The Dynastar Thread

[Mulletizer]

Thanks for the review - I’m interested if anyone can echo this negative. Were you undersized with the 182?

IMHO - It’s unacceptable for this ski to not shine in crud / chop.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I wouldn’t call it a failing, more of an unexpected compromise. I bought the skis without having seen them or having shop flexed them. Because they were described as stiff chargers I was concerned about float but assumed they’d be great in chop. As it happens they are better than anticipated in powder but less good in chop.

Stiffer tips = better in chopped up snow, less floaty in powder.
Softer tips = floatier and surfier, less good at charging through heavy, cut up snow.

I don’t think you can have it all. FWIW, I could definitely ski the 192 but I don’t think the skis are undersized in 182; I’m 5’9”, 165lb, technically fairly tight. Could also be the way I ski. :shrug:

[GoldMember]

If anyone has a dyna pro access all the mFree and Pro stuff is discounted further


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Dang, I didn't need you to tell me that. All this talk of the MPro has me debating.

You're stronger than me, Phatty. I just ordered the MPro 108 in a 182 with the further discount. Sometimes, you just gotta do what ya gotta do!

Thanks for the notice, ticketchecker....I think....

[D(C)]

I continued my 182 vs 192 M-Free 108 experimenting, this time on Whistler. Conditions were bluebird with about 10 cm of fresh but wind-affected snow over a hard crust. After my few laps on the 192s remounted at +1.5, I was quite certain I didn’t like the balance, so I moved them back to the original holes at recommended, and that’s where I skied them today.

So, I’m pretty sure the 182 is the winner for me. The general feel is similar, but the 192s take more focus to stay on top of, and have a bit of that bull in a china shop feeling unless you have conditions and terrain where you can confidently open it up. I also feel like the tips get a bit bogged down in deeper snow. On the 182s, I felt like I had better control of what the tips were doing in deeper snow, and the fact that they’re even easier to shut down helped me ski faster in bad snow. I think the 192s are suited to game-on conditions, but the 182s will be more fun most of the time and have enough top-end unless you’re skiing very fast.

[CaliBrit]

I continued my 182 vs 192 M-Free 108 experimenting, this time on Whistler. Conditions were bluebird with about 10 cm of fresh but wind-affected snow over a hard crust. After my few laps on the 192s remounted at +1.5, I was quite certain I didn’t like the balance, so I moved them back to the original holes at recommended, and that’s where I skied them today.

So, I’m pretty sure the 182 is the winner for me. The general feel is similar, but the 192s take more focus to stay on top of, and have a bit of that bull in a china shop feeling unless you have conditions and terrain where you can confidently open it up. I also feel like the tips get a bit bogged down in deeper snow. On the 182s, I felt like I had better control of what the tips were doing in deeper snow, and the fact that they’re even easier to shut down helped me ski faster in bad snow. I think the 192s are suited to game-on conditions, but the 182s will be more fun most of the time and have enough top-end unless you’re skiing very fast.

What’s your height/weight.

[D(C)]

What’s your height/weight.

5’8”, 175 lbs, grew up racing and coaching but I’m 38 now.

[Shorty_J]

I continued my 182 vs 192 M-Free 108 experimenting, this time on Whistler. Conditions were bluebird with about 10 cm of fresh but wind-affected snow over a hard crust. After my few laps on the 192s remounted at +1.5, I was quite certain I didn’t like the balance, so I moved them back to the original holes at recommended, and that’s where I skied them today.

So, I’m pretty sure the 182 is the winner for me. The general feel is similar, but the 192s take more focus to stay on top of, and have a bit of that bull in a china shop feeling unless you have conditions and terrain where you can confidently open it up. I also feel like the tips get a bit bogged down in deeper snow. On the 182s, I felt like I had better control of what the tips were doing in deeper snow, and the fact that they’re even easier to shut down helped me ski faster in bad snow. I think the 192s are suited to game-on conditions, but the 182s will be more fun most of the time and have enough top-end unless you’re skiing very fast.

Nice perspective.

I haven't skied the mf 108 but what you are describing is kind of how I feel about softer skis... sometimes they allow me to ski faster because they don't punish my mistakes as much as a stiffer ski.

Having said that I own and love k108s as well. So maybe I have no idea what I'm talking about!

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[2FUNKY]

Cool project. I noticed none of what you speak about the 192.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[D(C)]

I think our coastal snowpack plays a role in my observations. In lighter snow (which I haven’t gotten to ski this season), I’ve found the 192s easier to maneuver, though the tips have always felt stiff to me in terms of floating to the surface.

[2FUNKY]

We get the schmoo here as well. They are so effortless and float way above their dims. I’m taller, heavier and older but strong like bull. Lol


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[JRainey]

Question: How do you like the mfree 99 in like 3d refrozen, and coral reef type conditions.

I'm on the fence between Blackops 98 and mfree 99, and thinking mfree might be a little nicer when the snow is leaning toward more fucked up.

[D(C)]

Question: How do you like the mfree 99 in like 3d refrozen, and coral reef type conditions.

I'm on the fence between Blackops 98 and mfree 99, and thinking mfree might be a little nicer when the snow is leaning toward more fucked up.

I briefly owned the 182 Black Ops 98, mounted at -1 from recommended. I thought they carved well and were easy enough, but their handling in weird snow is what got me to sell them. The lack of taper made them more challenging to vary turn shape, with tips and particularly tails catching. The M-Free 99s are what ultimately replaced them. They are still pretty fun on groomers but are just so much more versatile than the Black Ops 98 (around here, and for how I ski).

…but, I saw that you like the Sender Free 110. The Black Ops 98 seems like it would be a similar style of ski. I haven’t tried the SF 110, though.

[JRainey]

Thanks!

Yeah, I think bc coastal and low/med altitude Alps share pretty similar fukt snow problems.

I think the SF110 handles the shit well, even with minimal taper, because it's got huge tail rocker. That makes up for a lot, letting that tail get up and over things.

That's where the BO98 seems like it might not be the same, and the MFree99 looks more similar to me.

I wish they made an m-fro 99 (free shape, pro construction). But you answered my questions and pushed me over the edge (I've been trying to come up with reasons to not get the mfree). Because a slightly softer looser ski, that deforms over crappy snow and doesn't hang up, is the biggest trait I need.

I just want a ski to stay off piste and noodle and jump off shit, even when it's potentially total crap. Groomer juice is great, but I don't really partake too much.

Thanks!

[D(C)]

Because a slightly softer looser ski, that deforms over crappy snow and doesn't hang up, is the biggest trait I need.

I just want a ski to stay off piste and noodle and jump off shit, even when it's potentially total crap.

Sounds like the M-Free 99 to me

[Huskier]

Sounds like the M-Free 99 to me

Looking for the same thing, contemplating going shorter. Is there consensus on a Goldilocks size for 99 like there is for the 108?

[oetk2]

Unless you're short get the 185, it measures and skis short

[Bandit Man]

Unless you're short get the 185, it measures and skis short

+1 - fun ski but cannot imagine going shorter than the 185.

[WhetherMan]

I want to join the m-free 99 party, but it's just way too short for me. Anyone got any ideas for 190ish (or longer) in the same vein?

[tgapp]

+1 - fun ski but cannot imagine going shorter than the 185.

+2. 185 skis a little short but it's an extremely versatile ski in all conditions.

Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

[Jong Lafitte]

Can you send a video of you skiing them on a groomer? Maybe in a separate thread. No judgement

Thanks man but no, no such video exists.

I did have a bit of a breakthrough trying to get these to ski better for me though. I need to be more dynamic fore-aft (and more forward with my hips. and rotary turns I need less femur twist.

I got along with them really well concentrating on these things. I prolly would have liked the 186 a bit more on cruddy open runs, but I do feel like I unlocked the ski. Was night and day.

Thanks to everyone who helped!

Given the choice, I’d go 186 but iz po’ and these were the used ones I could find. Super stoked for what I hope to be a no-brainer 1”-8” fresh snow ski for all day at a crowded weekend I70 joint.

Cheers!!!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Shorty_J]

I want to join the m-free 99 party, but it's just way too short for me. Anyone got any ideas for 190ish (or longer) in the same vein?

I haven't skied it but maybe the blade optic 104?

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[mr_pretzel]

I want to join the m-free 99 party, but it's just way too short for me. Anyone got any ideas for 190ish (or longer) in the same vein?

I’ve found the sub100 “fun”skis don’t really work how you want them to in + 185cm lengths. They don't ski like wider long skis as they usually have too much sidecut compared to the length of the ski.

The 190 Moment wildcat100 is one of the few that work pretty well but it has quite a bit of rocker

[Judo Chop!]

I want to join the m-free 99 party, but it's just way too short for me. Anyone got any ideas for 190ish (or longer) in the same vein?

I think I'm looking for the same as you. More specifically I want a 95-99 waist version of the Sender Free 110, just a bit more carving-friendly.
Nobody makes longer skinnier skis!!

maybe a bit of something in the new 2025 enforcer 99 worth looking at???

[jackattack]

I want to join the m-free 99 party, but it's just way too short for me. Anyone got any ideas for 190ish (or longer) in the same vein?

Dynastar Menace 98 in 187 skis longer than the Mfree 99. The long low rocker is more refined for firm snow and still forgiving in tight terrain, trees, and bumps. I've skied them in up to 10" of hot pow and they work there as well. Dead easy and fun, but has a reasonably high speed limit when you want to open it up. This ski was in Dynastar's lineup for over 10 years in various iterations, I think it was originally the Big Trouble followed by the Slicer 98.

190+ and under 100mm underfoot is usually a full charger

[NW_SKIER]

I’ve been saying that for years…


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Maybe true, but it feels less painful to agree with 2funky, so he gets the point.

[kid-kapow]

the MF99 is finally being labeled the same as the 182 (now 183) MF108 for next year - they have always been the same length. It is not a 185, but measures 181.5. MF99s are fun.

If you want a 10x narrower SF110 then a Faction CT2.0 is a good contender, especially the year they were made a bit more beefy. There might be some stores that still have them in stock.

I also quite enjoy BlackOps98s - really nice balance and fun on hard snow. Easy to carve, yet do not pull you into a turn if you do not tell them to and fair off piste. Not as floaty or loose as MF99s, but plenty loose still.