The Dynastar Thread

[The Tortoise]

Dead. Sexy.

[Colorado_Freeskier]

Attachment 344352Attachment 344353

The new P15s look purdy nice on my new Menace 98s.

Also picked up a pair of Menace Proto 118s. Not mounted yet.

Guess I gotta read this thread now.

KC

Great looking setup...have the Slicer Factory (same as the menace), great skis.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Shredhead]

Huh. The pro riders like in the link skied much softer than the LP105. Neutered if you will.

This is correct. The 184 LP was the neutered 100mm cousin of the OG Legend Pro.

[comish]

Have a pair of Factory Proto's or whatever the grey, sidewall older version was called. Anyone want to trade for the Menace Proto's? I'm interested in the slightly softer version since these are on the longer side of the spectrum for me. Someone has to want the supposed race room version?

Brand new in the plastic. I also have some Forza Pivot 14's, 130 brakes in the box that could go if interested.

[GoldMember]

Forgot to add to my post. Yes, I also think it would be a great touring ski. I was thinking of putting Shifts on them but went ahead and put Pivots on. I may remount them next year.

Going into the Way-Back machine a bit here but, thinking of putting a pair of Barons I have onto my x96 and turning them into my touring skis for out-the-gate Saturdays at Schweitzer. With that, I posted yesterday that I was looking for some used x96 to mount but, instead, am thinking I might want to go with the M-Pro 99 as new DD's, mount my Pivots on these and put the Barons on my x96. Anyone ski the M-Pro 99 yet?

I'm guessing they're a bit stronger ski than the x96 in that they have a larger radius but I don't know anything about their stiffness, stability, etc. I know that Blisterreview claims the x96 is a stiffer ski (which surprised the hell out of me) but lighter. With the different stiffness, radius, and weight, and damping, it's hard to understand where it lines up with the x96. One thing I noted in the review, they like it better on groomed than the x96 and felt it carves better. As for chop and crud, yeah, I get it, it's not the 105. Neither is the x96 and that takes me back to the one time where I was wishing I was on the x106 last year (maybe year before, don't remember for sure) while skiing really fast in North Bowl through variable snow with a friend. I stayed with him but was not real comfortable and was wishing for more ski.

Anyway, the purpose of the M-99 would be dailies and they sound like a good replacement for the x96. Thoughts?

[jackattack]

Going into the Way-Back machine a bit here but, thinking of putting a pair of Barons I have onto my x96 and turning them into my touring skis for out-the-gate Saturdays at Schweitzer. With that, I posted yesterday that I was looking for some used x96 to mount but, instead, am thinking I might want to go with the M-Pro 99 as new DD's, mount my Pivots on these and put the Barons on my x96. Anyone ski the M-Pro 99 yet?

I'm guessing they're a bit stronger ski than the x96 in that they have a larger radius but I don't know anything about their stiffness, stability, etc. I know that Blisterreview claims the x96 is a stiffer ski (which surprised the hell out of me) but lighter. With the different stiffness, radius, and weight, and damping, it's hard to understand where it lines up with the x96. One thing I noted in the review, they like it better on groomed than the x96 and felt it carves better. As for chop and crud, yeah, I get it, it's not the 105. Neither is the x96 and that takes me back to the one time where I was wishing I was on the x106 last year (maybe year before, don't remember for sure) while skiing really fast in North Bowl through variable snow with a friend. I stayed with him but was not real comfortable and was wishing for more ski.

Anyway, the purpose of the M-99 would be dailies and they sound like a good replacement for the x96. Thoughts?

yes, the M-99 is a fine ski: smooth and balanced character, confident edge hold in firm conditions, makes varied turn shapes easily. I thought it skied a bit short, so probably size up if in-between sizes.

I wouldn't even consider the x96 for an expert skier. x88 or x106 if you want to save a few dollars.

[phatty]

Looking at new skis for this year and focusing in on the MFree 108, ON3P Woodsman 108 and Enforcer 104. Looking at 19x length in both.

Any feedback on the MFree 108 in the 192 length? I have LP105 and QLab for when I want to hate ski the mountain. This would be for an Alpental daily driver. Looking to add a playful aspect without giving up the ability to drop the gas pedal. I know these didn't get a lot of time last season, but early feedback caught my attention. Any comparisons to other skis is appreciated.

[GoldMember]

yes, the M-99 is a fine ski: smooth and balanced character, confident edge hold in firm conditions, makes varied turn shapes easily. I thought it skied a bit short, so probably size up if in-between sizes.

I wouldn't even consider the x96 for an expert skier. x88 or x106 if you want to save a few dollars.

I had the x88 and x106. I really didn't like the 88's that well. Couldn't put a finger on it but I just never connected with them. I love the 106 but as DD's, especially in hard conditions, my knees would be feeling by the end of the day. The 96 was a great replacement for the 88 so I'm happy with them, hence, they've been my daily drivers. When pushed hard, though, in chop and crud with speed, I was wishing I was on the 106.

Anyway, we all have our own tastes, means, and methods so if you don't like the 96, that's cool. Not everything is for everyone.

ETA: Curiosity has me now.... what didn't you like about the 96?

[jackattack]

ETA: Curiosity has me now.... what didn't you like about the 96?

The 186 x106 was about as small as I would want to ski in that layup. For an intermediate skier who needs time on snow and to get comfortable with a single ski, or for someone who wants something more accessible and easy-going, the x96 makes sense; the 106 is already on that side of the equation for me. My pops got a pair of 178 x96 to make little turns when he skis with grandma and the grandkids. The m-pro 99 will do that and also make the x88 obsolete.

[comish]

Looking at new skis for this year and focusing in on the MFree 108, ON3P Woodsman 108 and Enforcer 104. Looking at 19x length in both.

Any feedback on the MFree 108 in the 192 length? I have LP105 and QLab for when I want to hate ski the mountain. This would be for an Alpental daily driver. Looking to add a playful aspect without giving up the ability to drop the gas pedal. I know these didn't get a lot of time last season, but early feedback caught my attention. Any comparisons to other skis is appreciated.

How would you compare the LP105 and the Qlab? They seem similar, but haven't skied the LP105's. I'm a huge fan of the original 186cm 97mm LP, just never got on the LP105.

[phatty]

How would you compare the LP105 and the Qlab? They seem similar, but haven't skied the LP105's. I'm a huge fan of the original 186cm 97mm LP, just never got on the LP105.

Honestly can't compare yet as I was about to get them mounted right as COVID shut everything down. I've wanted to try them for years and this thread got me to take the plunge.

I've skied the QLab as my daily ski for the past 5yrs. Nothing seems to be able to knock it out. I love the stability of it, the ability to crush when I want, rail on groomers with my kids and generally handle anything I throw at it. As I slow down skiing with my kids looking for jumps, I want something to trade a bit of the stability for playfulness (but not too much). Aren't we all looking for the elusive playful charger?

[GoldMember]

The 186 x106 was about as small as I would want to ski in that layup. For an intermediate skier who needs time on snow and to get comfortable with a single ski, or for someone who wants something more accessible and easy-going, the x96 makes sense; the 106 is already on that side of the equation for me. My pops got a pair of 178 x96 to make little turns when he skis with grandma and the grandkids. The m-pro 99 will do that and also make the x88 obsolete.

Guess it goes back to my mogul days (which I still do when I can find them..) but I like a short radius, quick ski for lots of stuff. The 106 is fine but works my knees, which don't need the added work. Whatever. Also would note I'm obviously older than you and would have probably liked the harder chargers more, back in the day. Your time will come...

I will add that one of my buddies and I always seem to get the same skis. He's who convinced me to try the x96 after the rep turned him onto them. He skis them in pretty much everything. I don't consider him an intermediate, either. He's a former national moguls champion and has appeared in four (I think) WM movies along with being one of the stunt skiers in Hot Dog, among other things. FWIW.

[jackattack]

How would you compare the LP105 and the Qlab? They seem similar, but haven't skied the LP105's. I'm a huge fan of the original 186cm 97mm LP, just never got on the LP105.

I've owned both, still have the LP105's, and a pair of 186 OG's.

The thing they have most in common is they're both HEAVY.
The lab has wide, stiff tails and the tips are a bit softer, whereas the LP105 has a more symmetrical flex.
The lab really wants to be carving medium radius turns and tends to wander if not on edge. The LP105 is happy in pretty much any turn shape if you have the muscle to bend it, or just go straight.
The lab seems to have more energy carving turns, whereas the LP105 can feel sort of "dead".
Either one is unflappable in crud as long as the skier drives the tips.

Honestly can't compare yet as I was about to get them mounted right as COVID shut everything down. I've wanted to try them for years and this thread got me to take the plunge.

I've skied the QLab as my daily ski for the past 5yrs. Nothing seems to be able to knock it out. I love the stability of it, the ability to crush when I want, rail on groomers with my kids and generally handle anything I throw at it. As I slow down skiing with my kids looking for jumps, I want something to trade a bit of the stability for playfulness (but not too much). Aren't we all looking for the elusive playful charger?

You'll probably like the m-free. I only have a few days on my pair, but they're probably going to knock my Wren108's (charger) and Menace 98's (playful) out of the quiver. Interested in a pair of NIP 187 Menace 98's?

[waxoff]

Have been lookin for a nice pair of '13 Legend 94 for some time. Happened to come across these all new but drilled 184's on the webz a couple of weeks ago. Just replaced the Look Rentals with some sth2 16. Looking to run them mainly for resort low tide and frontside use. Happy as a fish!

Skickat från min I4113 via Tapatalk

[singlecross]

^^^ I skied those for a couple of seasons and found them to be quite good as an all-rounder. Nice ski.

[waxoff]

^^^ I skied those for a couple of seasons and found them to be quite good as an all-rounder. Nice ski.

Yeah I know. Back then I had a pair from '11-12, but for various reasons I moved on from them, to Sidestash for alpine and first year Camox freebird for touring. And from there the quiver just grew. But, I started to miss the 94's after some time. Spent last years on the lookout, hoping to find a pair again, I did!

[Clementino]

Hey everyone, I just found a really good deal on some Legend Big Dumps (2012). Did any of you ski it and if so what do you think about it?

[TAFKALVS]

They like to go straight. Really good at busting through crusts, etc. You need to have strong legs and good technique.

Powder skis have come a long way since this ski, but if they're cheap... might be fun. Put them in the same camp as the old Atomic Powder+ and other straight heavy damp powder barges.

[phatty]

Any consensus for mount point on MFree 108? Will be on a 192cm.

[TAFKALVS]

Any consensus for mount point on MFree 108? Will be on a 192cm.

On zee line, or maybe back -1 to -1.5 if you're heavy and worried about float. But they have real tail rocker, so don't go crazy going backwards.

[DarthMarkus]

Any consensus for mount point on MFree 108? Will be on a 192cm.

I can only speak from experience on the menace proto, and my experience with that ski is that I'll probably go around -6 from true center. I believe the recommended line for the 108 is somewhere around -8 from true center? Proto I believe was -9 from center.

I started around +2 on the proto, then went to +3. The difference on the recommended line from true center between the proto and the 108 means I should like +2.

I'll do some measurements on contact points as well as camber soon. I suspect it'll look similar to the proto, but I think those things have a big say on where to mount.

Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

[phatty]

I can only speak from experience on the menace proto, and my experience with that ski is that I'll probably go around -6 from true center. I believe the recommended line for the 108 is somewhere around -8 from true center? Proto I believe was -9 from center.

I started around +2 on the proto, then went to +3. The difference on the recommended line from true center between the proto and the 108 means I should like +2.

I'll do some measurements on contact points as well as camber soon. I suspect it'll look similar to the proto, but I think those things have a big say on where to mount.

Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

Thanks. Powder recommended +2, that's one of the reasons I was asking.

I'm usually on the line or a little back, so I was curious what others were doing.

[jackattack]

I’m happy on the line for most days, might go back 1cm if I were to remount, no way I’d go forward of the line.

If you ski backwards intentionally or spin off every hit, you might consider a forward mount.

[DarthMarkus]

I’m happy on the line for most days, might go back 1cm if I were to remount, no way I’d go forward of the line.

If you ski backwards intentionally or spin off every hit, you might consider a forward mount.

Depends on the skier to be sure. The ski's shape should have you a little weary of mounting too far back though - the tail rocker is significant. Going too far back won't give you a lot to work with on the tail profile.

I know a lot of people on TGR liked the proto mounted behind the line too, but I've also talked to a lot of other skiers very happy with the proto and the 108 mounted forward. Richard Permin certainly mounts his forward as well.

If the 108 is similar enough to the proto, the contact points will extend a little past the camber profile, giving a little more effective edge when you turn the ski over.

Anyway, I think a lot of people could be happy between -2 and +3. It's certainly weird to say that about a dynastar, but this ski is different than the typical dynastar.

Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

[TAFKALVS]

The proto and the mfree108 are different animals. I'd personally just stay on zee line for the mfree108. The mfree108 mount is already +2cm from the proto/mfree118 mount point FYI.