The Dynastar Thread

[D(C)]

Any consensus on where the 185 108 compares to the old 182? Same ski just slightly longer or closer to the 192??

The 185s seem to be nowhere to be found. I’ve been waiting for them to show up in local shops to know the answer to that.

[whyturn]

[emoji638]][emoji640][emoji639]][emoji637][emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji640][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji639]][emoji639]]The [emoji637][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]s seem to be nowhere to be found. I’ve been waiting for them to show up in local shops to know the answer to that.

There is a pair at level nine Millcreek Call and have them measure If I remember right they were one eighty two

Damn emojis!!!!!

[MTslackcountry]

112 hot take:

Conditions: 3 - 5” over bulletproof raincrust, firm groomers, variable wind deposit.

It’s definitely a dynastar.

It’s more a Mfree 108 than a 118

It’s a playful charger. Plenty of beef for me at 5’ 10” 220lbs. Felt damp, composed, but also found myself popping off little lips and stuff. Less bouncy on chop than the Mfree 108

No regrets on my mount decision, which was significantly behind recommended and lines up where I mount 108s.

The shape is a little more sidecut driven but not locked in and very fun/loose in soft snow. Probably 10% less surf in pow.

Handles groomers great, a touch more fun than the 108. You can find an edge faster and it initiates/completes turns a little cleaner.

If your 108s are clapped, you like the sounds of the above and you want a replacement, buy these instead.

If you wish the 108 was a little stiffer in the tip, buy these.

I see no reason why this wouldn’t make a 1 ski quiver for someone.

Any chance you could give some insite on how these compare to the M-free 118/189. Thanks in advance

[D(C)]

There is a pair at level nine Millcreek Call and have them measure If I remember right they were one eighty two

Damn emojis!!!!!

So, same as the old 182s. I guess, if they do in fact ski “longer”, it’s because of the construction.

[TAFKALVS]

I asked someone I know on the US side pretty high up the totem pole:

M-Free 112 and SF 110 are different skis. The only shared piece of the ski is the underfoot shape of the mold. So we used the same starting point for the mold but slightly different tip and tail shapes and construction is totally different.

Also asked about the 185 MFREE108:

As far as new M-Free 108 construction, everything got the Hybrid Core 2.0 update. Not sure if it necessarily beefs up the core substantially compared to the OG version, but the athletes so far seem to be hyped on the updated sizing and skiability.

As for the 112 mount point:

112 mounting point is interesting for sure. Its way more progressive than the 108s, so I think a few athletes that had been mounting the 108s forward of rec were in for a bit of a surprise. Although the 108 has a relatively progressive shape, the mount point is more traditional than the 112. Athletes are happy with the 112 rec line now that they aren’t forward of it, but general public would be happier between -2 and -5 behind rec for a more directional feel or something closer what they know from the 108.

People like yourself who measure skis and figure out rec line in relation to true center should be able to figure it out, but if you just roll into a shop with that ski and don’t think about where you want it mounted, it could cause some headaches if someone was expecting a similar feel to the 108.

In general, sounds like inventory is a little bit tight in the US this year, so if you want a pair of 112s etc, grab a pair of you see a pair.

[kid-kapow]

I asked someone I know on the US side pretty high up the totem pole:

oh - interesting - thanks for sharing

[D(C)]

In general, sounds like inventory is a little bit tight in the US this year, so if you want a pair of 112s etc, grab a pair of you see a pair.

Per Instagram, many of their team athletes are still skiing on M-Free 108s with the old graphic.

[D(C)]

I ordered some discounted 185s from Corbetts Boxing Day sale. I guess I’ll find out myself if they’re different from my old 182s. I’ll report back.

[ASmileyFace]

Fondled the 185cm 108 yesterday in a shop... The profile looks very different than what I remember my 192 108s looking like. Less rocker, touch more camber and flatter tail maybe? Maybe it would ski in well like the old 192s did, but can't say I would buy the new 108 off the wall based on the rocker and profile personally.

[2FUNKY]

Sounds like a mfree mpro hybrid.
I have NIP one nine two Mfree one oh eights in gs im needing to move .


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[noslow]

Was curious if all the 183cm MFree 112 were noticeably heavier than the 184cm Sender Free 110 versions like the sets SkiEssentials had in their videos and what Soothski measured of their skis.

Got my contact at Corbetts to weigh their 2 pairs of 183cm MF 112 and set of the 190cm MF 112.
Their 183cm pairs were more in line with factory specs and the same as the 184cm SF 110 at around 2240gr each vs the 2360gr plus SkiEssentials set. The 190cm MFree 112 just above 2400gr each so in line with others sets on here and on Soothski.

[TAFKALVS]

I have spent the last 2 days on the 190 mfree112. It’s a really great ski, and really does take the charger nature of the 192 mfree108 and steps it up a notch while still being a poppy playful platform. Mine are definitely heavy (haven’t weighed them) and are super composed charging through dense pow pockets and chop. I really really like them, and if you’re a heavier dude or if you like the 108 and you want a ski that’s a bit “more” it’s perfect.

No regrets on mounting 5cm behind the line. I would not change it.

Compared to the mfree108, the overall flex is stiffer, especially in the tip. The float is similar. The 112 is less slashy but is still very fun in pow. The ski turn feels more “round” if that makes sense.

Compared to the HL r110, it has more tip float, and more suspension when running flat on packed snow, chop, or groomers. The 112s camber makes it easier to pop out of a turn. It is far less slashy and pivoty than the r110 especially on flatter terrain where the camber is more noticeable.

[2FUNKY]

Interesting sounding ski. I have a bunch of days of the R Dimes and have completely forgot about my mfree. You get on the R Dimes more than just that one run?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[jackattack]

[QUOTE=TAFKALVS;7180019]No regrets on mounting 5cm behind the line. I would not change it./QUOTE]

five centimeters? 50 millimeters? If so, it seems like the designers went full prog on the mf112.

[TAFKALVS]

[QUOTE=jackattack;7180337]

No regrets on mounting 5cm behind the line. I would not change it./QUOTE]

five centimeters? 50 millimeters? If so, it seems like the designers went full prog on the mf112.

Yeah. It’s like -4.5 from true center “on the line”, just like the Rossi SF110 or BO118.

Up thread I posted confirmation from dynastar folks that for directional skiers a rearward mount is suggested. I matched the mf108 mount and am happy.

[Dromond]

I ordered some discounted 185s from Corbetts Boxing Day sale. I guess I’ll find out myself if they’re different from my old 182s. I’ll report back.

Have you gotten these in hand yet?

[D(C)]

Have you gotten these in hand yet?

They showed up today. Tip to tail length is 181.5, so same as the previous 182s - I was hopeful they'd be longer, but not entirely surprised. I'll compare against my 182s when I get home later to see if there are other differences.

Edit to add - shape/camber appears to be the same as the 182s. Hard to tell differences in flex by hand-flexing. The skis weigh 2106 and 2140 g.

[noslow]

Remember measuring with digital callipers to find the min sidecut width on the 184cm Sender Free 110 and it was similar to the Blackops 118 around -8cm or so from Center. Incredibly slow increase in width up or down from there too.
So the rec mounts of the BO 118(-2.5cm) and SF 110/MF 112(-3.0 to -3.4cm) are pretty progressive.

Remember my almost identical sidecut to the 184cm SF 110 ski, the 21 CT 3.0 had its CT/freestyle mount around -5cm back, Progressive mount at -6.5cm and Traditional/Classic mount at -8cm.
Picked the -6.5cm progressive on the CT 3.0 and at -6.25cm(-3cm from rec) on my 184cm SF 110. Nice balance of playful but good float and stability there.
Further back would increase float and stability even more but not quite as playful.

[kid-kapow]

any updates on the MF112s? Is the Artist still alive?

[Bandit Man]

[emoji638]][emoji640][emoji639]][emoji637][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji638][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji637]]any updates on the MF[emoji637][emoji637][emoji638]s? Is the Artist still alive?

FWIW, mine arrive next Tuesday. [emoji41]

[TAFKALVS]

any updates on the MF112s? Is the Artist still alive?

I mean I posted an update a couple posts up? 112 is a great ski, good all mountain playful charger, more business than the mfree108

[Hood26]

I mean I posted an update a couple posts up? 112 is a great ski, good all mountain playful charger, more business than the mfree108

[forumskier]

Selling some brand new 192 MPro 108s if anyone is interested

[usr-674941]

Hello,
I’ve been lurking this thread since I got M free 99s last year and have thoroughly enjoyed skiing them as my daily driver in NVT.
I’m currently touring on line visions, but have some m tours 100s to mount up. I see other folks are mounting the m tour 108 at +1. Does anyone have any recommendations on mounting the m tour 100 a little forward?
thanks!

[Bandit Man]

My one-twelves arrived last week. Did the side by side with my one ninety two one-o-eights (like the Leavenworth ex-pat) and understand the minus five mount. Thinking minus three with demos since I have a tiny BSL and I know friends will want to try them. Got a few days to noodle it until snow comes back this weekend.