The Dynastar Thread

[dcpnz]

^^ yeah,intrigued by the m-pro 99 as potentially my next DD but the blister review throws me a bit in making it sounds like a move in the wrong direction from my current enforcer - more directional but lighter, similar moderate flex and damper but less “chargey”. Possibly just too light and not stable enough to be the all conditions destroyer for the TGR crowd hence the limited info here.
Sounds like something I ought to demo but sadly not available anywhere around here i don’t think.

Finally starting to jive with my M-free 108 a bit more after several days on it this year in basically perfect conditions for it - didn’t really get the love for that ski last year but maybe I’m coming around….

[jackattack]

What about the M-Pro 90 or 99 in 186? The tip shape and profile looks remarkably similar to that of the M-Free 108 (

They’re different sizes of the same flavor.

[slcdawg]

^^ yeah,intrigued by the m-pro 99 as potentially my next DD but the blister review throws me a bit in making it sounds like a move in the wrong direction from my current enforcer - more directional but lighter, similar moderate flex and damper but less “chargey”. Possibly just too light and not stable enough to be the all conditions destroyer for the TGR crowd hence the limited info here.
Sounds like something I ought to demo but sadly not available anywhere around here i don’t think.

Finally starting to jive with my M-free 108 a bit more after several days on it this year in basically perfect conditions for it - didn’t really get the love for that ski last year but maybe I’m coming around….

Curious, what didn't you like about it? I'm considering it for a DD in Colorado. I know it'll kick ass on soft days, but what about other days?

[dcpnz]

Curious, what didn't you like about it? I'm considering it for a DD in Colorado. I know it'll kick ass on soft days, but what about other days?

Post #2542 in this thread back in February.

I’m on the 182 (50+ and decidedly average size so I don’t want a 192 anything)

As a more than capable skier but definitely a directional style and not flippy spinny jibby I feel a bit like the mount is just too far forward and there’s not enough ski out front - not because it’s too soft as others have suggested but rather it’s just not there.

That said - new season, new perspective and I’ve picked it from a fairly full garage wall every day this week because conditions are right for it.

[slcdawg]

Good info, thanks. I'm also looking at the 182 as I'm 5'10"155lbs and have made the mistake of going too long in the past. I'm not jibby but definitely like surfy center mounted skis. Appreciate the feedback.

[dcpnz]

Good info, thanks. I'm also looking at the 182 as I'm 5'10"155lbs and have made the mistake of going too long in the past. I'm not jibby but definitely like surfy center mounted skis. Appreciate the feedback.

Surfy centered mounted ….. m-free sounds about perfect.

While I didn’t immediately and intuitively love it last season I’m definitely figuring it out and really enjoying it so far this season

[Westcoaster]

According sooth labs the mtour99 is stiffer than the new zero g, can anyone anecdotally speak to this? Seems unlikely/surprising.

[Eluder]

Good info, thanks. I'm also looking at the 182 as I'm 5'10"155lbs and have made the mistake of going too long in the past. I'm not jibby but definitely like surfy center mounted skis. Appreciate the feedback.

I've been on the 182s since early last season. I traded for mine on a whim, thinking I wouldn't like them because the mount is pretty forward compared to what I generally like. Historically I tend to ski forward and drive the tips... ex ski racer, blah blah... On the m-free 108s, I find myself skiing more in a balanced stance.

In soft snow, you can lean into them and go. This allows me to ski instinctively when charging in powder. I don't think I have skied anything in the 108mm category that skis deep snow as well as the m-free. In variable they are amazing at cutting through everything and reward you as long as you stay balanced. On firm, you have to be centered and roll the ski into the turn from your midfoot forward while keeping your weight fairly centered through the turn; I really like this about them as it makes them interesting to ski, but I could see how some would not like the extra effort. I use this technique in variable as well and have been happy with the experience.

If the pitch is steep, they are hard to edge if it's icy. I would say this is true even on steep firm corduroy. To be clear, that should not be what you are seeking out on these skis, and if it is, look elsewhere. If the snow is soft or close to soft, it's game on as long as you can keep up on pretty much any terrain you can ski. I don't think I have skied anything better in chopped up soft bumps, the tails just release so easily. In short, they are the most fun ski I have ever been on in the leftovers.

So DD? I guess that depends on where you ski, how you ski, and if you have other skis at your disposal for less than ideal conditions. Personally, I grab them more than any of the skis in the shed, but my Cochise still happily see the snow.

[Hood26]

MFrees rippped this weekend. Steep chalky bumps and steep groom were their playground this weekend.

[SkiLyft]

It’s a shame they can’t haul the mail…


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[gaijin]

What does that mean? They aren’t the MPro?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[scumpup]

I've demo'd the 182 Mfree 99 and Mfree 108, I remember liking them when the snow was soft but I remember getting jerked around in heavy chop and not having good edgehold in icy steeps. Being 5' 10 and 145lbs, I'm not sure if I could handle the 192 Mfree 108 but I'm heavily considering try them if they really are a different beast than the 182's. The descriptions of the 192 and my experience on the 182 don't quite add up so I'd want to see how different they really are.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

The 108 isn’t the tool for icy steeps in any length. The 192 will get pushed around in heavy chop. It’s a great ski and really fun but it’s not particularly stiff or damp.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Eluder]

The 108 isn’t the tool for icy steeps in any length. The 192 will get pushed around in heavy chop. It’s a great ski and really fun but it’s not particularly stiff or damp.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Compared to what? IME they are one of the dampest playful skis I have been on.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

Compared to what? IME they are one of the dampest playful skis I have been on.

Compared to the original Invictus 108, the BC Corvus, Prior Husumes etc.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Eluder]

Compared to the original Invictus 108, the BC Corvus, Prior Husumes etc.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I only ask because it is a quality I seek.

I haven't been on any of those but it makes sense on the first two, metal and then reverse camber. I need to try a Corvus, on paper they seem awesome but I have some fresh reverse Gotamas so it probably will be a while.

I have had a couple of pairs of Prior Overlords, which I would assume would be similar construction to the Husumes. I remember them as stiff but not overly damp.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

Quad glass Husumes are missiles. Straighter than the Overlord. They’re heavy, stiff and damp


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[2FUNKY]

The mfree 108 is a perfect blend of just enough dampness, stifness and playfulness, chargyness. Are there damper skis, yes, they are also not as playful. Are there stiffer skis, sure, they are also not as soft snow oriented. If you want a super damp straight up charger look elsewhere. Just because a ski has the same width underfoot means very little and rarely should they be compared just because of that one similarity. Take for instance my Stockli Stormriders compared to the mfree, they a re VERY different skis.
Since this is a Dstar thread, if looking for a damp charger, Mpro108 is what you seek.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[slcdawg]

I've been on the 182s since early last season. I traded for mine on a whim, thinking I wouldn't like them because the mount is pretty forward compared to what I generally like. Historically I tend to ski forward and drive the tips... ex ski racer, blah blah... On the m-free 108s, I find myself skiing more in a balanced stance.

In soft snow, you can lean into them and go. This allows me to ski instinctively when charging in powder. I don't think I have skied anything in the 108mm category that skis deep snow as well as the m-free. In variable they are amazing at cutting through everything and reward you as long as you stay balanced. On firm, you have to be centered and roll the ski into the turn from your midfoot forward while keeping your weight fairly centered through the turn; I really like this about them as it makes them interesting to ski, but I could see how some would not like the extra effort. I use this technique in variable as well and have been happy with the experience.

If the pitch is steep, they are hard to edge if it's icy. I would say this is true even on steep firm corduroy. To be clear, that should not be what you are seeking out on these skis, and if it is, look elsewhere. If the snow is soft or close to soft, it's game on as long as you can keep up on pretty much any terrain you can ski. I don't think I have skied anything better in chopped up soft bumps, the tails just release so easily. In short, they are the most fun ski I have ever been on in the leftovers.

So DD? I guess that depends on where you ski, how you ski, and if you have other skis at your disposal for less than ideal conditions. Personally, I grab them more than any of the skis in the shed, but my Cochise still happily see the snow.

This is great info. I mostly ski CO (CB is main mountain) - all off-piste, trees, bumps, steeps (no groomers). I'm looking for a DD on softish to pow days, but needs to be able to hold an edge on firm off-piste steeps. For comparison, I have a pair of older PB&J 188's that I love on everything except bumps (too long). Fischer FR 94's have become my primary DD as they rock in the bumps while I'm trying to maintain my razor thin edge over my teenagers. They are actually pretty fun in 6" of pow, but get bounced around in chop and definitely not a charger.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I was just noting that the MF 108 isn’t the ski for icy steeps and crud busting. It’s a greater ski, playful and incredible float. I really like mine


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Eluder]

I was just noting that the MF 108 isn’t the ski for icy steeps and crud busting. It’s a greater ski, playful and incredible float. I really like mine


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

This is why we all need multiple skis.

[Hood26]

I feel comfortable on my 182cm Mf108s on icy steeps. I keep my edges (on the side cuts) very sharp at the factory 1/2; plenty of detaining in tips and tails. I think icy steeps and survival skiing are also one of the reasons I like the 182, as they are much more manageable and nimble than the 192. Do I trade off “chargabilty”? Sure, but I am comfortable with the 182 speed limit and they are fast enough for me.

Am a carving turns on the 40sh degree bulletproof? No. However, I am also not seeing experienced racers and their coaches do so on race skis either.

We had over a month of oppressive high pressure last season and I had plenty of days on both my MF108 and MP90. I preferred the 90 for on-piste bulletproof, but the 108 was much more stable in the moon cupped frozen AM bull shit and the afternoon mank when off-piste, so I kept grabbing them more often and tolerated their moderately less composure than the 90s had on bullet proof groom.

[2FUNKY]

I was just noting that the MF 108 isn’t the ski for icy steeps and crud busting. It’s a greater ski, playful and incredible float. I really like mine


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Agreed, a sub 100mm ski fits that bill.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[californiagrown]

I was just noting that the MF 108 isn’t the ski for icy steeps and crud busting. It’s a greater ski, playful and incredible float. I really like mine


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

After 2 days i really like the skis. They do skis quite a bit lighter than they actually are. For better or for worse. For the tight, tech steeps of alpental it works really well for me so far... But they also do not provide a damp, stable suspension like ride that i kind of expected from a ski this heavy. Maybe its the shape of the tips, or the rocker? At the end of teh day its the wizard, not the wand and i can charge plenty hard on them- they just dont give me the confidence to go faster than my brain tells me i should... and maybe thats a good thing?

[MagnificentUnicorn]

After 2 days i really like the skis. They do skis quite a bit lighter than they actually are. For better or for worse. For the tight, tech steeps of alpental it works really well for me so far... But they also do not provide a damp, stable suspension like ride that i kind of expected from a ski this heavy. Maybe its the shape of the tips, or the rocker? At the end of teh day its the wizard, not the wand and i can charge plenty hard on them- they just dont give me the confidence to go faster than my brain tells me i should... and maybe thats a good thing?

Good summary.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums