The Dynastar Thread

[phatty]

I hope this is a typo, because if not I'll probably be buying more skis. But up on the Dynastar site there appears to be a mistake on the sizing for the M-Free 99. Says it's in a 189cm. I have low confidence that it's actually the case, but figured I'd ask the Dynastar knowledgebase if they know anything about it. If it actually came in a measured length of 185+, I'll probably get a pair.

Said picture: https://www.dynastar.com/product/mfree-99

Attachment 433552

I only see 185.


Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[TAFKALVS]

Waiting for the Artist living in the Potato-land panhandle to score a pair and make us all jealous.

I'm far less cool than you think I am.

[shank]

Don’t think this has been posted yet - someone finally wrote more than a blurb worth of words about the M Tour 99. I don’t always agree with the gear lab folks but in this case I’ll allow it cuz there’s not much else available, and also because it confirms my priors that they should tour pretty well and ski like the M Pro 99 with less oomph.

https://www.outdoorgearlab.com/revie...99-f-team-open

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I'm far less cool than you think I am.

I think you’re cool Woodrow


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[SkiLyft]

Came here to say, the Mfree 108 is still just as good in 22-23 as they were in the 21-22 season.




Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Bandit Man]

Came here to say, the Mfree 108 is still just as good in 22-23 as they were in the 21-22 season.




Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Looks like prime MFREE conditions! Jealous!

[SkiLyft]

Looks like prime MFREE conditions! Jealous!

They chewed it up!! Seems like you guys are well on your way to skiing soon!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[2FUNKY]

They chewed it up!! Seems like you guys are well on your way to skiing soon!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

They may have chewed it up but doubt they charge……… …


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[SkiLyft]

They may have chewed it up but doubt they charge……… …


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Heh


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[BlazersTimbers503]

Anyone here have the opportunity to A/B the 189 M-Free 118’s with some 190 Bibby Pro’s/Wildcats? I loved the 190 Bibby’s EXCEPT I found myself wishing for a bit better float and maneuverability in deep pow. Not sure if the MF118’s fit that description or not and if they’re stiff enough to be stable when my 6’4” 210lb dad bod wants to charge?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[waxman]

For all you MF108 nerds--

Attachment 433351

https://www.dynastar.com/news/m-free...imited-edition

I assume you're already aware of this. If not, THEN WHY ARE YOU NOT ON FWT'S EMAIL LIST?

Coming soon to a store near me.

[Hood26]

Follow link in Dynastar’s Instagram bio to drop a product review and be entered into a drawing for new skis.

[sander_h]

Don’t think this has been posted yet - someone finally wrote more than a blurb worth of words about the M Tour 99. I don’t always agree with the gear lab folks but in this case I’ll allow it cuz there’s not much else available, and also because it confirms my priors that they should tour pretty well and ski like the M Pro 99 with less oomph.

https://www.outdoorgearlab.com/revie...99-f-team-open

I've been pleasantly surprised by how well the M-TOUR 99 skis. I'm not normally a directional ski guy but these are so easy to ski. https://www.instagram.com/p/Clgib3cpBoW/

[oetk2]

Trying i find a pair of 185 mfree99 if anyone is looking to move them along

[ASmileyFace]

I've been pleasantly surprised by how well the M-TOUR 99 skis. I'm not normally a directional ski guy but these are so easy to ski. https://www.instagram.com/p/Clgib3cpBoW/

Where did you end up mounting your 99s Sander? I am curious about the m-tour lineup but I don't generally jive with directional mount points and I think the M-Tour is-11?

[sander_h]

Where did you end up mounting your 99s Sander? I am curious about the m-tour lineup but I don't generally jive with directional mount points and I think the M-Tour is-11?

I generally don't vibe with directional skis either as I didn't grow up racing and don't know how to drive a ski. I put them at recommended and have been pleasantly surprised with how surfy and easy to turn they are. I might try +1 on my next pair but I don't feel a need to go much further than that.

[Shorty_J]

Just put my first day on the 180cm pr-oto.

It felt slightly jittery at the 0 line on my 25 boot... felt more composed at +2 clicks (about +1cm) on my demo bindings.

They absolutely release and slarve easily but the tail can grab you for sure. I suspect this is a function of so much camber more than the shape... my rocker2 122s had less tail hangup despite a more forward mount.

One thing I was very surprised by is when carving them, the radius felt a lot shorter than the stated 22m for this size. I could drift them or carve them at will but when carving I felt like I only had 1 turn shape. My k108 seemed easier to vary the turn shape in minor variations... but definitely less loose in the wind affected powder.

These are cursory thoughts after only 1 day.

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[GoldenBC]

Any feedback on the new MPro Rider?

[kid-kapow]

I've been pleasantly surprised by how well the M-TOUR 99 skis.

cool thing there is a 108 m-tour coming then (m-pro shape)

Just put my first day on the 180cm pr-oto.

The Menance PR-OTO is a M-Free, not a PR-OTO.

PR-OTO is a different build/construction - Spain vs France.

[Shorty_J]

cool thing there is a 108 m-tour coming then (m-pro shape)



The Menance PR-OTO is a M-Free, not a PR-OTO.

PR-OTO is a different build/construction - Spain vs France.

Well I have this one... which says pr-oto on it.

Pretty sure that is the softer layup (same as the mfree), but it does say pr-oto.

And the stiffer one says "f team" or something?

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[TAFKALVS]

Any feedback on the new MPro Rider?

Yeah, I've had a pair since last spring. Here's a mini-review:

Me: 33, 195lbs, ski fast but not as fast or as I used to. The older I get, the better I was.

Skied 3 days now. I mounted my pair 1CM forward. I think that was a mistake, and will likely remount on the line.

I've been skiing the Mfree108 almost exclusively (except on big pow days) for the last 3 years. Prior to that I skied the LP105 primarily.

Overall impressions:

This ski is a charger. I would liken it to your "early versions of rocker" soft snow chargers ALA fischer watea 106, movement trust, bodacious, 182 atomic atlas, etc with a little bit more friendly tip and a tiny bit of tail rocker allowing for easier release. I actually wouldn't compare it to the LP105 which is essentially a fat soft GS ski and a very unique feel due to the soft yet energetic layup/very aggressive camber.

Length:

I am skiing the 192. Marketing length is in full effect with these skis, they are much longer than the 192 Mfree108, at least 2cms. But the 192 Mfree108 is a bit short, so maybe these are a true 192?

Rocker/Camber:

Tip is accessible, trustworthy, and friendly. Very similar amount of rise as the Mfree108. Much like the Mfrees, if you push against the tip it actually oddly floats more. I think it helps the tip flex up. This ski floats pretty dang well if the pitch is > 25 degrees but you're not going to mistake it for a meadow skip type ski.

Underfoot, the ski has camber but is actually quite a bit flatter than the mfree108.

Tail, is a touch rockered but you won't mistake this as a ski you want to ski switch on.

Flex overall is pretty stiff, probably a touch more so than the Mfree108 in the Tip and Tail... similar underfoot.

Conditions I've skied:

Groomers: this ski rips groomers. It's every bit as planted as the old LP105 but stiffer and has a different feel. More the feeling of energetic and smooth groomer ski vs. the cadillac u-spring feel of the LP105.

Hardpack/firm chalk: This ski shines in these conditions, more planted than the Mfree108 and less locked in to one turn shape like the LP105.

Corn/slush: very fun, planted yet can give energy back in to the turn. Fun.

Moguls/tight spaces: this ski wants to be pointed in the fall-line. So if you keep that in mind, it will make you happy. But you're not going to pivot through some weird treeline like they're not a longass charging ski. It requires input and pressure to turn.

Boot top pow on firm base: The ski really comes to life in these conditions. The shape turns easily and is fairly playful but also very planted when hitting firm underneath. I really like this ski in these conditions, better than either the LP105 or the Mfree108. The LP just submarines, you get boot drag, and can sometimes feel a bit cumbersome. The Mfree108 is fun but sometimes it can launch you when hitting firm stuff underneath.

Alpental pow (aka hot schmoo): The shape does not shine in these conditions... it feels like a lot of damn work compared to the mfree108 or (the gold standard for these conditions, imo) the 189/191 BillyGoat. I got extra Alpental beatdowned with these skis trying to ski Alpental with them. Another strong skier on here tried them the same day and wasn't that stoked, and I would agree.

Inland NW pow: (Specific conditions: early season, bottomless, slightly upsidedown, soft, mid-body pow.) This ski is quite fun in these conditions, especially once I started trusting the tip. Extremely fun on steeper terrain, had some of the best turns I've ever had down my favorite run at Schweitzer, Whiplash which is an open, fairly steep run. Early season its got little christmas trees and lots of little cliffy boulders, and this ski let me point them down the fall-line and drift where I wanted. In the lower angles so long as I pointed them in the fall-line and let them turn (vs slash, more on that in a second) they were awesome.

Mfree108 vs Mpro108:

This is topic that has been asked and pondered by me and others. I would say they are different skis, and certain traits in your skiing, mountain, or conditions would lend one or the other. Dynastar says the Free line is for new school playful skiers and the Pro line is for fall line traditional skiers. I'd say that is a spot on assessment.

The two skis can be skied hard (although the Mpro has a higher upper limit and less friendly at lower speeds).

The Mfree is a playful ski that can be skied fairly hard in the fall-line so long as conditions are at least slightly soft. But it doesn't have to be pointed in the fall-line and will drift/slash/slide/scarve/skid/slither/pop/butter even though you can push it pretty hard as well. And you can ski it centered or forwards.

The Mpro is a traditional, fall-line charger that has a friendly, accessible tip, and a less dominating (yet still supportive) tail compared to chargers of old. This ski wants you to push it, and keep it pointed down the fall-line and actually make turns. If the terrain is steep it will drift but at the end of the day, you're slightly drifting a traditional turn, not just pitching them sideways at will like the Mfree. Oh, and you better push those shins in to your boots.

Anyways, I will probably ski both the Mfree108 and the Mpro108 this year depending on conditions, the mountain, and the group I'm skiing with.

If I was skiing a place like Big Sky or Snowbird daily, this would be the ski.

At Schweitzer, it depends on the day.

At Silver or Mt Baker or Stevens I'd probably ski the Mfree108.

cool thing there is a 108 m-tour coming then (m-pro shape)



The Menance PR-OTO is a M-Free, not a PR-OTO.

PR-OTO is a different build/construction - Spain vs France.

I'm excited about an Mtour 108. I wish it was the Mfree shape though...

Well I have this one... which says pr-oto on it.

Pretty sure that is the softer layup (same as the mfree), but it does say pr-oto.

And the stiffer one says "f team" or something?

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

That version is the same layup as the current ski. The first gen Proto had a full sidewalls, came from the race room and was torsionally a lot stiffer. Grey topsheet just said "Dynastar" on it. Not many pairs out there.

[SnakeMagnet]

Yeah, I've had a pair since last spring. Here's a mini-review:

Of course you of anyone here would..

Any past skis you can relate them to/say they remind you of? What about to the LPXXL? Any gen Katana? Cochise? Etc.

[phatty]

Of course you of anyone here would..

Any past skis you can relate them to/say they remind you of? What about to the LPXXL? Any gen Katana? Cochise? Etc.

It kind of sounds like the old QLab. That comparison would be interesting.

[D(C)]

I got my first day of the season in on my 192 M-Free 108s. I quickly remembered why I like them so much. They’re stout enough that you can push into them, but their shape will let you make any turn shape and shut down speed on a moment’s notice. I think the added agility combined with the solid feel on edge makes them easier and more confidence-inspiring to charge on than what would be considered a traditional charging ski.

So what’s the narrower version? I have a pass at a smaller local mountain this year and I’m looking for something similarly versatile in a shorter, narrower package that’s optimized for groomers, dust on crust, and crusty bumps and trees (typical conditions at the local hill, not that different from what you’d want from an eastern ski).

Right now, that spot is filled by Rossi Black Ops 98s in 182, mounted at -1 from recommended (so -6ish). I generally like them but feel like there’s not enough tip in front of me, and the tails feel a bit weird making slid turns in bad snow. The MF 108s are far more intuitive to slide around while still feeling substantial and holding a good edge.

Reading reviews of the 185 M-Free 99, I’m not sure they’re what I want. They sound a bit unsubstantial.

Getting the M-Free 108s in 182 could be an option, though I tried them for a day and remember overpowering the tips when driving them into carves.

[Reformed]

I got my first day of the season in on my 192 M-Free 108s. I quickly remembered why I like them so much. They’re stout enough that you can push into them, but their shape will let you make any turn shape and shut down speed on a moment’s notice. I think the added agility combined with the solid feel on edge makes them easier and more confidence-inspiring to charge on than what would be considered a traditional charging ski.

So what’s the narrower version? I have a pass at a smaller local mountain this year and I’m looking for something similarly versatile in a shorter, narrower package that’s optimized for groomers, dust on crust, and crusty bumps and trees (typical conditions at the local hill, not that different from what you’d want from an eastern ski).

Right now, that spot is filled by Rossi Black Ops 98s in 182, mounted at -1 from recommended (so -6ish). I generally like them but feel like there’s not enough tip in front of me, and the tails feel a bit weird making slid turns in bad snow. The MF 108s are far more intuitive to slide around while still feeling substantial and holding a good edge.

Reading reviews of the 185 M-Free 99, I’m not sure they’re what I want. They sound a bit unsubstantial.

Getting the M-Free 108s in 182 could be an option, though I tried them for a day and remember overpowering the tips when driving them into carves.

I'm currently looking for a similar low to mid-tide ski and have wondered if the MF108 might work in this spot. No demos anywhere near me, so interested in thoughts beyond "best ski ever!" that the MF108 seems to earn. What makes you want to go skinnier? Better groomer/hard snow performance or just less ski to move around when the surface area/length aren't required? Some here seem to be pondering the new QST 106 for this role - wonder if it's different enough to warrant consideration? What about something like the Enforcer 104?