Long and heavy charger skis

[GregK]

@ski otter 2 Still not making a longer length of the Sender Free 118 next year than the 186cm again. Booo!!!

Thinking the new MFree 112 might be interesting as I’m hearing it’s much more similar to the Sender Free 110 in mount(-3.5cm), taper and the dimensions are just a hair wider. The latest core on the MFree 108 and 112 are supposed to be more damp than the previous versions too. And the 112 comes in a 191cm.

Revolt 114 much more similar to your blanks in shape and feel but with a longer radius and the typical “stiffest in front of the binding toe and decreasing back and forward from there. The blank a bit softer tip and tail but ramps up stiffer underfoot and remains strong the whole mid section.

 

[ski otter 2]

Thanks. Great! This is all interesting. Much to absorb.

Yeah, that stiffness pattern of the longest Blanks gives them a lot of character,
and versatility: charge or drift or do a lot of turns, or all three by turns; fast or slow.


Does this stiffer new Dynastar 112 mean they are discontinuing the 118, I think the original version?
I think I heard that. Or you already mentioned that. Sigh.

Anyway, to me those Proto skis (especially the wider 118 version) were stiff enough: never had a problem with the wider one
anywhere, including in pretty deep crud. It just stayed stable and not bothered by anything you could throw at it,
while being both charger and playful, and drifting sideways so well. Unique. Loved it.
(For me, in the longest versions, 19X only.)

These things rocked all over, 108 and 118, but were standouts in powder bump fields.
I especially liked the 118, when I skied them back to back the same day.
It just seemed to do everything a bit better, including float, carve anywhere in soft snow or soft groomers,
knife through crud, handle transitions, do soft bumps and soft trees, drift sideways, shed speed, handle speed,
and respond intuitively.

My main problem with the two fatter Dynastar skis was they had an odd carbon/plastic vibration and even sound
that was so carbony, or maybe like brittle plastic - to me slightly annoying. You could feel this as a steady impact
vibration, but it didn't really effect the ski's performance: just the feel to the things, which I didn't like so much.
(Maybe they solved this in later versions; just don't know.)

One year I took out three top powder/crud skis into fairly deep, light powder at Winter Park, and skied them back to back,
going head to head demoing all three: the 108 and 118 longest Dynastars, and the longest Head Kore 117
(from the first year that Kore 117 was modified, rocker and mount point, for the longest length).

My objective was to find a powder/crud ski that had more float than the Pettitors or the Black Ops 118; and more float than
the best of my other soft snow or powder or crud skis, without being a ski that got tossed in chop/crud.
I'd narrowed it down to those three, knowing I'd probably prefer the two fatter skis, but wanting to test the two Dynastars back to back.

Head to head , I liked the longest Dynastar Proto 118 and the longest Kore 117 by far best - almost equally, in almost every way:
except the Head floated slightly higher; the Proto 118 drifted much better side to side; and there was that bothersome sound/vibration
to both the Proto Dynastars only.

I ended up getting a pair of the Heads, instead of the Proto 118s.
(I use it on smoother soft snow days over 4 or 5 inches, when it seems that extra float might be nice.)

But the 118 Dynastars were so great also. Hate to see them go.
( Drifty, yet they charge.)

 

[GregK]

Yes, the MFree 112 replacing the MFree 118 now. Like Salomon replacing their old 118 with the 112 Blank it seems their sales of the 118 models weren’t that great although unreal how many Bent 120 skis I’ve seen out West the last few days. Haven’t seen one pair of Blackops 118 but have seen about 25 pairs at least of Sender Free 110 if that’s an indication of Rossi sales.

Early reviews of the new MFree 108 with the new core always talk about how quiet and damp the ski is with the same specs and dimensions so I have high hopes for that new MFree 112. Wished it was a bit wider too as a wider ski with a longer 191cm option would be awesome and seems very close in width to the sister company’s Sender Free 110.

 

[ski otter 2]

Good overview of the understandable reality of selling skis now.

It's really understandable that the 110 to 112 widths (even 108 to 114 at the outer limits), and shorter lengths,
would be more desirable and sell better for most people. Most people can ski one day on the weekends
and during holidays at most. It makes little sense for them to have more than one, or at most, two skis per person,
for even the most enthusiastic - and prosperous - families. One ski for each in a family, mostly. Given this reality, in terms of expense
limits and practicality of space driving, and versatility, this width range often makes sense for a one - or two - ski quiver.

(Whereas I'm mostly focused on the "wow" factor of particular skis, what they do best, irrespective of their practicality
for a one ski quiver, often.)

The Rossi Free 110 is such a good ski, given these parameters. The things carve really well on Rocky Mountain groomers.
Just a blast (more so by a hair than the Blanks). That same carving ability carries over into a few inches of fresh,
a few more inches of fresh. And thus most days during a season, these skis are optimal or close for everything.
To me they are not quite as versatile as the Blanks in terms of turn shapes, going fast or slow, doing bumps and trees,
but it's close - especially if one goes with a shorter Rossi 110, rather than my longer version, which for me is soft snow
and milder terrain biased. (To me, the shorter Blanks are mostly "meh" skis, whereas the shorter Ross 110s are more
interesting.)

I never felt there was a problem with the dampness of the Dynastar Protos, 108 or 118, even though they were not as damp
as the Black Ops, Blanks, Billy Goats or some other skis. The 108 was less damp than the 118s, surprisingly. Maybe that's
now been fixed, dunno. But the "noise" - actually the odd vibration quality - maybe that's been fixed also - sounds like maybe so.
The two wider skis were both just more fun in powder, and more precise and easy to ski in powder and powder bumps also -
and on groomers (even with the difficulties of them being wider). Just noticeable, meaningfully different, better, with the fatter,
longest skis.

Maybe that's been changed now, in these two new Dynastar 108 and 112 versions. Hopeful.

Guess I'll have to demo them, if I can.

 

[COSkier87]

Just curious, when you're all using your heavy charging skis, how long do you usually ski for? How much vert? etc.

After modifying my technique to deliver more power to my M102s, I've only been able to get half days and about 20k vert on blues before my legs give out. It's my 4th day testing out this new technique, so I'm hoping my legs catch up!

 

[arildGFB]

Anywhere between 3 and 6 hours worth (depends on night or full day).

 

[SlideWright]

Good overview of the understandable reality of selling skis now.

It's really understandable that the 110 to 112 widths (even 108 to 114 at the outer limits), and shorter lengths,
would be more desirable and sell better for most people. Most people can ski one day on the weekends
and during holidays at most. It makes little sense for them to have more than one, or at most, two skis per person,
for even the most enthusiastic - and prosperous - families. One ski for each in a family, mostly. Given this reality, in terms of expense
limits and practicality of space driving, and versatility, this width range often makes sense for a one - or two - ski quiver.

(Whereas I'm mostly focused on the "wow" factor of particular skis, what they do best, irrespective of their practicality
for a one ski quiver, often.)

The Rossi Free 110 is such a good ski, given these parameters. The things carve really well on Rocky Mountain groomers.
Just a blast (more so by a hair than the Blanks). That same carving ability carries over into a few inches of fresh,
a few more inches of fresh. And thus most days during a season, these skis are optimal or close for everything.
To me they are not quite as versatile as the Blanks in terms of turn shapes, going fast or slow, doing bumps and trees,
but it's close - especially if one goes with a shorter Rossi 110, rather than my longer version, which for me is soft snow
and milder terrain biased. (To me, the shorter Blanks are mostly "meh" skis, whereas the shorter Ross 110s are more
interesting.)

I never felt there was a problem with the dampness of the Dynastar Protos, 108 or 118, even though they were not as damp
as the Black Ops, Blanks, Billy Goats or some other skis. The 108 was less damp than the 118s, surprisingly. Maybe that's
now been fixed, dunno. But the "noise" - actually the odd vibration quality - maybe that's been fixed also - sounds like maybe so.
The two wider skis were both just more fun in powder, and more precise and easy to ski in powder and powder bumps also -
and on groomers (even with the difficulties of them being wider). Just noticeable, meaningfully different, better, with the fatter,
longest skis.

Maybe that's been changed now, in these two new Dynastar 108 and 112 versions. Hopeful.

Guess I'll have to demo them, if I can.

Demo some Icelantic Pioneer 109s while you are at it ....and buy Colorado. Talk about plowing through crud and fun.

 

[ski otter 2]

Hi! Thanks. I have demoed the Icelantic Pioneer 109s, on two soft snow days at Loveland. They are a soft snow ski that
carves well also. Great ski.

(But for myself, I already have some skis of around that width I personally like more, so I didn't go further.)

 

[SlideWright]

Hi! Thanks. I have demoed the Icelantic Pioneer 109s, on two soft snow days at Loveland. They are a soft snow ski that
carves well also. Great ski.

(But for myself, I already have some skis of around that width I personally like more, so I didn't go further.)

Then you'd love the Keepers. I got the Pioneers as their 'not so little brother'. When those beast are feeding you will be smilin'. As a friend put it:

"The PNW "powder" is too thick for Keepers (just float on top) but had a feeding frenzy at Alta and Jackson Hole last year on our van trip. I'll take mine to my grave. I thought of you when I used them because you said they always make you smile and I looked like I had a coat hanger in me mouth after the first run."

AND

"I continue to love my Keepers, I still feel they are the best deep powder and slush skis in the world, or as my poetic friend says "when they are feeding." They have that unique step rocker in the front that gives them a control quality in deep snow I have never experienced before, and which unfortunately makes them slower than shit on the flat. The bottom line is that I believe the design of the Keepers was actually a lucky accident. It's like they formed them with rocker and then bent the tips a little more. It is a completely unnatural profile compared to any other ski I have ever seen. It's like the Icelantic Shaman where they went weird, got lucky, and ended up with a cult classic which made their reputation. From what I can tell they have made a lot of other very mediocre skis with stunning top sheets, although they do have a few good ones. They seem to specialize in weird shapes. "

 

[ski otter 2]

Yeah, the Icelantic Keepers bring back memories. A great ski. Distinctive. I almost bought it. Has it been changed?
I demoed it more than once and loved them, a number of years ago. Very much a unique feel to them,
at least back when. I remember the way you could cut them almost sharply in a turn in deep snow......

I think I got a pair of K2 Pettitors 189 instead. That ski is bordering on too much ski for me now,
in some difficult conditions - but not all.

I also liked the 115 Nomads in the 19x length, I think they were. (Or was it the Shamans? Do they come in that width?)

There was an elite skier one year at Loveland, who would come early and ski groomers for the morning,
on those 115 Nomads in that longest length. He did one huge GS laid over turn after another, just beautiful.
When I demoed a pair myself, dang, but I could do sort of the same thing too (though not laid over as far, and
no doubt not as beautiful turns).
Just a magical ski for that use. Surprising for such a wide ski.

 

[SlideWright]

Icelantic hasn’t made the Keeper in years and I guess they recently brought back the Shamans. You’d have to hunt for a used pair. I’ll bet there are some little used ones around. My Keepers are 189 and seem massive but amazingly agile in bumps, tight trees and do carve well. They are pure, heavy and long chargers in 3d and deep snow. They just don’t get out enough, but when they do I couldn’t imagine a more fun and capable ski for me.

 

[Rc231]

Just curious, when you're all using your heavy charging skis, how long do you usually ski for? How much vert? etc.

After modifying my technique to deliver more power to my M102s, I've only been able to get half days and about 20k vert on blues before my legs give out. It's my 4th day testing out this new technique, so I'm hoping my legs catch up!

As long as I have time for. As a bigger guy who likes to ski fast in mixed snow I find a big heavy ski to be less fatiguing than a light or twitchy ski.

 

[GregK]

Just curious, when you're all using your heavy charging skis, how long do you usually ski for? How much vert? etc.

After modifying my technique to deliver more power to my M102s, I've only been able to get half days and about 20k vert on blues before my legs give out. It's my 4th day testing out this new technique, so I'm hoping my legs catch up!

Curious what exactly you’re doing differently because it should be less fatiguing allowing your charger skis to run more with their increased stability. Sounds like you are “fighting the hill” more now?

On blue groomers only and high speed lifts, 35k to 50k aren’t too hard for 54 year old me. Steep bumps all day and 25k is a workout though.

 

[salvatore]

As long as I have time for. As a bigger guy who likes to ski fast in mixed snow I find a big heavy ski to be less fatiguing than a light or twitchy ski.

As a smaller guy who likes to ski fast in mixed snow... Definitely agree!

 

[Even_Stevens]

As a smaller guy who likes to ski fast in mixed snow... Definitely agree!

The “liveliness” of a lighter ski like a Ripstick is more tiring than the solidity of a ski with similar dimensions with a couple sheets of metal in it, or just a thicc heavy non metal ski like the Dynastar M-Frees.

 

[salvatore]

The “liveliness” of a lighter ski like a Ripstick is more tiring than the solidity of a ski with similar dimensions with a couple sheets of metal in it, or just a thicc heavy non metal ski like the Dynastar M-Frees.

That's why I keep adding skis from HL. No metal, just lots of stout timber and rubber. So heavy, so damp. There is no replacement for mass.

But I also love my Moments. And this week... added a Billy Goat! It's in the bag for next week's trip.

 

[COSkier87]

Curious what exactly you’re doing differently because it should be less fatiguing allowing your charger skis to run more with their increased stability. Sounds like you are “fighting the hill” more now?

On blue groomers only and high speed lifts, 35k to 50k aren’t too hard for 54 year old me. Steep bumps all day and 25k is a workout though.

Previously my problem (early this season and last season(my 1st season)) was too much bracing of my outside leg, A-framing, back seating, and staying really tense on blues. This made me super stiff, and I'd wear out pretty quickly. On greens I was fine, and able to pull off short turns pretty well and consistently. The steepness and the speed of blues just seemed like something that was a bit of a step up for me and I couldn't quite get down larger turns.

This season, I started getting much more forward than I was used to, keeping my knees closer together, leaning into the direction of the turns, and getting lower, which all helped get better edge angles. Now it feels pretty seamless to go from edge to edge if I just let the skis do their thing, and it's a lot less work. It feels like a night and day difference because I just focus on where my upper body is pointed throughout the turns, keep my core engaged, and I completely relax my legs as they go from side to side. The tension and bracing are virtually gone.

Where I've been getting more tired lately is that I've also been experimenting with intentionally driving the downhill ski a lot harder than I need to just to get a feel for different levels of pressure and the pop response. It's probably not really necessary, but I like to play around when I get comfortable and try different things.

 

[TahoeJoe]

Im
Thinking I’m gonna separate with my Moment Countach 110’s
They’re not my kind of ski
Think they’re made for a younger demographic

188’d with Salomon strive 14 with the oil water mix color.
Skid 4 runs on them

basically brand bew
26.5 boots gw with 305 soles

or talk me out of it
Should I give them a chance? Is it all in my head?

 

[dwoovre]

Im
Thinking I’m gonna separate with my Moment Countach 110’s
They’re not my kind of ski
Think they’re made for a younger demographic

188’d with Salomon strive 14 with the oil water mix color.
Skid 4 runs on them

basically brand bew
26.5 boots gw with 305 soles

or talk me out of it
Should I give them a chance? Is it all in my head?

Why don’t you like them?

 

[ski otter 2]

Those kill crud in the Rockies and far West. Too narrow for powder optimally there,
but great for medium inches once crudded up.

I'd guess too wide for Back East hardpan,
except on a new snow day with enough snow to bury the hardpan, even if quickly crudded up.

I'd have thought its extra precision over the Wildcat would make
it pretty great in those conditions back East, even when you'd be scraping the hardpan here and there.

What actually bothers you about them?