Page 58 of 70 FirstFirst ... 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 ... LastLast
Results 1,426 to 1,450 of 1734
  1. #1426
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Alpental
    Posts
    6,031
    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    This fucking ski... the got damn Ron Popeil of skis. Just set it.................and forget it.
    Firm, shin deep, knee deep, balls deep, donít GAF. Carve, float, surf, charge, play, same shit. Mach Klammer? Why the fuck not. Kopi_red and I put these bishes through their paces the last three days and hot damn they delivered. I keep waiting to find something they suck at, canít fucking find it. I could literally chop my quiver to three, maybe two skis and be just fine, but thatís fucking dumb.
    Honestly if a person is looking for a one ski quiver, thatís a weird concept amirite, these can absolutely be it.
    Man I really got to echo 2F here and was literally thinking the same just a couple days ago about this being maybe the closest quiver of 1 ski as I have sampled.

    Most "quiver of one" skis end up pretty meh in some or all conditions, but I'm giving the M108 an above average to really f'en great across all conditions I've been in so far, groomed and charging/decent edge grip on ice and bumps/great float for me in deep pow. I kept grabbing the 108's throughout the storm cycles over the last few weeks and was never disappointed or felt outgunned. I like skiing fast and most skis I've gravitated towards really come to life once at 30+mph. The M108 is really lively and fun even at 15mph, yet and still rails hard at 50mph.


    Zero regrets with grabbing this in the 182, but Dynabros if you are listening, the "cure cancer" model would be 186 +/- cm.
    Move upside and let the man go through...

  2. #1427
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    11
    Has anybody else thought m-free 108 but with core of m-tour 99....might be a fun touring ski?

  3. #1428
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Imaginationland
    Posts
    3,951
    Considering a 182 is barely 100 grams heavier than the steeple 108 I currently tour on, no, I haven't thought that. I have thoughts about putting pin binders on them the way they are though.

  4. #1429
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    930
    The 108 has my extreme attention: how overlapped with a mantra 102 you think? The mfree sounds more playful and pivoty. Anyone been on both?

  5. #1430
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    2,049
    Iím looking for that cure- wishing 186/7 🤨

    Mofro what size 108 would you rec for me in our area? Knee arthritis issues coming on. .

  6. #1431
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    8,316

    The Dynastar Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by chickenNugget View Post
    Has anybody else thought m-free 108 but with core of m-tour 99....might be a fun touring ski?
    At 2200ea for the 192, theyíre not overly heavy. I could see a second pair with pin binders or CAST for next year, Ďcause I do so much touring...
    A CAST set up would make a super sick travel ski tho.
    Last edited by 2FUNKY; 02-22-2021 at 04:45 PM.

  7. #1432
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    3,238
    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    At 1880 for the pair, 192, they’re not overly heavy. I could see a second pair with pin binders or CAST for next year, ‘cause I do so much touring...
    A CAST set up would make a super sick travel ski tho.
    this is what I'm leaning towards.

    CAST mfree 108 + Protest for ultimate travel capability

  8. #1433
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    2,183
    Quote Originally Posted by Andyski View Post
    The 108 has my extreme attention: how overlapped with a mantra 102 you think? The mfree sounds more playful and pivoty. Anyone been on both?
    yep, if i have a choice i'm taking the MFREE, for exactly those reasons, i don't think you give up anything on hardpack (not ice just regular lower mountain stuff) with the Mfree and it's more "fun" everywhere else
    what's orange and looks good on hippies?
    fire

    rails are for trains
    If I had a dollar for every time capitalism was blamed for problems caused by the government I'd be a rich fat film maker in a baseball hat.

    www.theguideshut.ca

  9. #1434
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Alpental
    Posts
    6,031
    Quote Originally Posted by CascadeLuke View Post
    I’m looking for that cure- wishing 186/7 廊

    Mofro what size 108 would you rec for me in our area? Knee arthritis issues coming on. .
    Yup you are right at the tweener point where the 186/7 would be $$$. A few folks have said the 192 has some heft to it, and it might feel that way sizing up from a 18X something ski. Dunno if it is the downsizing, but my 182's feel downright "nimble" and light coming off the 188 X106, and other than looking short under my feets, I wouldn't hesitate to downsize for skiing Steven's/Alp type terrain, esp with knee issues lurking.

    If most of the skis in your quiver are 189+ and you are 175+ lbs, or skiing where there is more wide open terrain, then the 192 is the way to go.
    Move upside and let the man go through...

  10. #1435
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    3,782
    Dynastar went full 4frnt with the sizing on that ski

  11. #1436
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    At 1880 for the pair, 192, theyíre not overly heavy. I could see a second pair with pin binders or CAST for next year, Ďcause I do so much touring...
    A CAST set up would make a super sick travel ski tho.
    I agree a CAST setup would make a sweet travel ski/ lift accessed/hybrid ski.

    My 192ís are 2400+- grams each, which is about 6-700 grams heavier than I like my BC skis to be.

  12. #1437
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,716
    Quote Originally Posted by Andyski View Post
    The 108 has my extreme attention: how overlapped with a mantra 102 you think? The mfree sounds more playful and pivoty. Anyone been on both?
    Own the 184 M102 and 192 MFree...Not sure you are going to get very objective info in this thread, but here it goes...

    The M102 is a much more directional charger than the MF108. The M102 is far more damp and is better on hard pack. The M102 skis loose in deep snow, especially considering how little rocker it has. The M102 has virtually no speed limit (my kid clocked 60+ MPH on his at Park City last week and felt he could have pushed them faster). Oh yeah, they eat crud and float well for only being 102 in the waist. They are an all-mountain/big mountain ski that rules firm or variable conditions but also holds it own in deep snow.

    Now to the MF108. There is a lot of hype in this thread about how ďfunĒ this ski is...and it is not embellished. The MF108 is a powerful, energetic, and fun ski. It really wants to be off trail and in soft snow. It skis amazingly loose. I was a skeptic with all that camber, but it is so much fun in soft off trail conditions at a place like a Stevens Pass. I love it in the trees, where it rivals a Billy Goat for loose smeary turns. It probably floats better than any other 108 waist ski I have ever tried. Kills powder and more than holds its own in crud.

    Now, letís get to firm conditions. It is very capable on hard snow. It rails and is quite stable at speed, but you have to work a bit to not get the tails to wash out at the end of a turn. It took me a while to figure that piece out. Compared to the M102, the MF108 takes more work and concentration to stay in the turn. Also, it is not as damp and that camber can fight against you on roughed up groomers...the ski absorbs energy and wants to do something with it. The MF108 is not bad on firm snow, it just demands more from the skier. Also, this may be an unpopular opinion, but I think the MF108 has a speed limit...albeit a very high one. It may be that I just suck, but Iím not as confident going Mach Schnell on the MF108 as I am on the M102.

    Finally, the M102 is more forgiving (due to its dampness) than the MF108. I also think the difference in camber profile plays a role here, too.

    So, both are great skis, but it really depends on what you want out of a ski. With our most recent ridiculously deep snow cycle in the PNW, you could ski the MF108 everyday and be stoked about it. If you are going to be skiing firmer or variable conditions, I think there are much better options.

    I think the better comparison is the Katana K108 and MF108. And in that showdown, it would be nitpicking to choose a winner.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  13. #1438
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    930
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post

    I think the better comparison is the Katana K108 and MF108. And in that showdown, it would be nitpicking to choose a winner.
    Awesome reply. Thank you. This last sentence sort of answers it. I already own the M102 (and an old metal Katana) and love it, but had demoed the wine-colored QST 106 (before it got heavier) I thought it was surprisingly fun as hell, just a different type of fun than the M102. I like both types of fun and the Mfree sounds even funner than the QST for those softish hacking around Alp or dancing in the trees/windlips at Bachelor days.

  14. #1439
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,716

    The Dynastar Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Andyski View Post
    Awesome reply. Thank you. This last sentence sort of answers it. I already own the M102 (and an old metal Katana) and love it, but had demoed the wine-colored QST 106 (before it got heavier) I thought it was surprisingly fun as hell, just a different type of fun than the M102. I like both types of fun and the Mfree sounds even funner than the QST for those softish hacking around Alp or dancing in the trees/windlips at Bachelor days.
    I owned the wine colored QST106 for a short stint. It was an easy, fun ski. The MF108 is just more ski than the MF108 in just about every way. Floats better, charges harder, and skis looser. But the QST is more forgiving. I keep coming back to that point with the MF108, but I think that it is a key characteristic...MF108ís are fun and energetic, but you got to stay on top of them...or at least I have to stay on top of the 192ís. If you do, they are a ton of fun.
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  15. #1440
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    8,316
    Quote Originally Posted by chickenNugget View Post
    I agree a CAST setup would make a sweet travel ski/ lift accessed/hybrid ski.

    My 192ís are 2400+- grams each, which is about 6-700 grams heavier than I like my BC skis to be.
    Yeah, not sure how I typed that fuct up number and went with it. Corrected my original post. I could see a lighter build for touring only.

    As far as a speed limit on the mfree108, I have yet to find it and Iíve tried, even spooked myself a little the other day, tough to do, but stayed composed and they didnít even flinch.
    Went back to my marketing dept and came up with a slight adjustment..
    ď The Ron Popeil of skis, just send it............
    and forget itĒ

  16. #1441
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,927
    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    Yeah, not sure how I typed that fuct up number and went with it. Corrected my original post. I could see a lighter build for touring only.

    As far as a speed limit on the mfree108, I have yet to find it and Iíve tried, even spooked myself a little the other day, tough to do, but stayed composed and they didnít even flinch.
    Went back to my marketing dept and came up with a slight adjustment..
    ď The Ron Popeil of skis, just send it............
    and forget itĒ
    I'm totally in love with my MFree 108s as my do everything ski but the only time I found a speed limit or any negative characteristics was in chop. On one of the days before the recent PNW cycle, I had them out in some softer chop and noticed them bouncing around more than I was used to with my QLabs. Not really bad, but I had to adjust from a "crush everything" ski style to bouncing from pile to pile.

  17. #1442
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    seatown
    Posts
    3,583

    The Dynastar Thread

    fwiw my 192 are barely longer than my 187 woodsman

    eta it will also probably end up my travel pick inbounds or out

  18. #1443
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    idaho panhandle!
    Posts
    8,316
    Quote Originally Posted by phatty View Post
    I'm totally in love with my MFree 108s as my do everything ski but the only time I found a speed limit or any negative characteristics was in chop. On one of the days before the recent PNW cycle, I had them out in some softer chop and noticed them bouncing around more than I was used to with my QLabs. Not really bad, but I had to adjust from a "crush everything" ski style to bouncing from pile to pile.
    I could see that with the heavier snow you guys get on the crest. I felt a slight tip push on the big piles here the other day but they stayed right on track. Iíll take that one ever so tiny issue for what they give in return everywhere else.

  19. #1444
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,927
    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    I could see that with the heavier snow you guys get on the crest. I felt a slight tip push on the big piles here the other day but they stayed right on track. Iíll take that one ever so tiny issue for what they give in return everywhere else.
    Yep, it's a trade I'll make every day for the other benefits of the ski.

  20. #1445
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Imaginationland
    Posts
    3,951
    I find that just staying committed to the edges negates that "bouncy, pushy" sensation alot. They definitely have a lot of liveliness to them, no question. It's fascinating to me that they hold an edge so well and truck so hard when they give back so damn much energy.

    I'm a huge fanboi. I really want them to make them in a 186~

  21. #1446
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    2,049

    The Dynastar Thread

    Thanks Mofro and others for help. Thought I had decided size until saw some weights thrown out. Any more data points for weight? All sizes appreciated.
    Shroom did you put those 172s on a scale? Probably following suit for Mrs

  22. #1447
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    7,125
    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    This fucking ski... the got damn Ron Popeil of skis. Just set it.................and forget it.
    Firm, shin deep, knee deep, balls deep, don’t GAF. Carve, float, surf, charge, play, same shit. Mach Klammer? Why the fuck not. Kopi_red and I put these bishes through their paces the last three days and hot damn they delivered. I keep waiting to find something they suck at, can’t fucking find it. I could literally chop my quiver to three, maybe two skis and be just fine, but that’s fucking dumb.
    Honestly if a person is looking for a one ski quiver, that’s a weird concept amirite, these can absolutely be it.
    I'm glad you like them, I know in our early season discussions there was some concern.

    Quote Originally Posted by steveski View Post
    Alright alright I gotta get on a pair. Tried to get my rockered soles into jackattacks 192s last week but couldn't get them to work...
    Quote Originally Posted by Kopi_Red View Post
    What's your bsl? I'm thinking about heading up to the windy hill midweek. My 192 mfree's are mounted on the line for 305 bsl. Bindings are Pivots so not too much adjustability.
    If Kopi wants to come grab my pair with Vipec in Sandpoint you're welcome to them.

    Quote Originally Posted by optics View Post
    It also cured me from having to put up with inappropriately temperamental attitude from indy companies.
    It's neat how consistent they seem to be from the factory, with little discussion about tune or unflat bases or anything. I know the raceroom proriders seemed to be a little unfinished but I think that's a scenario of small batch production just like an indy maker. The Dynastars (in my past 8 years of skiing them) from the "made in spain" factory seem to be incredibly consistent. I've yet to see any major variation in camber, rocker, topsheet placement, tune or else across the Cham, Legend X and now Mfree/Mpro series. Not sure if the production is super dialed or if the QA is spot on, but so far I know I can get a pair of skis, take them out of plastic and ski them with little fuss other than a mild tip and tail detune to taste.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mofro261 View Post
    Man I really got to echo 2F here and was literally thinking the same just a couple days ago about this being maybe the closest quiver of 1 ski as I have sampled.

    Most "quiver of one" skis end up pretty meh in some or all conditions, but I'm giving the M108 an above average to really f'en great across all conditions I've been in so far, groomed and charging/decent edge grip on ice and bumps/great float for me in deep pow. I kept grabbing the 108's throughout the storm cycles over the last few weeks and was never disappointed or felt outgunned. I like skiing fast and most skis I've gravitated towards really come to life once at 30+mph. The M108 is really lively and fun even at 15mph, yet and still rails hard at 50mph.
    I'm with you, I keep falling back to them in lieu of more specialized skis in the quiver because I know I can almost always have at least an okay time on them, regardless the condition. Also agree, I love that they are fun at low speeds but super capable at LPR speeds. This is opposite a lot of the older Dynastars that really need a good 100 yard straightline before "getting up on plane" so to speak.

    Zero regrets with grabbing this in the 182, but Dynabros if you are listening, the "cure cancer" model would be 186 +/- cm.
    I agree but I think if you were skiing at place that was more open you'd like the 192. Personally I liked the 192 when I skied it last year at Alpy, but obviously I'm fatter.

    Quote Originally Posted by chickenNugget View Post
    Has anybody else thought m-free 108 but with core of m-tour 99....might be a fun touring ski?
    Yes. For now I mounted a pair of 182 with Vipecs. The precut Pomoca skins from Dynastar are pretty sweet too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andyski View Post
    The 108 has my extreme attention: how overlapped with a mantra 102 you think? The mfree sounds more playful and pivoty. Anyone been on both?
    I think there's room for both... if you ski stevens or alpy or another soft snow oriented mountain with more technical terrain you might find yourself grabbing the mfree a lot more than you thought you would.

    Quote Originally Posted by CascadeLuke View Post
    I’m looking for that cure- wishing 186/7 ��

    Mofro what size 108 would you rec for me in our area? Knee arthritis issues coming on. .
    192 mfree is like an ON3P 189, so YMMV here.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    At 2200ea for the 192, they’re not overly heavy. I could see a second pair with pin binders or CAST for next year, ‘cause I do so much touring...
    A CAST set up would make a super sick travel ski tho.
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    this is what I'm leaning towards.

    CAST mfree 108 + Protest for ultimate travel capability
    Quote Originally Posted by chickenNugget View Post
    I agree a CAST setup would make a sweet travel ski/ lift accessed/hybrid ski.

    My 192’s are 2400+- grams each, which is about 6-700 grams heavier than I like my BC skis to be.
    I've been thinking Cast or Shifts/Tectons. Either way would be the ultimate travel setup.

    Quote Originally Posted by waxman View Post
    yep, if i have a choice i'm taking the MFREE, for exactly those reasons, i don't think you give up anything on hardpack (not ice just regular lower mountain stuff) with the Mfree and it's more "fun" everywhere else
    Yup

    Quote Originally Posted by Mofro261 View Post
    Yup you are right at the tweener point where the 186/7 would be $$$. A few folks have said the 192 has some heft to it, and it might feel that way sizing up from a 18X something ski. Dunno if it is the downsizing, but my 182's feel downright "nimble" and light coming off the 188 X106, and other than looking short under my feets, I wouldn't hesitate to downsize for skiing Steven's/Alp type terrain, esp with knee issues lurking.

    If most of the skis in your quiver are 189+ and you are 175+ lbs, or skiing where there is more wide open terrain, then the 192 is the way to go.
    Agree



    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post

    Now to the MF108. There is a lot of hype in this thread about how “fun” this ski is...and it is not embellished. The MF108 is a powerful, energetic, and fun ski. It really wants to be off trail and in soft snow. It skis amazingly loose. I was a skeptic with all that camber, but it is so much fun in soft off trail conditions at a place like a Stevens Pass. I love it in the trees, where it rivals a Billy Goat for loose smeary turns. It probably floats better than any other 108 waist ski I have ever tried. Kills powder and more than holds its own in crud.
    100% agree here.

    Now, let’s get to firm conditions. It is very capable on hard snow. It rails and is quite stable at speed, but you have to work a bit to not get the tails to wash out at the end of a turn. It took me a while to figure that piece out. Compared to the M102, the MF108 takes more work and concentration to stay in the turn. Also, it is not as damp and that camber can fight against you on roughed up groomers...the ski absorbs energy and wants to do something with it. The MF108 is not bad on firm snow, it just demands more from the skier. Also, this may be an unpopular opinion, but I think the MF108 has a speed limit...albeit a very high one. It may be that I just suck, but I’m not as confident going Mach Schnell on the MF108 as I am on the M102.
    I think you need a few more days on them, I am skiing as faster or faster on my pair than my 192 LPR and 196 Bodacious. I think the key is find the balance point and using the camber to your advantage. There might be some technique adjustment on my end too, and learning to trust the ski.

    I think the better comparison is the Katana K108 and MF108. And in that showdown, it would be nitpicking to choose a winner.
    I really want to try the k108 some time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andyski View Post
    I like both types of fun and the Mfree sounds even funner than the QST for those softish hacking around Alp or dancing in the trees/windlips at Bachelor days.
    Yes, this but you won't hate yourself if it variable or weird.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    I keep coming back to that point with the MF108, but I think that it is a key characteristic...MF108’s are fun and energetic, but you got to stay on top of them...or at least I have to stay on top of the 192’s. If you do, they are a ton of fun.
    Its funny, by comparison to a lot of other past skis in my quiver that served daily driver (mostly Dynastar) I find them to be so stupid easy to ski. You outta try a first gen Cham107 or a LPR if you want to feel a ski that can run away from you haha.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2FUNKY View Post
    As far as a speed limit on the mfree108, I have yet to find it and I’ve tried, even spooked myself a little the other day, tough to do, but stayed composed and they didn’t even flinch.
    What funky said. The more I trust them, the more I trust them.

  23. #1448
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    7,125
    Quote Originally Posted by NW_SKIER View Post
    It's fascinating to me that they hold an edge so well and truck so hard when they give back so damn much energy.
    The amount of energy that they give back in a turn in unreal, I didn't know a 108 underfoot ski could launch you out of a turn so quickly. It almost feels like 2 skis... flatter bases, more neutral stance = surftown. Push in to shins, steeper edge angles, more aggressive transitions = snapcity.

  24. #1449
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Squamish, BC
    Posts
    802
    thinking about some MFree 108 192cm to replace some 4frnt Devastator 194's (that are loosing their liveliness) as my resort dailies for W/B next season.

    I wouldn't mind a little more camber for rebound carving groomers and playful pop for lower speed fun, but keep some of the damp charger mode and non-hooky pivoty fun, while dropping just a few grams. I'm worried the short turn radius would be kinda unfamiliar.

    Am I on the right track?

    faaaack. I wish they just still made the 194 Dev's.

  25. #1450
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Imaginationland
    Posts
    3,951
    You won't even notice the radius. They straightline harder than a whore with a mirror and a rolled up twenty.

Posting Permissions

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