The Dynastar Thread

[obviouslynotagolfer]

The blister review you read is probably for the newer Devastator, I think it's ~2000g in the 186. I was talking about the old heavy one.

I guess the OG dev comparison is probably not very useful to anyone who hasn't skied the OG dev--It's similar in weight, waist width, dampness, but it's kind of a unique ski. I guess the point I was trying to make is that the 192 M-Free skis shorter than it's stated length. It's one of the more maneuverable skis I own, great in the trees. The only point I noted a real decrease in the manuverability was in rain pow... It works fine there but the reverse camber dev does it better.

Ahh gotcha. Well that’s all still helpful to know.

FWIW previous damp skis I’ve been on were a real mix and not entirely apples/apples comparisons, but all pointing to these 192’s being probably way more maneuverable/manageable than other skis I've tried in this weight-class:

2017 Head monster 88 @ 184 (great suspension and fun @ low tide + high speed, but a lot of work in the trees and bumps)

2016 BC Corvus @ 188 (old-school cambered version), great bulldozers but too stiff and unwieldy + not enough smear/surf for my skinny ass, sold ‘em pretty quick. Probably should’ve tried the 183’s.

2013 Line Mr. Pollard’s Opus @ 185: such a fun ski in the trees, but in this case I think I could’ve / should’ve sized up to the 192 for a touch more stability/more tip in front of me.

P.S. Hate to say it, but looking Whistler's weekend forecast and sure enough it's a lot of 'rain pow' on the menu...

[Hood26]

For my small, tight, steep hill I like 182. By the time I feel like I am outs skiing them I am already in the lift line.

[obviouslynotagolfer]

For my small, tight, steep hill I like 182. By the time I feel like I am outs skiing them I am already in the lift line.

Right on. The 182’s were a lot of fun and, at a smaller hill, would be the no-brainer choice for me.

[roQer]

The men’s podium of the Junior Freeride World Championship says it all - 2x MF108, 1x SF110.
Probably the best two skis at the moment for current competition winning skiing style.

[waveshello]

Yeah but what lengths were they on

[obviouslynotagolfer]

Yeah but what lengths were they on

Probably pro-only 187's

[D(C)]

I just took the 182 and 192 M-Free 108s out for an hour each, skied back to back. I was night skiing, and conditions were slushy with poor visibility. I was at the local mountain, which has mostly tighter terrain.

The general feel of the skis are similar, with a common dampness and feel when sliding in and out of turns. The 182s want to make short turns and are actually a touch challenging to lock into a carve, being so loose. The 192s also slide easily, but once on edge, they hold with a quiet stability, flattening the terrain beneath them. The 192s also need a bit of speed to come alive, or the tips can get away from you when engaging turns. They need more deliberate effort to make short turns. The 182s turn on a dime, with little speed needed, but give up stability.

I would compare the sizes to slalom and GS skis. The choice comes down to what size turns you want to prioritize, which will be based on terrain, conditions and preferences.

If I had to pick one, it might honestly be the 182s. They have a bit more fun factor to me, and I don’t mind giving up some stability. Skiing fast on the 192s sure is sweet, though.

I also wonder whether mounting the 192s a bit forward of the line would help make it easier to engage the tips at low speeds. My concern is always that going forward will make the ski feel unbalanced and overpowered by the tails. But I feel like there is opportunity to go a bit forward.

[obviouslynotagolfer]

Really helpful insights here D(C), thanks for sharing. Hope the wet conditions were still fun for ya. I’m actually up in Whistler today and renting the 99’s and 108’s back-to-back. Decision will be made tonight!

[obviouslynotagolfer]

Well, those Mfree 99’s I booked for today were apparently damaged-beyond-repair by previous user, so I ended up spending another full day on 182 Mfree 108’s, which was fine by me. They were again so fun in everything, from slush and re-frozen bumps to the surprise knee-deep pow. I tried to spend some more time with them in the steeps around Whistler Bowl, and for my level of aggressiveness and skill, they were plenty charge-y and supportive -- TBF I turn 45 in a few months and am far from the most aggressive skier on the mountain, so that makes sense! I’m sure on the deepest days I’d enjoy more surface area, and for that, my Ripstick 116’s will do nicely. So, 182 it is, and I’m stoked! Thanks all for the advice here!

[beeeom]

Curious about the M-free 118's.. Any idea how they compare to 2014 Billy Goats? (my only measuring stick for a ski's performance)?

[TAFKALVS]

Not as floaty, similar to better performance in dry light snow, not as good in the PNW super glop. Surfy, loose, fun ski.

[kid-kapow]

I just got to fondle a pair of 183 Dynastar M-Free 112s at the local dealer. They measure in at 181.5 straight pull, and the mount point is 87.5cm from the tails. They are very different to the outgoing 118s. I forgot to measure the relative lengths of camber in front of / behind the mount point, but they seem a whole lot more symmetrical than the 108s. They specify that you are to use 4.1 drill bit, so metal underfoot. They had a nice supportive flex underfoot and softer tips/tails - so pretty standard flex pattern for this kind of ski. Simply put, the seem to be fairly awesome.

Again, the Rossignol group is killing it with the MF108, SF110 and now these, with MPro108s and Sender106tis as bonus charger skis. Such a tremendous lineup.

[D(C)]

I just got to fondle a pair of 183 Dynastar M-Free 112s at the local dealer. They measure in at 181.5 straight pull, and the mount point is 87.5cm from the tails. They are very different to the outgoing 118s. I forgot to measure the relative lengths of camber in front of / behind the mount point, but they seem a whole lot more symmetrical than the 108s. They specify that you are to use 4.1 drill bit, so metal underfoot. They had a nice supportive flex underfoot and softer tips/tails - so pretty standard flex pattern for this kind of ski. Simply put, the seem to be fairly awesome.

Again, the Rossignol group is killing it with the MF108, SF110 and now these, with MPro108s and Sender106tis as bonus charger skis. Such a tremendous lineup.

So that puts the mount point at -3.25? If so, that’s pretty different from the current M-Free skis.

[mr_pretzel]

I just got to fondle a pair of 183 Dynastar M-Free 112s at the local dealer. They measure in at 181.5 straight pull, and the mount point is 87.5cm from the tails. They are very different to the outgoing 118s. I forgot to measure the relative lengths of camber in front of / behind the mount point, but they seem a whole lot more symmetrical than the 108s. They specify that you are to use 4.1 drill bit, so metal underfoot. They had a nice supportive flex underfoot and softer tips/tails - so pretty standard flex pattern for this kind of ski. Simply put, the seem to be fairly awesome.

Again, the Rossignol group is killing it with the MF108, SF110 and now these, with MPro108s and Sender106tis as bonus charger skis. Such a tremendous lineup.

Whats the turn radius

[beeeom]

Not as floaty, similar to better performance in dry light snow, not as good in the PNW super glop. Surfy, loose, fun ski.

Thanks! Snagged a set and skied them for the first time today. Very similar to the 2014 186 goats, but they have a traditional tail and all that camber bites when you lean them over. Very very stoked. Only thing I really think could be improved would be less tip taper, cause they lack a bit of the top end monster truck in the chunder that I'm used to on the BG's.

[TurxSki]

Kinda reticent to post, as you guys only do one flavor, but Cinders bought some ePro 99's just t'other day, and so far, not bad as cham97w replacement.
But we have had freshies, and that makes almost anything better.
Only funny thing?
Ski shop guy "no such thing as wimmins skis anymore"
...sublimated rose flower graphic on skis? Ok, yeah 'cos that is so broh/brah...

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using TGR Forums mobile app

[gaijin]

Ok, I’ll bite. Could you repeat that in a voice we can read?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[kid-kapow]

Whats the turn radius

183 r20 4.4kg 141-111-133
191 r22 4.6kg 141-112-133

[MagnificentUnicorn]

Ok, I’ll bite. Could you repeat that in a voice we can read?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Put the bottle down buddy


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Bandit Man]

183 r20 4.4kg 141-111-133
191 r22 4.6kg 141-112-133

Boy, those figures are awfully close to Sender 110 specs, right down to the ski weights.

Curious to hear more about the construction. The Dynastar hybrid core (like the MFree 108) with a smidge less camber in the SF110 shape could be money.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[roQer]

MF108 with a modern metal frame construction like Mantra 102 or Nordica Unleashed would be money. The suspension of the hybrid core is not the bestI MO. I dunno if version 2 of the hybrid core changes much. I love how the MF108 skis but the lack of dampness and poor edge hold are sometimes killing me.

[2FUNKY]

If it’s so firm that edge hold and dampness are an issue I’m on the wrong ski like the mfree and slap on a skinnier more damp ski like a FL105 or R99.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Bandit Man]

If it’s so firm that edge hold and dampness are an issue I’m on the wrong ski like the mfree and slap on a skinnier more damp ski like a FL105 or R99.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I second that. MFree108 is an amazing “soft conditions” daily driver. They only come out in appropriate conditions and they always shine there.

[shroom]

are you saying they don’t charge?

[Bandit Man]

are you saying they don’t charge?

They charge just fine as long as conditions are soft. Firm groomers and variable start to bring out their shortcomings, IMO.

Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums