The Dynastar Thread

[2FUNKY]

I really hope it looks better than it sounds.

No kidding. Sounds like they rubbed some shit on the old graphic. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[skis_the_trees]

So, the froggies are launching a Dynastar logo'ed GPO?

I thought that was the Mfree108.
Seriously similar shape if 8mm narrower.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[waveshello]

I spent my first day on the M-Free 108 192cm this weekend--late to the party, I know. I skied a couple inches of new and soft to firm groomers @ Snoqualmie.

Pretty cool ski, I could instantly see why y'all like it so much--there's some magic in these boards. A ski of contradictions.

The OG 184 4frnt Devastator is my go-to DD. First run on the M-free, I was surprised at the shorter perceived turn radius, and what first seemed like a little bit of nervousness, but what I would actually call reactiveness or liveliness... they want a little more shin pressure than the devs, and when I gave them that it was game on.

Carve arcs or slarve and drift at will
Low speed fun but also composed at higher speeds
Heavyish but fairly nimble
Responds to small inputs from skier but does not deflect easily

I'm looking forward to steeper/deeper days, think these will be very fun. Any soft snow under the bases and they start feeling incredibly loose. I could see these stealing the DD spot from the devs. I think the devs are actually more of a charger than the m-free and feel even more composed at speed. The devs are also more maneuverable in wet cement. But the "liveliness" (or whatever I'm going to call it) of the m-free is kind of addicting and I'm already daydreaming about the next time they're on my feet.

[Bandit Man]

I spent my first day on the M-Free 108 192cm this weekend--late to the party, I know. I skied a couple inches of new and soft to firm groomers @ Snoqualmie.

Pretty cool ski, I could instantly see why y'all like it so much--there's some magic in these boards. A ski of contradictions.

The OG 184 4frnt Devastator is my go-to DD. First run on the M-free, I was surprised at the shorter perceived turn radius, and what first seemed like a little bit of nervousness, but what I would actually call reactiveness or liveliness... they want a little more shin pressure than the devs, and when I gave them that it was game on.

Carve arcs or slarve and drift at will
Low speed fun but also composed at higher speeds
Heavyish but fairly nimble
Responds to small inputs from skier but does not deflect easily

I'm looking forward to steeper/deeper days, think these will be very fun. Any soft snow under the bases and they start feeling incredibly loose. I could see these stealing the DD spot from the devs. I think the devs are actually more of a charger than the m-free and feel even more composed at speed. The devs are also more maneuverable in wet cement. But the "liveliness" (or whatever I'm going to call it) of the m-free is kind of addicting and I'm already daydreaming about the next time they're on my feet.

Wait until you ski them on an appropriate day at Alpental. They really thrive in a place like that.

[Mulletizer]

I thought there was some discussion of mounting point for the M-PRO 108 but I haven’t managed to find it. About to mount a pair of 182. Thinking 1cm forward of the line. Any thoughts? Or anyone able to point me towards the previous discussion about this? Thanks.

[2FUNKY]

No clue on the 182. Most of us liked the 192 +1 while some liked the line. Think that had to do with fwd lean of boots. Maybe that same logic applies on the shorter pair.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[waveshello]

Wait until you ski them on an appropriate day at Alpental. They really thrive in a place like that.

Hopefully I'll find out Thursday [emoji1696]

[Mulletizer]

No clue on the 182. Most of us liked the 192 +1 while some liked the line. Think that had to do with fwd lean of boots. Maybe that same logic applies on the shorter pair.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Thanks. I’ve gone with +1 - the logic being that my boots (Lupo) are relatively upright and the bindings (Pivots) have almost no ramp. That’s still 12.5cm behind true centre, albeit with a lot more rocker in the tips than the tail. Will report back about how I go.

[gwat]

What y’all skiing for a dedicated pow ski.
Like 30cms overnight and you’re expecting to score fresh tracks all morning.

105s don’t quite have the float but kill it once things are chopped up.
The old Cham 127 is a powder monster but they are damn heavy and a lot of work to throw around (or I’m getting old..)

Do I just need an Mfree 108? Proto?

[2FUNKY]

Protest or Lhasa fat. Lol
With that said the Mfree 108 floats way better than it should. Nothing in the fat pow ski from Dstar excites me.
Maybe try the Mpro 108 as it’s 110 in the 192.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[phatty]

I have the older Factory Proto 118s and think they are great for pow. Still prefer my ON3P BGs, but they are a close second. Bonus is they can usually be found for cheap.

[gwat]

Protest or Lhasa fat. Lol

Ha. That reminds me I do have 186 Lhasa Pows tucked away in the back of my shed. Never got around to skiing them but maybe they will be the ticket.

Nothing in the fat pow ski from Dstar excites me.

I feel the same..

I have the older Factory Proto 118s and think they are great for pow.

Ya I should just try the Proto. Should be easier to swing around than the 127.

[Shorty_J]

What y’all skiing for a dedicated pow ski.
Like 30cms overnight and you’re expecting to score fresh tracks all morning.

105s don’t quite have the float but kill it once things are chopped up.
The old Cham 127 is a powder monster but they are damn heavy and a lot of work to throw around (or I’m getting old..)

Do I just need an Mfree 108? Proto?

Volkl BMT 122. # wrong thread

Not heavy (which you might prefer if you're into dynastar), but have a rearward mount but are still ridiculously loose.... like sustained spatula-like sideways drifts but you can also load the tips if you want.

Powder is fun on any ski but these stood out for me last year on a 30cm day at fernie. I got rope drop in timber bowl under the lift and was way in front of everyone else, even on the short size... they feel very stable at the same time as being able to go loose.

I tried the proto 118 and had a good day but they honestly felt more like a tight tree powder tool than a charger. Still fun but didn't blow my socks off.

YMMV

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[waxoff]

Did some time travelling yesterday. Finally got my NOS 2010 184 cm Pro Riders on snow.

Conditions were not the best for off-piste. Cut up, sun baked and refozen crap in Arlberg. Really hard pistes, boilerplate in many places.

Man have one been spoiled rotten. The pivotability of modern tip and tail rockered skis in poor conditions make a big difference. The cambered PR's were a handful on there and left a lot to be wished for.

But my oh my were they sweet on hardpack. Carving, drifting, anything. The front-rockerless turn initiation were so crisp and clean with super edge conrol. The flex and damping proportions second to none. High speed cruising just sooo smoth. When they bend in a tight carve I almost wished for even less sidecut. This was a joyful day. Can't praise them enough for their frontside capabilities. And that's the role they'll carry in my collection. I've been considering something a fattish frontsider like a Monster 98 or HL R99. That thought has been put on ice for now!

[Lord Thomas]

Wax,

I've got a pair of the 190's and pretty much agree with your description. Deep, punchy, off piste = no fun if you have to point them any direction but right on the fall line. But, soooo good when there is a firm base and it's not too deep.

[waxoff]

Wax,

I've got a pair of the 190's and pretty much agree with your description. Deep, punchy, off piste = no fun if you have to point them any direction but right on the fall line. But, soooo good when there is a firm base and it's not too deep.

Yeah, being used to current rockered freeride skis even on piste, these were a hoot! And nowadays 100 mm underfoot is semi-skinny anyways. Groomin zoomin, soo sweet on these "relics" 😎

[Karl_H]

2010 184 cm Pro Riders were the only skis I owned for my first 4 years of skiing. It may be hard to believe, but some of the best powder days I have ever had were on those sticks.

Learning to ski them (with frame bindings) in bottomless powder and breakable crust is one of the most challenging things I have ever done.

[TAFKALVS]

What y’all skiing for a dedicated pow ski.
Like 30cms overnight and you’re expecting to score fresh tracks all morning.

105s don’t quite have the float but kill it once things are chopped up.
The old Cham 127 is a powder monster but they are damn heavy and a lot of work to throw around (or I’m getting old..)

Do I just need an Mfree 108? Proto?

If you want to stay Dynastar…

Mfree108 is good but if it’s really upside down or punchy, a little more width is nice.

I’ve skied the 118/proto a fair bit, it is pretty good but doesn’t have the tip float I want sometimes. It’s weird in that regard, I’ve had some really great days on it and some days where it’s a pretty frustrating ski where I tail gun more than I want.

The new mfree112 or whatever it will be called is intriguing. Not available yet.

The mpro108 floats nicely and the more rearward mount compared to the Mfree108 makes it more floaty and predictable in more punchy conditions. But it’s only moderately slashy. But this has been my go to.

The old 117/117 2.0 was pretty fun in pow. Similar feel to the Lhasa Fat, but dynastar construction. Way less of a tank than the 127.

[CaliBrit]

If you have eyes on M-Tour 108 hit up Ptex1.

[gwat]

The mpro108 floats nicely and the more rearward mount compared to the Mfree108 makes it more floaty and predictable in more punchy conditions. But it’s only moderately slashy. But this has been my go to.

The old 117/117 2.0 was pretty fun in pow. Similar feel to the Lhasa Fat, but dynastar construction. Way less of a tank than the 127.

Thanks for your insight.
I probably need a Pro108 anyway so I can charge 3mms harder than the Pro105.
I never considered the Cham 2.0 117 but it could be a good option.

[TAFKALVS]

Thanks for your insight.
I probably need a Pro108 anyway so I can charge 3mms harder than the Pro105.
I never considered the Cham 2.0 117 but it could be a good option.

108 in the 192 is actually 110mm… and unless you are straightlining hardpack cliff drops on some grim euro face in a comp, is a pretty much a better ski for resort conditions. They are super awesome skis.

I would recommend them.

[roQer]

108 in the 192 is actually 110mm… and unless you are straightlining hardpack cliff drops on some grim euro face in a comp, is a pretty much a better ski for resort conditions. They are super awesome skis.

I would recommend them.

Ha ha, that’s exactly what some Dynastar athletes like Reine Barkered were doing on the MF108. Watch his run in Verbier at FWT final 2021.

https://youtu.be/NjG4Wjf4WQg?si=8e4brsCftUJ0NkyY

To recommend MF108 in this thread is like one alcoholic recommends to another alcoholic to drink some booze.

[gaijin]

Yeah, but, like, bro… you misquoted him.

Put your own booze down and reread the conversation.

Jesus Christ.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[shank]

So there's a pair of wife-sized 2012 Legend 115s for cheap on the local classifieds... Don't know anything about the 115s, am I risking my relationship by buying them? Am I risking my relationship by NOT buying them??

[arild]

So there's a pair of wife-sized 2012 Legend 115s for cheap on the local classifieds... Don't know anything about the 115s, am I risking my relationship by buying them? Am I risking my relationship by NOT buying them??

Depends on the wife, or if you want to ski wife size skis, or,or or.. [emoji23] afair, they're not too dumbed down from the 184.

Sent fra min LE2123 via Tapatalk