Page 96 of 110 FirstFirst ... 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 ... LastLast
Results 2,376 to 2,400 of 2742
  1. #2376
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,229
    Edit...I've been drinking...

  2. #2377
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    North Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,404
    Iím 5í7Ē, 165lb on the 180cm Proto 118 at +2cm. Tried +3cm too. +2cm is perfect. And I like forwardish mounts.
    _________________________________________________
    I love big dumps.

  3. #2378
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    North Van
    Posts
    3,588
    So far, my 187 Menace 98s and 192 M-Free 108s feel perfect and balanced on the recommended lines, though I am someone who grew up racing and likes to drive the tips. If it were me, Iíd have no reason not to start with the recommended line on the 118s.

  4. #2379
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthMarkus View Post
    Which size are you on. Also, how tall and how much you weigh?

    Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk
    180cm and Iím 5í10Ē 165lbs


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  5. #2380
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by kc_7777 View Post
    Iím 5í7Ē, 165lb on the 180cm Proto 118 at +2cm. Tried +3cm too. +2cm is perfect. And I like forwardish mounts.
    Thanks for the feedback! Thatís what Iím leaning towards unless someone talks me out of it. Seems to make it a little more playful without getting squirrelly


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  6. #2381
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by D(C) View Post
    So far, my 187 Menace 98s and 192 M-Free 108s feel perfect and balanced on the recommended lines, though I am someone who grew up racing and likes to drive the tips. If it were me, Iíd have no reason not to start with the recommended line on the 118s.
    I grew up on center mounted park skis and realized in recent years that only caring about hitting rails on small hills in the Midwest led to a lot of bad habits. Iíve gotten a lot better about driving my tips, but still feel more comfortable closer to center.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  7. #2382
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins
    Posts
    625
    Quote Originally Posted by jdoyle View Post
    180cm and Iím 5í10Ē 165lbs


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    190, 6'1, and I skied the 189 at +2. I think you'd probably enjoy +1, maybe +2 on the 180.

    Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

  8. #2383
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    'sconsin
    Posts
    11
    I'm not a great comparison, I'm a bigger guy/directional skier/mounted right on the line, but really enjoying the 189 as an unnecessarily wide ski for blasting around on wisconsin hills - hope you do too.

    Somewhere way back in this thread I remember some speculation that Richard Permin mounted his factory protos dead center, am I making that up? Wide sweet spot on the ski either way.

  9. #2384
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    North Van
    Posts
    3,588
    Quote Originally Posted by skin teeth View Post
    Wide sweet spot on the ski either way.
    Yeah, that's my experience with my Menace 98s and M-Free 108s. Some skis on the recommended line need to be skied forward and feel like there isn't enough tail behind you for completing turns or to catch you if you get backseat. One the line, my two Dynastars feel like they can be skied forward but don't require it. Both are pretty forgiving.

    Also, awesome about the 189 118s in Wisconsin. Gotta keep it interesting!

  10. #2385
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by skin teeth View Post
    I'm not a great comparison, I'm a bigger guy/directional skier/mounted right on the line, but really enjoying the 189 as an unnecessarily wide ski for blasting around on wisconsin hills - hope you do too.
    Iím sure I will. Iíve been singing the praises of 90+ waist skis to my older coworkers who ride 70s for years with nothing to show for it. Canít wait to show up with 118s and see the reaction lol

    Havenít seen you in the Midwest stoke thread. Where do you ride in Wisconsin? Iím little switz during the week and cascade or granite on weekends.




    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  11. #2386
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    'sconsin
    Posts
    11
    Yep, real good for confusing old farm country gatewhackers. The ski being a blast is just an added benefit.

    Should probably go introduce myself in the Midwest thread, Iím a PNW transplant in Madison skiing mostly at Tyrol and Devils Head on their $15 ticket midweek deals and boho when I can justify the drive. Shoot me a message if youíre in my neck of the woods!

  12. #2387
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Sun Valley, ID
    Posts
    2,175
    Iím 165 5í10Ē and have 189 118ís on the line. Donít see any reason Iíd ever mount them forward. Super nimble. I have demo binding on them and Iím actually about to try them a little back if we ever get more snow here.

  13. #2388
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Fish
    Posts
    3,961
    5’7” 145. 180’s on the line. Personally couldn’t Imagine them forward too much with how the soft tip is. I could see going forward on the 189.
    a positive attitude will not solve all of your problems, but it may annoy enough people to make it worth the effort

    Formerly Rludes025

  14. #2389
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    467
    Quote Originally Posted by kc_7777 View Post
    Attachment 401475

    This sign was on Peak Chair as you skied into Whistler bowl. I didnít find conditions that bad. Probably cause I was on the M-Free 99. Those things rip shit conditions. Canít really explain it except I seemed to be finding the conditions better than most. They had great grip (even on ice) for a ski with so much tip/tail rocker. You could ski them fast/hard on the steep ice, or maneuver over stuff, and fly on groomers. Easy to ski , yet rips. Iím 5í7Ē, 165 lbs on the 179cm @ +1cm (-6.5cm).

    So impressed with the 179cm M-Free 99 considering a 178cm M-Pro 99??

    Anyone skied both. I know they are totally different animals.

    M-Free 99 and M-Pro99??
    Attachment 402387



    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  15. #2390
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    264
    Just picked up a pretty fresh pair of 2012 LP105s, wondering if there is any particular care needed for the wooden sidewalls. Skied three runs today and they are legit. Can't wait to get some more time on them.

  16. #2391
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    467
    KC- I was thinking about your post this weekend, and it was spot on w/my obs. I am 5í5Ē and 145 and i have the mpro 99 in a 178, mfree in a 178 (or is it 179) and mfree 108ís in a 182. All mounted on the line. I skied the mpro 99 yesterday and mfree 99 today on the same hill, groomers and looking for soft snow. Having skied the mpros only all year last year, and spending a lot of time on the mfree 99 and 108ís this year due to an abundance of snow early in the season, I immediately noticed yesterday how much effort it took to ski the mpros. They are a demanding ski that needs speed to come alive (and are weapons when skied right) and to be pushed on/driven, whereas the mfree 99ís are so much easier to ski on both groomers and on non- groomed. I had no idea how much effort the mpro 99ís took until I skied the mfree 99ís today back to back. For me, I realized that the mfreeís are so nice as they carve well in spite of the tail and can ski variable conditions so well at so many different speeds. Hopefully this helps ya out!


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  17. #2392
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    6,062
    Quote Originally Posted by TAFKALVS View Post
    The Pro line will continue to be fall-line oriented and traditionally mounted and Free line will be for skiers with a more playful approach to the mountain with a more progressive mount point. A slightly more forgiving Pro Rider is not an Mfree108... it's still a fall line charger.
    Do we have a length breakdown? Will it be a 192, mid-180s, 180? or will it be like the M-Free 108 with a 192 and a 180 only?
    For Sale:


    182 Dynastar M Free 108s (1x mount for a CAST-ed Look Pivot @ 305 bsl)

    If you're in the Northeast and would like to borrow some Jigarex Plates I have:

    Rossi/Look plates
    Salomon Warden 13 plates
    Marker Kingpin Plates

  18. #2393
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    panhandle locdog
    Posts
    7,543
    Quote Originally Posted by nyskirat View Post
    Do we have a length breakdown? Will it be a 192, mid-180s, 180? or will it be like the M-Free 108 with a 192 and a 180 only?
    182 and 192.

  19. #2394
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    462
    Reine looked somewhat not as good on his new M-Pros in Baqueira as on MF108 last year.
    Maybe to much chargy and to less playful for the modern FWT style?

  20. #2395
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    6,062
    Quote Originally Posted by TAFKALVS View Post
    182 and 192.
    Have you been on them yet?

    I'm going to guess they'll ski slightly shorter given their build with?
    For Sale:


    182 Dynastar M Free 108s (1x mount for a CAST-ed Look Pivot @ 305 bsl)

    If you're in the Northeast and would like to borrow some Jigarex Plates I have:

    Rossi/Look plates
    Salomon Warden 13 plates
    Marker Kingpin Plates

  21. #2396
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    North Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,404

    The Dynastar Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by zlatham View Post
    KC- I was thinking about your post this weekend, and it was spot on w/my obs. I am 5’5” and 145 and i have the mpro 99 in a 178, mfree in a 178 (or is it 179) and mfree 108’s in a 182. All mounted on the line. I skied the mpro 99 yesterday and mfree 99 today on the same hill, groomers and looking for soft snow. Having skied the mpros only all year last year, and spending a lot of time on the mfree 99 and 108’s this year due to an abundance of snow early in the season, I immediately noticed yesterday how much effort it took to ski the mpros. They are a demanding ski that needs speed to come alive (and are weapons when skied right) and to be pushed on/driven, whereas the mfree 99’s are so much easier to ski on both groomers and on non- groomed. I had no idea how much effort the mpro 99’s took until I skied the mfree 99’s today back to back. For me, I realized that the mfree’s are so nice as they carve well in spite of the tail and can ski variable conditions so well at so many different speeds. Hopefully this helps ya out!

    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    So I’ve had a few days now on my 179cm M-Free 99s (128-99-120, turn radius 17m). I’m 5’7”, 165 lbs and am mounted at +1cm from rec (-6.5cm from center) with Pivot 15s. Dalbello Krypton 120s and 130s for boots.

    Skis that I have owned that I really liked are: 179 Enforcer 104, 178 Salomon Blank, 180 Dynastar Proto, 181 Icelantic Nomad, 184 Moment Bibby, 183 Faction Candide, 180 Rustler 11, 184 4FRNT Devastator, 181 4FRNT InThaynes, 177 K2 Marksman.

    I bought this ski just cause I love my 180cm Dynastar Proto Menace 118s (they are mounted at -7cm), and wanted to try it in the 100mm size. This ski allowed me to sell the 180cm Elan Ripstick 96 Black Edition, which is also a really good ski. This ski is better for me. As I really love the Dynastar M-Free/Menace Proto shape as it is super maneuverable for a ski that has decent camber. Per the pic below you can see the deep tip rocker and tons of tail rocker on both the 99 and 118. I really love this shape for how/where I ski. Good in steep, tight spots. But still rips open stuff and groomers too. You can haul ass as it is comfortable going through stuff or simply over stuff. All I can say is that the M-Free 99 delivers exactly what I wanted, and more. It really excels by going effortlessly from carving a turn on edge, to slashing/slarving/pivoting by throwing the ski sideways. I have found it really stable at speed in all snow conditions, even on ice. So whatever the polyurethane core materials they put in this ski makes it feel pretty damp. Cause I love its suspension. There is something in this ski that makes shit snow (refrozen crap) easy to ski.

    So ya I don’t need the M-Pro 99….the M-Free is just too versatile (it's stable and still playful).

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	thumbnail_IMG_3657.jpg 
Views:	102 
Size:	427.7 KB 
ID:	402715
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	thumbnail_IMG_3659.jpg 
Views:	100 
Size:	421.3 KB 
ID:	402716
    Last edited by kc_7777; 01-24-2022 at 05:24 PM.
    _________________________________________________
    I love big dumps.

  22. #2397
    Join Date
    Feb 2021
    Location
    'sconsin
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by TeleBeaver View Post
    Just picked up a pretty fresh pair of 2012 LP105s, wondering if there is any particular care needed for the wooden sidewalls. Skied three runs today and they are legit. Can't wait to get some more time on them.
    Nice! Asked the same question a couple of months ago for the same reason, was suggested to give them some occasional TLC with tung oil or some other neutral oil. Have since seen similar advice elsewhere. Also put them away dry and store indoors, don't leave them in the ski box.

    The original review thread is full of arguments about how to care for them, whether to treat them at all, and whether they're actually made from wood (spoiler, they are). Worth a read if only to appreciate the era when a 2500g ski mounted with frame bindings could be reasonably discussed as a do-it-all touring setup. Review: Dynastar Legend 105 (tetongravity.com)

  23. #2398
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Fernie and/or Smithers
    Posts
    1,362
    No metal. And just a bit of wood?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	menace.jpg 
Views:	135 
Size:	1.34 MB 
ID:	402789
    Do what you like, Like what you do.

  24. #2399
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins
    Posts
    625
    Quote Originally Posted by gwat View Post
    No metal. And just a bit of wood?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	menace.jpg 
Views:	135 
Size:	1.34 MB 
ID:	402789
    Strange.

    Sent from my Redmi Note 8 Pro using Tapatalk

  25. #2400
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    North Van
    Posts
    3,588
    Quote Originally Posted by gwat View Post
    No metal. And just a bit of wood?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	menace.jpg 
Views:	135 
Size:	1.34 MB 
ID:	402789
    Iíll be interested to hear your impressions when you get them on snow. If you read my posts a couple pages back, I found them grabby and unpredictable from the factory, making me suspicious that the bases came concave/edge-high. I sent them for a grind and the difference was night and day. Awesome skis.

Posting Permissions

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