Recommend Resort Daily Driver

[PeachesNCream]

Anyone care to compare the mfree with the jeffery? Specifically curious on playfulness

[TAFKALVS]

(in the 192.)
Define "b ski". The Mfree hype from BGs fan bois has me intrigued.

Its really my "a" ski. mf108 daily driver for 0" - 12" and then a wider pow shape (which was 191 Billygoat for a long time) as the 2nd slot for more than 12 - 14" new snow. But I've skied a few pretty deep days on the MF108 and not been unhappy.

Id say try um.

[phatty]

Its really my "a" ski. mf108 daily driver for 0" - 12" and then a wider pow shape (which was 191 Billygoat for a long time) as the 2nd slot for more than 12 - 14" new snow. But I've skied a few pretty deep days on the MF108 and not been unhappy.

Id say try um.

Yeah, that's probably a more accurate way to look at it. I usually don't bring the BGs out until 8+". MFree are on my feet 85% of the time.

[TAFKALVS]

Yeah, that's probably a more accurate way to look at it. I usually don't bring the BGs out until 8+". MFree are on my feet 85% of the time.

If I still skied more coastal snow I'd billygoat sooner but now I'm Intermountain and I find less width is okay on an average day.

[North]

My biased interpretation of your ask points directly to the OG Cochise.

Full Disclosure pt. Deux: I have owned this ski. It was a long time ago, but I remember it being a good ski that felt a little dead. Suspension-wise, my Goldilocks is something reasonably damp that is also poppy. Prior to BGs I thought this was an inevitable tradeoff, but I find my BGs (2014 186) to strike the balance perfectly.

If I still skied more coastal snow I'd billygoat sooner but now I'm Intermountain and I find less width is okay on an average day.

Thanks for the prior info and the reminder that you're in ID - that's a useful data point. I went deep on the Dynaster thread and was/am a little wary of the hype(!!) because it's clear that Mfree HQ is in the PNW, where annual snowfall is 2x+ compared to my spot. I think DarthMarkus is in CO. I should probably shoot over a PM about the Mfree. If it does all the goat stuff (crazy maneuverable, lively but also smooths out chunder), but works a little better at low tide I'd probably be pretty stoked.

[Reformed]

Full Disclosure pt. Deux: I have owned this ski. It was a long time ago, but I remember it being a good ski that felt a little dead. Suspension-wise, my Goldilocks is something reasonably damp, that is also playful and poppy. Prior to BGs I thought this was an inevitable tradeoff, but I find my BGs (2014 186) to strike the balance perfectly.

Gotcha, and know exactly what you are talking about regarding ON3P's balance between damp and poppy (see my recent post in the ON3P thread). The on snow feel of my BGs and Steeples makes me want to try the Woodsman 102 for lower-tide conditions. I have skied my Steeples in this slot and had a lot of fun on them, but they're mounted with pin bindings and being driven with touring boots, so it's hardly a fair comparison to the Cochise with alpine clamps and boots. Still, I have had thoughts of putting alpine clamps on the Steeples if I ever upgrade to the current touring layup to dump some weight, so it's not like they sucked in this role - Woods 102s would just be better.

[D(C)]

I think the 192 M-Free 108 is more of a one ski quiver than a daily driver per your definition (you don’t care about pow or groomers). It does quite well when there’s no new snow, but then leaves nothing to be desired when it’s deep. If you aren’t planning to use it in deep snow, I think you could get away with something a bit narrower that would be even less cumbersome in bumps and trees (maybe the M-Free 99? Although, it sounds like the 185 99s are more similar in length to the 182 108s than to the 192s).

[Bandit Man]

Full Disclosure pt. Deux: I have owned this ski. It was a long time ago, but I remember it being a good ski that felt a little dead. Suspension-wise, my Goldilocks is something reasonably damp that is also poppy. Prior to BGs I thought this was an inevitable tradeoff, but I find my BGs (2014 186) to strike the balance perfectly.



Thanks for the prior info and the reminder that you're in ID - that's a useful data point. I went deep on the Dynaster thread and was/am a little wary of the hype(!!) because it's clear that Mfree HQ is in the PNW, where annual snowfall is 2x+ compared to my spot. I think DarthMarkus is in CO. I should probably shoot over a PM about the Mfree. If it does all the goat stuff (crazy maneuverable, lively but also smooths out chunder), but works a little better at low tide I'd probably be pretty stoked.

TSFKALWS used his “if you like BG’s, you’ll love the MFree108” Jedi mind trick on me last year. I resisted for a while, but eventually gave in. He was absolutely right. I still prefer the Volkl M102 and K108 in true technical “low tide” conditions, but the MFree108 is the real deal. What you choose really depends on how “loose” you want the ski to feel.

[jmedslc]

Just weighing in to say that I’m really enjoying the ON3P Woodsman 108 as DD this season in the Wasatch. It skis real short tho.

[Bandit Man]

Can't speak for LWS, but as a fellow BG fan who skis the MFree 108 as my daily, I think of the BG as my "a" ski, meaning it's the ski I want to use first when the conditions are right. It's my favorite ski in the quiver. The MFree is what I ski on days when the BG isn't the right call.

I've tended towards more charging skis for my DD (QLab, old Gotama and Mantra, etc.) but the MFree gives me the right amount of chargeability with a pop and looseness that I've been looking for. It allows me to ski hard when I want and is still fun to dick around on when I'm skiing with my kids.

While I love the MFree, I'm still a Mag and have a wandering eye for other skis. The other ones I want to try are Katana 108 and Woodsman 108/110 in a 192 (skied and enjoyed a 187). Not all of us have spouses that allow us to have a true fleet (not merely a quiver) of skis like Bandit Man. [emoji28]

I feel targeted and called out! I need a safe space!

Seriously, I’m running out of room! I bet I have a better ski walk than Evo right now! 🤣🤣🤣

[phatty]

I feel targeted and called out! I need a safe space!

Seriously, I’m running out of room! I bet I have a better ski walk than Evo right now! [emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]

I'm just envious! I don't know if I could handle the daily decision or have a box big enough for the amount of skis I would want to take up every day.

[North]

192 M-Free 108
I think you could get away with something a bit narrower that would be even less cumbersome in bumps and trees

Agreed, might make sense to get a ski with a more narrow use case. But then I look at the Dynaster thread and you're saying things like "might've jumped the gun on buying Menace 98s" so I don't know what to believe . If there are skinnier options out there with that magic mix of goat-like traits I'm interested - I'd like try a few that have been suggested already. Width is just one design parameter though and I'm trying not to get too hung up on #s, I've made that mistake before.

What you choose really depends on how “loose” you want the ski to feel.

Gut says pretty loose. Confident I can find and set an edge on a "loose" ski, and can make due with less grip in favor of being able to break the tails free in tech stuff (at the resort, tech b/c I have a different preference). I'd be looking harder at the M102 but am not certain it's what I want in bumps.

[Bandit Man]

Agreed, might make sense to get a ski with a more narrow use case. But then I look at the Dynaster thread and you're saying things like "might've jumped the gun on buying Menace 98s" so I don't know what to believe . If there are skinnier options out there with that magic mix of goat-like traits I'm interested - I'd like try a few that have been suggested already. Width is just one design parameter though and I'm trying not to get too hung up on #s, I've made that mistake before.



Gut says pretty loose. Confident I can find and set an edge on a "loose" ski, and can make due with less grip in favor of being able to break the tails free in tech stuff (at the resort, tech b/c I have a different preference). I'd be looking harder at the M102 but am not certain it's what I want in bumps.

I love the M102 and K108. Don’t need to beat that dead horse.

My quest for a capable but “more playful, less demanding” last season led me to the Woodsman 108. It was really close to what I was after. It felt a lot like a Billy Goat due to the core material and layup. Damp enough but a bit of playful and easy to ski. The problem was the tail…it just wasn’t loose enough. I hear that has been “fixed” with the WD110, so we will see when reports come in this season.

The 192 MFREE 108 is a bit more energetic/less damp than the 187 WD108, but also feels like it wants to be pushed harder. It’s also so amazingly loose in deeper/soft snow. The MFREE 108 more than holds its own on firm snow and groomers, but the WF108 probably gets the edge there. The WD108 was closer to the M102/K108 in the end, but not as damp and stable, so I moved on from them and kept the Volkls and Dynastar since they cover a wider spectrum of conditions. If it’s more skied out and variable, I go with the Volkls. If it is on the soft side, the Dynastar gets the nod.

[bovine]

Not to highjack, but I too am kinda looking for something like what the original poster is looking for.

I currently ride a pair of Line 184 Bacons (a little soft for me) that have Marker F12s on them- We used to ski Wolf Creek a bit and the frame bindings were handy for probing beyond the ropes a bit, but they are heavy and I'd prefer a lighter weight 2-peice binding that fits my AT boots.

One of my favorite older skis was a pair of gold-buddha Volkl Gotamas-stiff enough, slight twin tip for billy-goat-ing, tough bases...

Background: dedicated hike-to terrain skier w/years of ski bumming at Taos and Telluride, always looking for fresh nooks w/techy lines and steep. I don't need a stiff comp ski- I'm 52 now, but still like to ski like I was 26... Currently area ski Crested Butte and Telluride when I'm not touring on Red Mountain Pass.

Curious about the Atomic Backland 107s- want something with lots of energy/poppy that skis bumps, trees, steeps well...

Thoughts?

[snowaddict91]

Not to highjack, but I too am kinda looking for something like what the original poster is looking for.

I currently ride a pair of Line 184 Bacons (a little soft for me) that have Marker F12s on them- We used to ski Wolf Creek a bit and the frame bindings were handy for probing beyond the ropes a bit, but they are heavy and I'd prefer a lighter weight 2-peice binding that fits my AT boots.

One of my favorite older skis was a pair of gold-buddha Volkl Gotamas-stiff enough, slight twin tip for billy-goat-ing, tough bases...

Background: dedicated hike-to terrain skier w/years of ski bumming at Taos and Telluride, always looking for fresh nooks w/techy lines and steep. I don't need a stiff comp ski- I'm 52 now, but still like to ski like I was 26... Currently area ski Crested Butte and Telluride when I'm not touring on Red Mountain Pass.

Curious about the Atomic Backland 107s- want something with lots of energy/poppy that skis bumps, trees, steeps well...

Thoughts?

ON3P woodsman 108s could fit the bill. I like my wren 108s but wouldn't mind something a hair less straight-liney around here, especially since mine are 189s. Their layup is a good mix between damp and poppy, with thick, durable bases and edges.

Let's ski sometime, sounds like we have similar terrain tastes.

[Benneke10]

If you liked the full-rocker Volkl Gotama why not stick with full rocker? Camber sucks anyways, and there are plenty of full rocker options - Black Crows Corvus, 4frnt Raven/Hoji, Moment Meridian, WNDR Vital/Intention, Volkl V Werks Katana and 100eight if you can find em

[phatty]

If you liked the full-rocker Volkl Gotama why not stick with full rocker? Camber sucks anyways, and there are plenty of full rocker options - Black Crows Corvus, 4frnt Raven/Hoji, Moment Meridian, WNDR Vital/Intention, Volkl V Werks Katana and 100eight if you can find em

Gold Buddha Gots were not the full rocker version. They had camber and were the version before the switch to full rocker.

[bovine]

Thoughts on the Head Kore 105s? The Blister review on the 189s sounds pretty good...

[Jong Lafitte]

Gold Buddha Gots were not the full rocker version. They had camber and were the version before the switch to full rocker.

Yup.

Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[jmedslc]

Thoughts on the Head Kore 105s? The Blister review on the 189s sounds pretty good...

I skied them for a dozen days ntn telemark. Alpine turns were awesome. I found them too stiff particularly in the tip for tele turns. When I dropped the knee the tip would dive instead of float. My buddy loves them for alpine tho.