop this year? I canít get a hold of them and I want those skis damnit.

  24. #3099
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,114
    Quote Originally Posted by toastybroski View Post
    Any idea if they will restock 192s mfree in the pro shop this year? I canít get a hold of them and I want those skis damnit.
    I saw that, too. Though Iím curious about the 182. Supposedly a lesser ski. But Iím 155 and on tele, meaning less leverage/power compared to fixed heel. Have 184 bibby and 192 lotus138 and have no regrets about length of either ski. Hmmmm

  25. #3100
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    9,430
    Quote Originally Posted by bodywhomper View Post
    I saw that, too. Though Iím curious about the 182. Supposedly a lesser ski. But Iím 155 and on tele, meaning less leverage/power compared to fixed heel. Have 184 bibby and 192 lotus138 and have no regrets about length of either ski. Hmmmm
    The 182 will be perfect for ya.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •