The Dynastar Thread

[kid-kapow]

For science!
N
New to me SF110 and MF112 - both 184, mounted at -1 from rec, one day of skiing in ideal testing conditions (fast, firm groomers, to untracked soft snow that was both light and a bit denser in spots). They are incredibly similar wrt to shape/rocker profile, if not identical. SF110 = 2230ish a ski, MF112=2330ish a ski. These pairs ski a fair bit differently though. MF112s are noticably stiffer and more busninesslike - they want to go where you point them. I reset the edges before skiing them, but might not have gone to town enough on these - something that could have affected how they skied (more locked in). This pair of SF110s are a fair bit softer and poppier and want to play and pop and turn. I was really sceptical concerning the reported differences in layup in these vs a suspiscion of a marketing department saying stuff, but one day in their different rides seems to confirm that they are in fact a bit different. I am kinda curious if they made the SF110 a bit softer this year or if it is just this pair - makes me curious to pick up a pair of SF118s - to differentiate them more from MF112s. As for the BO118 vs MF112 question - the are a bit different. BO118 are similar wrt to stiffness, but their added width makes them surfier. MF112 are more of a daily driver imho, BO118 more of a powder specialist. They both mob variable. It should be fairly easy to choose between them as the choice is kinda the same as SF110 vs SF118.

[phatty]

If anyone is looking for a BNIP pair of 192 MFree 108s from last year (pre changes), I have a pair I'm selling for $400+ship. Bills are coming in from leg surgery and I won't be skiing this year anyway. Will be posting on FB once I can walk again.

[kid-kapow]

holy crap phatty - heal up well man, hope things are on the mend!

[phatty]

holy crap phatty - heal up well man, hope things are on the mend!

Thanks. Recovery is going well. Should get the go ahead to put weight on the leg in a couple of weeks.

[noslow]

Think there are definitely some "heavy" sets of the 183cm MF 112 out there with these 2350ish gr each ones. The Sender Free 110 seems to have gained some weight since the first ones as they are usually 2250-2300gr now in the 184cm(2200gr ish before) and the 191cm closer to 2400gr vs 2300gr now. Got Corbett's to weigh their 183cm MF 112 and they were 2250gr each so not the "heavy" sets Bandit, SkiEssentials/Soothski seem to have. Their 190cm set were over 2400gr each which is in line with current SF 110 sets.
I think similar weight SF 110/MF 112 will feel different due to the core change and the fact that the SF 110 has lighter tips. Should feel a bit more damp in the MF 112(especially the "heavy" sets) and the SF 110 feeling a little more precise with its lower swing weight.

[TAFKALVS]

Whatever it is, I think the mfree112 skis awesome and is quickly becoming my favorite ski. Still no regrets mounting so far behind the line.

[D-Roc]

Hey just got my MFREE 108 (185) and contemplating mount point. Hand measuring puts them at like -8.5cm behind true center.

Has anyone mounted them at -6cm from true? I value playful / nimble over most things.

thanks in advance

[D-Roc]

<p>
Hey just got my MFREE 108 (185) and contemplating mount point. Hand measuring puts them at like -8.5cm behind true center. Has anyone mounted them at -6cm from true? I value playful / nimble over most things. thanks in advance</p>

[bearcub69]

Hey just got my MFREE 108 (185) and contemplating mount point. Hand measuring puts them at like -8.5cm behind true center. Has anyone mounted them at -6cm from true? I value playful / nimble over most things. thanks in advance

they still ski well at -5/-6 cm from center if thats what youre about

[GoldMember]

I'm curious about a narrower ski for low tide groomers or firmer conditions. My current narrowest ski is MPro 99 which works well and I can hook up fine but I'm thinking maybe M Cross 88 or something else for these conditions. Anyone else have these or recommendations?

[TAFKALVS]

I’ve not skied any of the new narrow Dynastars, didn’t really love the 963 4x4 (overly burly/hooky), Speedzone 72 (not 100% sure what it’s called now) is pretty fun, but you gotta be on your game off piste.

The more I ski it, the more I really like the HL rc85 as it’s more that surfy off edge but locked in on edge feel I like… you can actually ski them off piste like a wider ski. If you like the mpro 99 feel but want a narrower ski, it really should be on your radar imo.

[GoldMember]

I'm really more interested in purely on-piste. If it's at all likely I'm going off, I'll ski my 99 or even the 108. The 88, or so, would be a limited use ski so not a lot of days. I'm thinking of maybe even dropping to an 82 or something even narrower, a true GS of some kind.

[dcpnz]

GM - I went thru a similar debate last summer. I ski a 100 as my daily, and wanted something skinnier, gripper, carvier for low tide. Was able to demo a bunch of things in southern hemisphere. I decided the ~88mm waist genre did not fit what I was looking for, yeah it gives a bit of off piste versatility but if I’m doing that I’d rather be on something mid 90-100s. And as a pure on piste option I much preferred the ~70 mm options. Specific tool for specific purpose. The skinny racey Dynastar 963 (not the 4x4 TAFKALVS mentions) was one of my favorites and I will buy if I find a deal on it.

[GoldMember]

Yeah, I'm not sure I want to drop to a 68. That's really skinny and reminiscent of the old days... Also, damn! Those things are short! 173 is the longest in the line which fits me at the low end of the range but, still... I'm 178 cm tall and the range is plus or minus 5 cm so, technically, sure... I'm used to skiing closer to 180 in a narrower ski, a bit longer in something fatter.I used to ski on Rossignol before switching over to Dynastar and skied a few different Experience 88 a few years ago. I liked how they skied piste which is what I was kind of looking at when considering M Cross 88 but haven't skied these. We have demo days here in a couple of weeks so I think I'll just talk to the rep when he's here and check out some options. Thanks for your input!

[DarthMarkus]

Hey just got my MFREE 108 (185) and contemplating mount point. Hand measuring puts them at like -8.5cm behind true center. Has anyone mounted them at -6cm from true? I value playful / nimble over most things. thanks in advance

Not with the 185. But I've been at +1.5, +2, and +3.5 for locations on the 192. Currently at 1.5 for a little more ability to pressure the tips, and supposedly the tails are a little stiffer on the newer models now. 3.5 was fun & pivoty, but definitely more squirly at speed and chop. Splitting hairs between 1.5 and 2, but if I valued playful more, I think you'd be happy at 2.

Probably depends on your weight/height. I'm 6'1 190lbs and if I were on the 185 I likely wouldn't stray from recommended.

[m360d2]

How are people liking the 112? Anyone have comparisons with other skis?

[TAFKALVS]

Best ski dynastar had made to date. It’s killed the mfree108 and the mpro108 for me. It’s really really good.

[m360d2]

How much stiffer would you say it is than the 108?

[TAFKALVS]

15 - 20% overall.

[CaliBrit]

15 - 20% overall.

4 units stiffer

[jimbojones]

Artist - any chance you could compare MF108, MP108, and MF112? Considering one of these to slot in-between my B97s and BO118s.

[TAFKALVS]

4 units stiffer

Mostly in the tip and tail, the middle of the ski is about the same.

[GoldMember]

Mostly in the tip and tail, the middle of the ski is about the same.
How does the stiffness compare to the MPro 108? I have not skied the MF108 except for a few runs a couple of years ago so cannot really rationalize the 15-20% for my interest.
Jesus this thing is wonky. Three edits later...

[TAFKALVS]

Artist - any chance you could compare MF108, MP108, and MF112? Considering one of these to slot in-between my B97s and BO118s.

I think I did up thread. The mfree108 and mpro 108 are very similar in stiffness/dampness, it’s more about if you like a more traditional vs progressive shape.

The mfree112 is stiffer and damper than both, and the shape is less tapered than either. It’s really just a sf110 with beefier heavier dynastar construction, probably closer to the heavy metal BO118.

[GoldMember]

^^ I guess I wasnt paying attention. That answers my question as well. Not sure on the MCross 88 now, either. It doesnt appear to have any metal, is light, and maybe not as responsive as I would prefer. Ill give it a drive when the rep is in town.