The Dynastar Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CirqueScaler

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?

---

I have the 180cm Proto 118 (+2cm = -7cm) and the 179cm M-Free 99 (+1cm = -6.5cm).

I ski the 179cm M-Free 99 a lot (seems these and my 184cm 4FRNT Ravens are all I’ve skied in the last month due to shit snow) and find it pretty damp, and surprisingly good on groomers and in crap snow.

My Protos haven’t got as much use this year due to the lack of any real deep snow since early Jan….but I don’t find them hard to ski. They’re not light, but they ski easy as they are so maneuverable. The Proto is a strongish ski, but its tips and tails are not super stiff so you can still bend them. Maybe cause it’s only the 180cm (which is perfect for me at 5’7”, ~170 lbs). The flex pattern feels pretty even too, though maybe the tails are a bit stiffer than the tips I think.

Both can rip while still being super fun, which is what I want in a ski. Both skis are staples in the quiver.

PS - the 180cm Proto 118 and 179cm M-Free 99 both measure true to length, not “shorter” like the 185cm M-Free 99?

Surprisingly, more tail splay on the 99 vs Proto. Family resemblance pic:
Attachment 411839

Attachment 411840

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kid-kapow

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.

---

So this is why I ask. One of the guys at the Dynastar tent yesterday said they keep the construction the same into the 118s when other brands would worry about it getting too heavy.

On the website, the advertised weight (kg/pair) is:
99-179 = 3.7 kg/pair
108-182 = 4.4 kg/pair
118-180 = 4.5 kg/pair

Pretty sure when I weighed my 180cm 118 Protos they were over 2,200 gm per ski....so ya close to 4.5kg per pair.

I put metal Pivot 18s on mine to make them lighter. Haha

Corbett's still has some:

https://www.corbetts.com/2020-dynast...o-f-team-skis/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc_7777

the 180cm Proto 118 and 179cm M-Free 99 both measure true to length

---

Why the fuck even make a "185" and have no longer options if the next size down is a real-world 3cm difference? Now that's truly aggravating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CirqueScaler

So this is why I ask. One of the guys at the Dynastar tent yesterday said they keep the construction the same into the 118s when other brands would worry about it getting too heavy.

---

I think he must have misunderstood. The marketing guys would've made a huge fuss about the 118s having the hybrid core if it did. Besides, it is kinda easy to tell - both 99s and 108s have these lines in the top sheet or it is somewhat translucent - and the 118 does not have that set of lines.
Attachment 411904

Very reminiscent of this no? It is easier to see on the 108s, but both of the narrower skis have them - the wider does not.
Attachment 411906

From the 21/22 catalogue:
Attachment 411907
It would be interesting to know how the 118s and BO Gamers (page 42-43) differ construction wise.

Evo specified that the original PR-OTOs had something Dynastar called Powerdrive Free Construction. The catalogue doesn't show the PR-OTO though - it was seemingly a later edition, only a wider Legend Factory. Wrong wood though.
Attachment 411905

I do not know what the 118s construction looks like re the above - I think it is a straigth up poplar core with glass/diago fiber without any of the extra bells and whistles mentioned above, but perhaps one of the proper Dynastar heads can chime in?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeMagnet

Why the fuck even make a "185" and have no longer options if the next size down is a real-world 3cm difference? Now that's truly aggravating.

---

word.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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 haven’t so I can’t help you. Just echoing what you said, I liked the long effective edge, especially on steeps, but couldn’t jive with how grabby they get in thick funk so I sold them. I think that tail rocker transition doesn’t mesh with my skiing style.

Next season I’m going to try giving up on 98mm as a daily driver size and going skinnier (88-92) for firm to mostly firm, already decided on Woodsman 108s for anything remotely soft (even melt freeze that is just starting to transition to corn). Thankfully I don’t ski anywhere that it’s a total PITA to switch pairs as the sun comes out and does its thing.

Wow, thanks for the breakdown kid kapow. That's really great background.

Kind of leaning towards the 118 right now. Doesn't seem too unwieldy in soft snow.

To echo this sentiment yet again, 192 MF108s are something else (disclaimer: one day in).

In fact, the only thing I do not like about them is that there is not a 187 length with the same shape and flex pattern. Very, very good skis.

A bit long for me at 175cm/68kg perhaps. I also kept on thinking "should I have gone +1 or +1.5? instead of at recommended?". But man, these things haul for how loose, smooth and easy to ski that they are. The biggest learning curve was to look further ahead and pop sooner. Plenty nimble, and strong/predictable on groomers too ( as in they make the turn you tell them to).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kid-kapow

To echo this sentiment yet again, 192 MF108s are something else (disclaimer: one day in).

In fact, the only thing I do not like about them is that there is not a 187 length with the same shape and flex pattern. Very, very good skis.

A bit long for me at 175cm/68kg perhaps. I also kept on thinking "should I have gone +1 or +1.5? instead of at recommended?". But man, these things haul for how loose, smooth and easy to ski that they are. The biggest learning curve was to look further ahead and pop sooner. Plenty nimble, and strong/predictable on groomers too ( as in they make the turn you tell them to).

---

Also just got a pair and my goodness do I just feel at home on this ski. So lively and easy but pretty high top end.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

My only gripe with the mFree 108 is that it doesn’t come in a 200 and I wish the turn radius was high 20s. That’s splitting hairs though, I love them


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

A mfree 108 with a turn radius in the high 20s would be dope.

a 200 would be killer for big lines. i’m kinda staring at the 108 pro thinking it may fill that gap better without going overboard

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shroom

a 200 would be killer for big lines. i’m kinda staring at the 108 pro thinking it may fill that gap better without going overboard

---

Very eager to hear more about the MPro108. Very happy with my MFrees but wouldn't mind more dampness to quiet them down a bit once things get chunky.

I should have a pair with demo bindings at LBD.

If the Mpro108 is more inline with my TT110Stormriders I may have to grab a pair. The only place the Mfree took the edge over the Stormriders is float and a tad looser in sun effected pow and it wasn’t by much. The Stormriders kill it in chop and firm snow, way more damp and quiet at speed. They slay pow just need more speed to come up than the Free. It’s really to bad that ski isn’t made anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TAFKALVS

I should have a pair with demo bindings at LBD.

---

Demo bindings are a nice touch, especially for the Sasquatch feet of us. Unfortunately I'm not going to be in town this year [emoji24]

Spent a full day on the pro108 today. Its a great ski, and I will post more details once a have a few more days on them this spring.

Listening to Blister's interview with Sander Hadley, Jonathan mentions that there are new touring skis in the works from Dynastar at the 57min mark. The context makes this sound like a M-Free type ski, to be relevant for how Sander skis. Does anybody have any info on what is coming and when? The M-Free shape in a lighter layup should still ski awesomely as a more touring oriented ski.

On a side note, Jonathan's dismissing the notion of a mid 180s ski completely misses the mark imho. Sure, the 192 measures in at 189something and skis short. But that does not mean that a lot of folks would still love a 185ish ski that still has the flex pattern of the longer length, but is somewhat shorter for less swing weight. Aka something that merges the best of the 182 and 192 in a ski. That would be awesome imho.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kid-kapow

Listening to Blister's interview with Sander Hadley, Jonathan mentions that there are new touring skis in the works from Dynastar at the 57min mark. The context makes this sound like a M-Free type ski, to be relevant for how Sander skis. Does anybody have any info on what is coming and when? The M-Free shape in a lighter layup should still ski awesomely as a more touring oriented ski.
.

---

Not a lot of info behind the “Discover” button but this is Dynastars homepage which appears to confirm a new M-tour line.
Attachment 412944

Attachment 412946

Does appear to indicate shape and rocker will be like M-pro not m-free though with a different/lighter core Attachment 412947

M-Tour looks the same as the current version just with a different topsheet. I doubt they would make any substantive changes to it, its only been out for 2 seasons and has been pretty well received

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TAFKALVS

Spent a full day on the pro108 today. Its a great ski, and I will post more details once a have a few more days on them this spring.

---

Seriously…we just let this go with no comment? Now that we know that the MFree108 is so stellar, there are high expectations for an updated MPro108. And don’t make us wait for a Blister MFree vs MPro comparison, please.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bandit Man

Seriously…we just let this go with no comment? Now that we know that the MFree108 is so stellar, there are high expectations for an updated MPro108. And don’t make us wait for a Blister MFree vs MPro comparison, please.

---

Come ski them at LBD Saturday.

I can post some circle jerky fanboi isms now but you guys wouldn't believe me anyways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TAFKALVS

I can post some circle jerky fanboi isms now but you guys wouldn't believe me anyways.

---

You're right. Post them anyways.

Okay fine.

Me: 195lbs, ski with eagle arms.

My normal quiver rotation this year:
Mfree118, Mfree108, LP105.

Conditions:
April midwinter conditions: 2-4" dust on very firm crust, slush, firm groomers, slush groomers, refrozen moguls... a mixed bag.

Mounted the skis at +1, which I feel good about after skiing the mfree lineup for the last 2 years.

The "192" mpro 108 is actually more like a 194 or 195 in length. Its markedly longer in appearance than the 192 lp105 or the mfree108.

Its actually 110mm underfoot.

The boot mark lines up with the old lp105. I've always found that to be a very rearward mount, so again, I felt good at +1, and after skiing them I would not change that.

The rocker in the tip is identical to the mfree108. The tail rocker reminds me of the Legend x106, low but enough to make the ski release easily.

The shape is tapered but similar to the lp105. No radical taper in the tail or anything weird. I detuned the tips and tails.

How they differ from the mpro105/pro 105/lp105/pro rider
-much more float.
-feel lighter, more responsive.
-more "supple" feeling in rough snow.
-less demanding and bigger sweet spot.
-slightly looser tail.
-a little more turny on edge.
-require less speed and don't require a lack of self preservation instinct to be fun.
-less camber than lp105.
-more rocker.
-still very stable and damp, but less abusive when you aren't "on it".

How they differ from the mfree108:
-more stable on firm snow.
-more damp on rough/refrozen surfaces.
-less bouncy (quieter, less feelings of getting bounced off stuff).
-less slashy.
-tail is more secure.
-more effective edge to use.
-bigger sweet spot on groomers.
-can push forebody of the ski much harder, especially in rough snow.


Thought/impressions:
-wow.
-this is exactly what I want on my feet right now.
-this is the fastest I've skied this year.
-the "powerdrive" layup is noticeable. This ski is incredibly damp and smooth.
-the addition of metal makes the layup feel even better.
-this ski has incredible edge grip for 110mm underfoot. Like drag your hip 80mm groomer ski edge grip. Insane. But not hooky.
-the radius is perfect. I straightlined multiple 500' vert pitches of steep, rough snow and never felt like the ski was hooky.
-its a big stable ski, but very friendly and approachable. Its much easier to ski than the LP105, but is definitely a little more ski than the mfree108. But in a way its a ski you can be a little lazier on than the mfree108, as it doesn't require you to be as active on the ski. It feels very damp and stable.
-its not a loose slasher like the mfree108. It likes a more traditional turn, and requires you to ski it from the front of the boots.
-I took it in to some tight trees (those that ski with me are familiar with my definition here) and definitely the mfree108 is the superior tool.

Mfree vs Mpro: Verdict is out on what ski I will grab. For a more traditional turn skier, its got similar qualities to the mfree but more EE and a shape that rewards a little more forward stance. Which i like. I think pow performance will be similar but less loose, and probably not the ski for tighter trees.

Lp105 vs Mpro:
I am certain that I would prefer the mpro over the lp105. To me the mpro is a more modern and more enjoyable ski with greater versatility and a bigger sweet spot.

I want to try the 182 length, as it could actually be a really great DD if the stability is still there in the shorter length. That said, I wouldn't be afraid of the 192 as a daily driver at my mountain which is fairly open. This ski would kill it at a Big Sky type place. It doesn't ski like a Super Goat, Bodacious, or "comp ski" of old. It certainly can charge but it's not something that is continually trying to kill you.