Dynastar M-Free 108 replacement

[D(C)]

Apologies for a ‘what ski’ thread.

I lost a 182 M-Free 108 and need to replace the skis, and it has me thinking about what to go with.

Current quiver:
192 Dynastar M-Free 108 - Whistler good day soft snow ski
182 Dynastar M-Free 108 (to be replaced) - storm day ski, and for smaller terrain at the local mountain
185 Dynastar M-Free 99 - everyday ski
183 Kastle MX 83 - groomer ski

The 182 and 192 M-Free 108s each have their strengths and ski differently, but I don’t actually get that many days when I grab the 192s, and the 182s ski a bit short for higher speeds in more open terrain. But I am a huge fan of the feel of the M-Free 108 and 99. They have a solid, stable feel with a shape/rocker profile that makes them easy to slide around and vary turn shape. I like the tapered tips and tails. And the mount point/fore-aft balance works well for me (mount around -8ish).

Is there anything I should be looking at that combines the 182 and 192? I could potentially go wider, but wouldn’t want to go narrower. I also have found I don’t get along that well with skis with less tapered tips and tails.

Or do I just get another pair of 182s to replace the lost ski?

[grinch]

I'd say a 188 praxis mvp. I really like my mfree 99. Its very versatile and does a lot of things well. I think i mount a couple cm forward. I've considered adding an mfree 108. The dynastar edges and bases are tougher than rossi/dynastar used to be but theyre not that tough or xlide very fast. With the new rocker profile on the mvp i think i'd go that diection instead of the mf 108. I miss praxis durability and rocket bases. The rocker , camber and stiffness look to line up with an mfree along with a longer radius and mount point where i wamt on that segment of ski

Sent from my SM-A536W using TGR Forums mobile app

[Bojangles Mgillicutty]

What's your height/weight? I'm 6'0 185 nekkid and have wanted to try this ski but have been turned off by the sizing, I ski 186 unleashed/enforcers right now and think it's the perfect length for me for those models

[NW_SKIER]

Buy another pair of M-frees. Problem solved.

[D(C)]

What's your height/weight? I'm 6'0 185 nekkid and have wanted to try this ski but have been turned off by the sizing, I ski 186 unleashed/enforcers right now and think it's the perfect length for me for those models

I’m 5’8” 175 lbs.

I think skiers of different sizes could get along well with the 192, but it really depends on the type of terrain where you’ll be using them, and if there’s enough room for a 192.

[D(C)]

Buy another pair of M-frees. Problem solved.

I’m leaning that way. I’ve been through a lot of skis before getting to the M-Frees, and they just work so well for our conditions/terrain and how I like to ski. I just wish they made a length between the two lengths so I didn’t have to own both and choose which to grab.

[Bojangles Mgillicutty]

Sigh. Yeah reading this I'm coming to the same conclusion I have for the past couple of years, which is that 192 is probably too long for me and 182 is too short.

[I've seen black diamonds!]

Rustler 11 or QST Blank. They're all different but they're all really good. I think the Rustlers (the old ones) are the most stable at speed yet least damp of the group. The M-Frees are the dampest but most most prone to going sideways (which could be good or bad for you). The Salomons are in the middle. But they are all highly maneuverable yet capable.

I didn't care for the very popular Enforcers 104 or 110. They're sluggish at low speed and once you get moving they're too turny unless you have a really centered stance.

[Bandit Man]

Have you tried a Line Blade Optic 104? I could see that doing most of what the 182 MF108 does. You would give up a little float but gain some backbone and stability.

For reference, 192 MF108's are my all-time favorite "there is soft conditions at Blackcomb" ski. I've had some of my best days at WB on that ski. And when it isn't that kind of day I just grab my M102's or K108.

[californiagrown]

Buy another pair of M-frees. Problem solved.

I think im gonna do this just to have a backup pair. If i can find a new pair <$300, that its.

It is, IMO, a perfect travel ski if you can only bring 1 pair.

[D(C)]

How “much” ski is the 189 M-Free 118? Does it feel like it sits between the two M-Free 108 lengths or is it closer to the 192 108? That's another option, to go with something even wider for truly deep days.

[Dantheman]

I didn't care for the very popular Enforcers 104 or 110. They're sluggish at low speed and once you get moving they're too turny unless you have a really centered stance.

At high speed the Enforcer 110 tips turn into a wet noodle. I thought they were terrifying and not in a good way.

[Eluder]

The taper bit is interesting and seems to be getting overlooked by some.

Love my 182 Mfree 108s. The skis I look at most when I think about trying something different is the 184 Wildcat 108. I have never skied it, but on paper, they seem closer than most.

[D(C)]

The taper bit is interesting and seems to be getting overlooked by some.

Love my 182 Mfree 108s. The skis I look at most when I think about trying something different is the 184 Wildcat 108. I have never skied it, but on paper, they seem closer than most.

Yeah, in our coastal snow, I find the taper to be pretty key for avoiding grabbiness. Skis with less taper, even if properly rockered, feel more locked in than I'd prefer.

[mr_pretzel]

189 Mfree 118 is closer to the 192.

Blade optic 114 is probably a bit more of a whistler ski than cypress.
I’d probably go 186 blank and get my turn on.

[D(C)]

The more I think about it, the more I'm considering grabbing some 118s to replace both pairs of 108s. I got the 192 108s first and liked them so much that I got all the other skis, but the 185 99s are the ones I use most. Having those and a dedicated pow version could make the most sense.

[Shorty_J]

Have you tried a Line Blade Optic 104? I could see that doing most of what the 182 MF108 does. You would give up a little float but gain some backbone and stability.

For reference, 192 MF108's are my all-time favorite "there is soft conditions at Blackcomb" ski. I've had some of my best days at WB on that ski. And when it isn't that kind of day I just grab my M102's or K108.

I haven't tried them but based on the thread you contributed to, I was going to suggest the same.

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[I've seen black diamonds!]

At high speed the Enforcer 110 tips turn into a wet noodle. I thought they were terrifying and not in a good way.

Yup. If you drive the tips they fold.

[lrn2swim]

Hotshot 183

[oetk2]

The more I think about it, the more I'm considering grabbing some 118s to replace both pairs of 108s. I got the 192 108s first and liked them so much that I got all the other skis, but the 185 99s are the ones I use most. Having those and a dedicated pow version could make the most sense.

This is what I do. 99s for most days. BGs for pow, others for specific days. But here I am thinking about how it would be great to add the 108s

[singlesline]

How “much” ski is the 189 M-Free 118? Does it feel like it sits between the two M-Free 108 lengths or is it closer to the 192 108? That's another option, to go with something even wider for truly deep days.

Haven’t been on the 108s, but the 189 118s really don’t feel like a lot of ski to me. For long and fat skis they are pretty agile and pivot easily.

But I’ve also read in other threads that people don’t think they share the same DNA as the other m-frees.

[resolute goggles]

The more I think about it, the more I'm considering grabbing some 118s to replace both pairs of 108s. I got the 192 108s first and liked them so much that I got all the other skis, but the 185 99s are the ones I use most. Having those and a dedicated pow version could make the most sense.

This is what I do. 99s for most days. BGs for pow, others for specific days. But here I am thinking about how it would be great to add the 108s

Yowza, I need to get my MF99's mounted up stat.

[SnowMachine]

Sigh. Yeah reading this I'm coming to the same conclusion I have for the past couple of years, which is that 192 is probably too long for me and 182 is too short.

Dude... Story of my life. I like 185-6 where possible.

[SnowMachine]

Hotshot 183

Hotshot 189 if you think the 183 is too short. Honestly, I love the 183 for a playful, damp ski. I have bigger skis to really charge on. I'm 6' 160lbs.

[Eluder]

The more I think about it, the more I'm considering grabbing some 118s to replace both pairs of 108s. I got the 192 108s first and liked them so much that I got all the other skis, but the 185 99s are the ones I use most. Having those and a dedicated pow version could make the most sense.

I have 180 118's so not the exact same ski. I do wish they were 184-186cm long though. They are related but I honestly prefer the 108 on many soft snow days. The tails are very different skiing. I think if the 118s were longer, I could mount them more forward, and that would help. I feel the 108's tail rocker profile makes it unique in how it skis. I should probably try some 189s, but I honestly don't need that long of a ski for my size and the hill I ski on. To playcate my Wildcat 108 curiosity I picked up some used 184 Wildcat 116s for that niche, but haven't skied them yet.

Small side rant and possible thread hijack and probably opening myself up to a shit storm, but... Why do people ignore prerequisites and fill these types of threads with the skis they own? I am generally curious why someone would ignore an original post and suggest something that is exactly not what the original poster has stated they are searching for. This isn't to say you can't suggest something that doesn't comply with what they are after, but at least acknowledge that it doesn't fit the criteria and why you think that should be overlooked. Example: yes, it's narrower, but in my experience, it actually floats better.

Is there anything I should be looking at that combines the 182 and 192? I could potentially go wider, but wouldn’t want to go narrower. I also have found I don’t get along that well with skis with less tapered tips and tails.

Some of the skis being suggested not only miss one of these but both!