Page 49 of 50 FirstFirst ... 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 LastLast
Results 1,201 to 1,225 of 1249
  1. #1201
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    OR
    Posts
    1,695
    Quote Originally Posted by NW_SKIER View Post
    No, because the mfree doesn't suck like the woodsman.
    I entertained thoughts on a sultry woodsman in the fat size. I got better things to do than detune skis to make them ski adequately. I've been intimate with many modern skis, including ON3Ps and have never had to/thought about detuning. I do however get taking the bite off with a gummy/diamond stone in certain circumstances.

    I was convinced with a recent tgr comment to detune tips above taper to reduce tip topsheet damage though.

  2. #1202
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SEA>DEN>Spokanistan
    Posts
    1,720

    The Dynastar Thread

    I love that this thread went here... got back on a woodsman again this weekend, sorry they just freaking suck.

    Sure it was the 98 vs the 108 I originally skied at BBI but the tips were super chattery which is a phenomenon I donít usually see with bamboo. Tried driving them and they were too squirrelly.

    They liked a neutral stance but when on edge felt them wanting to pull me up the fall line. Side note those fuckers like turning too much..

    Blaahhhh

    Buy the 192 MFree108 and ski em however the fuck you want...


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  3. #1203
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Imaginationland
    Posts
    3,895
    Quote Originally Posted by SkiLyft View Post
    I love that this thread went here... got back on a woodsman again this weekend, sorry they just freaking suck.



    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums


    Quote Originally Posted by mr_pretzel View Post
    Owning both, this is false
    Not just my opinion dude

  4. #1204
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    2,965
    opinions are like assholes, some are unpopular

  5. #1205
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Imaginationland
    Posts
    3,895
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    opinions are like assholes, some are unpopular
    Most assholes are unpopular

  6. #1206
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    2,965
    Isnít that what you said about your opinion?

  7. #1207
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Imaginationland
    Posts
    3,895
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    Isnít that what you said about your opinion?
    My asshole doesn't stink

  8. #1208
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,007
    Quote Originally Posted by NW_SKIER View Post
    No, because the mfree doesn't suck like the woodsman.
    snicker

    Quote Originally Posted by NW_SKIER View Post
    Not just my opinion dude
    So not your opinion? So fact? Cool story bro.

    Quote Originally Posted by SkiLyft View Post
    I love that this thread went here... got back on a woodsman again this weekend, sorry they just freaking suck.

    Sure it was the 98 vs the 108 I originally skied at BBI but the tips were super chattery which is a phenomenon I don’t usually see with bamboo. Tried driving them and they were too squirrelly.

    They liked a neutral stance but when on edge felt them wanting to pull me up the fall line. Side note those fuckers like turning too much..

    Blaahhhh

    Buy the 192 MFree108 and ski em however the fuck you want...
    96s I gather? So the Woodsman that is designed to be a somewhat turny east coast groomer slayer is in fact somewhat turny? Say it ain't so But it is unfortunate that either woodsman was not what you were hoping they'd be. Chattery and squirrelly is not often used to describe ON3Ps, so I am sure that Scott would appreciate your findings and thoughts on why they exhibited those traits.

    I am not out here to defend on3p or say that anybody is wrong - I am just trying to convey my findings on a comparison between two skis that I own and will spend quite a few days on. Thus far I see a role in my quiver for both - they are more than a bit different. The 182 M-Free 108 does not yet strike me as the slay everything ski that some mags have proposed earlier in this thread, even if my initial impressions are very favorable.

    I also do not necessarily agree with the sentiment that something that doesn't ski like I hope it would sucks (and thus since I am right everybody else is wrong - no SkiLyft, that last one was aimed at NW, not you), but oh well - we all communicate differently. I also did not mean to make this into another Woodsman/on3p vs whhatever thread though - I mentioned the quote as it was what made me consider the skis in the first place.

  9. #1209
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    871
    praxis rx
    Common sense. So rare today in America it's almost like having a superpower.

  10. #1210
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Driving around the RFV
    Posts
    7,302
    Quote Originally Posted by NW_SKIER View Post
    No, because the mfree doesn't suck like the woodsman.
    It's about damn time for this to be said.
    I remember a bottomless freedom...

  11. #1211
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    1,007
    I spent the second half of the day riding woods108s and m-free 108s back to back (started out on BGs), both in the 182 length. The short take away is that they are completely different skis that need to be skied differently and cater to different types of riders imho. Conditions were mixed wind affected fresh with pockets of deep, to fresh softer snow groomers. I am 175 / 66kg nekid, so no clyde, and have more enthusiasm than proper technique.

    The M-Free 108 in 182 is perhaps as forgiving a ski as I can remember to have been on in soft snow. Together with the taper and rocker that makes for a loose and fun ski that is predictable and always gets you out of a tigth spot. In spite of being forgivable and relatively soft they can still rally. They are fairly strong and fun on groomers. They are just what my left knee needs right now, and I would recommend these to just about anybody. I really like them.

    Wood108s are a lot more ski. The require more speed and a more forward stance to come alive, but when they do they are loose and fun. I find them to be stronger on groomers than M-Free 108s. The section behind the binding/under the heels could perhaps benefit from being a tad softer, something that could also make them a bit more forgivable and versatile wrt skiing style. They require a lot more input and force to have them ski like you want them to and do not cater well to passive skiing. I would not recommend them to smaller/more passive/beginner skiers in resorts that gets skied out fast (while chargy intermidiaries and up will can have a lot of fun on them, especially in resorts that gets a lot snow). I am really curious how this years wood108s ski with their slightly adjusted mount point, or the tour version that is lighter weighth and rounder flex. So I do not agree at all that they suck, they just require more from the rider than M-Free 108s and require more speed to come alive. I like them and think of them as an aspirational ski.

    I really appreciate the posts that explains why an opinion is a specific way, not just statements without any context or reasoning.

    Quote Originally Posted by glademaster View Post
    It's about damn time for this to be said.
    jesus man, did Iggy piss on the grave of your dead cat or something? Getting anything resembling a nuanced perspective based on recent use of any their skis seems just beyond you. It is pretty obvious that you do not like their skis - broken record kind of obvious - but other than negativity you never add anything of value to the discussion. Yeah, a lot of mags can be too positive about gear, but the flip side of that is not to be negative on principle. I hope that you understand that people call you out on how you contribute to the conversation, not only that they disagree with your points.

  12. #1212
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Imaginationland
    Posts
    3,895
    When you say they require more from a rider, I agree fully. The "more" they require is a very specific weight placement on the ski. I would word it as a small sweet spot. Skis with a small sweet spot get one into trouble when things get tight and/or conditions get tough. A skier shouldn't have to change much about the way they are placing their weight on a ski depending on what condition they are skiing. That somewhat defeats the purpose. If I am skiing out of the trees and out onto the groomed runout to the chair, I don't feel it should require me to remember to ski a different stance at the transition.

    I would also never put a beginner skier on them. Mostly for the exact reason I named above. They are not an intuitive, or "easy" ski to ride. And I am far from from a slow, or non-chargy style skier. I prefer skis that require a forward stance, and don't care for what the woodsman wants from me to be reliable. Whether that's a stance change, or extensive tune changes.

    When I stated it wasn't just my opinion they suck, I was not indicating it's a fact, I was simply pointing out that I'm not the only one who doesn't like them.

    I'm not changing my stance on this issue, or on that ski.

  13. #1213
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    SEA>DEN>Spokanistan
    Posts
    1,720

    The Dynastar Thread

    @kid-kapow. Yes 96** thought that 98 didnít look right.

    Anyways way to take up the good fight for ON3P. I love their skis that are >11X, specifically the goat design. Itís amazing, and what the 189 goat lacks the super goat absolutely slays.
    But, If we roll back to the inception of the WD and what it was originally designed to do, it was designed to give skiers an option.

    Most skiers could not ski the wren correctly as it did require significant skier input and what skiers were left with was to mount the Kartel back 2cm to achieve a more directional approach.

    If I look at the woodsman now having skied the 96 and 108 Iím sorry I just canít say that they successfully achieved their mission. That ski is weird, itís not balanced, and demands the skier to do strange things while skiing to compensate for its unpredictability.

    This is why we are comparing the mfree to the WD and saying itís a much better ski and was the ski we wanted the WD to be. With the Mfree you donít have to ski it any damn way. You can Mach GS turns down an open face, you can noodle and slave your way trees, you can load up the tails for tons of pop. On tight run outs just effing stand on them and they will be there.

    Idk, Iíve seen a lot of strong skiers ski the WD and have similar sentiments; but everyone who has gotten on the MFree buys one.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  14. #1214
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    871
    Quote Originally Posted by SkiLyft View Post

    Idk, Iíve seen a lot of strong skiers ski the WD and have similar sentiments; but everyone who has gotten on the MFree buys one.
    Sounds like all you dynastar reps need to get me on a pair to try while my WD still has some resale value.
    Common sense. So rare today in America it's almost like having a superpower.

  15. #1215
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Imaginationland
    Posts
    3,895
    Quote Originally Posted by steveski View Post
    Sounds like all you dynastar reps need to get me on a pair to try while my WD still has some resale value.
    I don't know. Everything I ever bring to mission comes home with a core shot in it.

  16. #1216
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    10
    Kid-Kapow,
    You previously had the Wildcat 108 as well right? How would you compare the MFree 108 to the Wildcat 108?

  17. #1217
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    7,029
    Quote Originally Posted by steveski View Post
    Sounds like all you dynastar reps need to get me on a pair to try while my WD still has some resale value.
    I have 192 mounted with pivots, and 182 mounted with vipecs, you will fit in both.

  18. #1218
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    871
    Quote Originally Posted by NW_SKIER View Post
    I don't know. Everything I ever bring to mission comes home with a core shot in it.
    Bet your viciks didn't. Took me a few years to damage mine.
    Quote Originally Posted by The Artist Formerly Known as Leavenworth Skier View Post
    I have 192 mounted with pivots, and 182 mounted with vipecs, you will fit in both.
    Excellent. I will take you up on that.
    Common sense. So rare today in America it's almost like having a superpower.

  19. #1219
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    7,029
    Quote Originally Posted by steveski View Post
    Excellent. I will take you up on that.
    Come east, you have a place to crash as always.

  20. #1220
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Imaginationland
    Posts
    3,895
    Quote Originally Posted by steveski View Post
    Bet your viciks didn't. Took me a few years to damage mine. Excellent. I will take you up on that.
    I got an edge compression and a core shot on the first or second lap. Lmao

  21. #1221
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    1,155
    Quote Originally Posted by jdeist View Post
    Kid-Kapow,
    You previously had the Wildcat 108 as well right? How would you compare the MFree 108 to the Wildcat 108?
    Also interested in such a comparison...

  22. #1222
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Wenatchee
    Posts
    871
    Quote Originally Posted by NW_SKIER View Post
    I got an edge compression and a core shot on the first or second lap. Lmao
    Oh.

    Guess it pays to be light and flighty. Something about "float like a... person skiing a sharp rock pile"
    Common sense. So rare today in America it's almost like having a superpower.

  23. #1223
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    7,029
    Quote Originally Posted by steveski View Post
    Oh.

    Guess it pays to be light and flighty. Something about "float like a... person skiing a sharp rock pile"
    Lol, before I even met Chad, I watched him nail a rock at Mission while I was riding up chair 4. I was watching him ski in to a spot, and thinking... that guy hasn't skied here before... *CLACK CLACK CLACK*. We met up the next run.

  24. #1224
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Imaginationland
    Posts
    3,895
    Quote Originally Posted by The Artist Formerly Known as Leavenworth Skier View Post
    Lol, before I even met Chad, I watched him nail a rock at Mission while I was riding up chair 4. I was watching him ski in to a spot, and thinking... that guy hasn't skied here before... *CLACK CLACK CLACK*. We met up the next run.
    I'm not exactly known for my good decison making.

  25. #1225
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,452
    Look what showed up today...and both on the same day.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Image1610772498.444393.jpg 
Views:	86 
Size:	223.4 KB 
ID:	358176
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

Posting Permissions

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