The Dynastar Thread

[SchralphMacchio]

Not what you're asking for, but after being very impressed with the Mantra 102 this year, I'm looking at the Kendo 88 or 92 for the same use you're describing.

As I understand it both will be revised with the 3d-sidecut design next year

Had also considered K88/92 for this quiver slot, but I keep seeing comments that it's focused more for groom than off piste? I'm not picky about carving performance - especially because I don't keep my skis tuned well enough to be perfect for carving firm snow anyways - so I'm sure anything in the class will carve well enough for my liking ... but not all will quickly settle while picking a line between firm death cookies!

[shroom]

are you touring? why not go 108 if you’re skiing off piste? i ski the old brahma 80 and mfree 108 for on/off piste and brought up this similar topic with jackattack recently who gets on a lot of skis (do i get new brahma or mpro90 or other for piste/quick jaunts in the trees when it’s not good yet) and my takeaway was dropping width to the mpro90 wouldn’t really get me anywhere. i’m sure you have reasons just my $.02

i think for next year i am going brahma 80 / menace 98 / mfree 108 for alpine. but should get on some other skinny cambered skis (been on blizzard shape for some time).

[SchralphMacchio]

are you touring? why not go 108 if you’re skiing off piste? ... my takeaway was dropping width to the mpro90 wouldn’t really get me anywhere.

These would be full time resort skis. Have totally separate touring setups and long term plans for that quiver.

Woods 108s are absolutely fantastic for me with 1 cm or more of "give" to the snow surface, but for my light 140-145 lbs weight, even the 178s are not forgiving enough for me for firm crap, especially the kind that has been kissed (or molested) by the sun the previous day: the combo of width, weight and flex profile is unwieldy and gets me in the backseat.

Again, the main reason for me to consider dropping waist from current E98 is to also buy more grip on smooth boilerplate during these conditions, but I'm not looking for a pure groomer optimized ski. I don't keep my current edges sharp enough after messing around skiing thin cover over manzanita, treetops, and scree, and I also have my tail pretty detuned, so that E98 just slides around with little precision on boilerplate. A less turny E94 would probably do the trick for me. Less popular opinion but I may also have to try the Declivity 92ti for this slot as well, I found the D102ti to be pretty indifferent to snow surface in how it responded to my inputs.

Hopefully someone here has skied both MPro 90 and Brahma 88 in firm junk, and can offer firsthand opinions!

[jackattack]

Anyone done a SxS comparo of the M Pro 90s and the Brahma 88s?
Looking for a firm snow / crap snow ski, to use off piste on the west coast, and I'm M-Pro 90 curious.

Would be replacing 10 year old OG Enforcer 98s (flat tail lightning bolt double titanal heavy and damp AF ski, forgiving initial flex and then good support deep in the flex). Basically I really like my E98s but as the skinniest ski in my quiver I want more bite on windscraped boilerplate groom, and I also want a little more modern tip/tail so I don't have to work too hard once the snow starts softening or getting into thick/variable spots. I tried the current E94s and jived with the flex and versatility overall but found them too turny / wanting to pull me into a fixed turn shape (which I don't like). I tried the current Brahma 88s and really liked them, but ran out of time during the demo and didn't get to test on nasty dust on crust w/ lurking death cookies or other crap conditions where I want this ski to do as well as my E98s do. The concept of the M-Pro shape has me more excited than the Brahma shape. Note that I have my E98 tail heavily detuned so that I can still get it around when I get bucked backwards - I'm not obsessed with flat tail skis at all, just ones that immediately settle in crap conditions.

In the warmer midday/afternoon periods or on more forgiving snow, the crap snow ski would go back to the truck/RV and my ON3P Woods 108s would come out, just to give you a sense of the quiver jump there. I'm not a charger, ripper, spinner or flipper. Just an out of shape dad with bogus form who gets to ski 30-90 minutes at a time, and during that time looking for fun on the hill where non-masochistic skiers aren't.

Im generally a Dynastar fan, but I wasn’t crazy about the mpro 90/99. I felt the rearward mount point, tip taper and rocker worked against it, resulting in vague tip engagement — something I’m not stoked on for a low tide ski. This may be perceived as a benefit compared to the new enforcers that do have a tendency to pull you into their desired turn shape.

If you want something that will be more like your woodsman, the mfree 99 is a hoot, but won’t give you that damp charger character.

Heritage Labs full ti/vds layup in a freeride shape could be what you seek. I ordered a pair of r99’s, the r87 might be your huckleberry. There’s a dedicated thread for more info. https://heritagelabskis.com/products...41344514883772

[SchralphMacchio]

Thanks for the review!

And you just blew my mind with Heritage, I haven't been keeping up. I have a feeling the R87s would be "too much ski" for me, in comparison to forgiving initial flex of Brahmas and my E98s, but will ping for more details in that thread.

[SnakeMagnet]

Had also considered K88/92 for this quiver slot, but I keep seeing comments that it's focused more for groom than off piste? I'm not picky about carving performance - especially because I don't keep my skis tuned well enough to be perfect for carving firm snow anyways - so I'm sure anything in the class will carve well enough for my liking ... but not all will quickly settle while picking a line between firm death cookies!

What do you want from off-piste performance? The brahma's are going to be missiles while the Kendo will be easier to release and can make different turn shapes easier because of that 3d radius. Don't bother with the 92, unless they actually give it 3d radius that ski has been in a weird limbo of irrelevance and i don't even think they made it last year.

[SchralphMacchio]

What do you want from off-piste performance?

Good question!
I already mentioned settling quickly on junk snow surfaces … Easy release is something I always want, which I achieved on my current E98s with an aggressive tail detune. I don’t need it to totally monster truck through junk snow, more like I’m connecting 4-5 moves on micro strips where I can throw in larger smoother skid turns or short carves (with the ski staying composed) in between quicker windshield wiper moves on or around nastier surfaces and obstacles while trying to reset and plan the next sequence without stopping until my legs are shot or I’m at the bottom. Reset meaning resetting momentum, weight, line choice plan, etc. So easy release, tips following the shins more than the sidecut, and multiple turn shapes even in the same turn all sounds good to me!

[phatty]

Had my LP105s out for a soft spring morning ripping around Deer Valley. After adjusting to the much longer turn radius, they were so much fun. The Cadillac smooth feel at 60mph+ was very addicting. I'll be interested to see the new MPro108 next year.

[Hood26]

Check Insta for the new limited edition MFree 108.

Damn good looking ski.

[detrusor]

I e been skiing Jackson for 3 days on my LP 105’s while the oldest races. Perfect as always


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[kid-kapow]

Check Insta for the new limited edition MFree 108.

Damn good looking ski.

M-Pro 108

[phatty]

M-Pro 108

Oh yeah! HAWT!

[2FUNKY]

So haWt!

[D(C)]

Has anyone been on both the Menace 98 and the Rossi Black Ops 98/Holyshred?

I had my 187 Menace 98s out in weird snow today (cream cheese over refrozen) and I think the turn initiation/release could be improved. Although a tune helped, I still find them a bit grabby. I do like the long effective edge and dampness, though.

I’m wondering if the Black Ops 98 keeps what I like about the Menace 98 but would improve feel at turn initiation. I was looking at the BO98 in the shop, and they have a bit more taper than the M98, and shorter but more abrupt tip rocker, as opposed to the M98’s long, low rocker.

[Hood26]

M-Pro 108

Second time I fucked up with a miss identification of product names this week In this thread. I need to get my shit together.

It being the Pro though makes it so I don’t have to have an excuse to move along my only one year old Frees and just buy a pair of Pros to go with them.

[Bandit Man]

Check out these special makeup FWT edition M-Pro108’s. Says they will be available in fall 2022. They also say “193” for length?


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[Sylvan]

They also say “193” for length?

Yes please.

[DumbIdeasOnly]

Check out these special makeup FWT edition M-Pro108’s. Says they will be available in fall 2022. They also say “193” for length?


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Anyone have intel on whether it’s different in ways other than 1 cm from the “stock” 192?

[detrusor]

Question

Do the LP 105’s with the plastic sidewall ski any different than the woodcsidewall versions? Was it just the “legend” year that did away with the wood?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[ZomblibulaX]

I don't think that ski ever had anything other than wood sidewalls. My Leg/end version has the same sidewall as my OG orange creamsicle, and they shred equally mightily.

[HAB]

Anyone have intel on whether it’s different in ways other than 1 cm from the “stock” 192?

Obligatory:

[CirqueScaler]

I tried the M Free 99 in 179 today and sort of enjoyed them. The slarvy, skiddy, very rockered shape isn't normally how & what I prefer to ski, but I definitely get why they're fun. Much better in bumps, in unconsolidated snow, and tight spaces than the skis I normally like to ski.

I could see myself getting a 108 or 118 for purely powder days. Is the 118 in 180 a hefty ski? Compare with the 99 please?

[kid-kapow]

I could see myself getting a 108 or 118 for purely powder days. Is the 118 in 180 a hefty ski? Compare with the 99 please?

It would surprise me if a mf118 180 would ski very differently to the 185/182 MF99, just like a wider and heavier version. So if you enjoy how MF99s ski, chances are that you'll like the 118 180s even more as the shape gets better in softer/deeper snow (aka where the 118 shines).

MF108 182s and MF99 185/182s ski very similarly, just with the differences you'd expect from their respective weights and widths. While MF99s are fun, I still prefer the wider versions due to their slightly beefier feel - mass helps.

[SnakeMagnet]

If i'm not mistaken the 118 is a re-named proto and the thinner sticks have a new layup and shape with some resemblances. No special PU hybrid core so if that does what's advertised the 118 should ski much more like a purpose-built soft snow stick than expected. Like if you were to A/B the 3 m-free widths the 118 would differ more from its siblings than say, the fat cat would on the wildcat line.

[kid-kapow]

M-Free/Menance Proto are/were both made in Spain, the PR-OTOs were made in France. Same shape, different construction -> the latter is slightly stiffer (I have both, but have not skied the latter yet).

I am guessing that the wider ski does not get the hybrid core due to them not really needing it to stay damp and due to weight considerations - a 118 hybrid core ski would probably be prohibitively heavy. 118s are pretty heavy as is.

When comparing 192 108s and 189 118s, almost all the added length is in the rockered zone in the tails. The cambered zone and front rocker is the same, whereas the 108's tails are slightly longer and with more splay (slightly more abrupt rocker). 118s also have slightly more taper in the tips, but other than that they are very similar.

Thanks for making me take out the tape measurer and check (for real) - now I am second guessing my decision to mount my 118s at +1.5. I might mount the PR-OTOs on the line. I've liked my 99s and 108s in 182 on the line.