Whats the best ski for me: I want a double tip, rocker, really light ski, 75-84, 155-170, I ski the mountain, but look for the trails and small bumps, no black diamond and no downhill fast, I like to ski the mountain, side to side. Thanks.
Hello! It sounds like a narrower twin tip would be the best option for you. You might end up going a little wider than 84, however, as there aren't many skis that narrow with the characteristics you're looking for. Atomic Bent 90 would be a good example of something that checks all your boxes, but is a little wider than your range. The Volkl Bash 86 is similar, but a little narrower. There are quite a lot of options in that mid-80 twin tip category, actually. The other option for you, which I think worth considering, would be eliminating the need for a twin tip. I know you mention you want it, but I'm curious if you really need the twin tip shape? If you're not skiing switch or using it in the park, you could stick with a more directional ski that may be more beneficial. M-Pro 85, Atomic Maverick 86 C, Black Crows Vertis, Elan Ripstick 88, Rossignol Experience 86 Basalt, Volkl Kanjo 84, those would all be good directional all-mountain skis to consider.
How does this ski compare to a head Kore 87? Especially off Piste. I would imagine the m pro 85 is softer flexing and thus more forgiving, but that Kore 87 is much lighter and has more intuitive turn initiation. Curious to hear your take.
Kore is a little easier off-piste just because its lighter and has a looser tail. You're right that the M-Pro is a little softer, but it's not THAT soft, so the difference off-piste really comes from the difference in tail shape than anything else. Turn initiation is fairly similar between the two, actually, it's more how they finish the turn. Hope that answers your question!
I like mid 80s for "grab and go" if unsure of conditions, I do feel like someone could make a more camberd ski in the segment, the tip rocker of the deacon 84 v-werks annoys when super hard conditions, anything else is great.
If you think of what an aspirational track day car is, it's a Porsche GT3. Until you've driven one on track at speed, you don't really get it. The reason the car works so well is that at speed, you have so much grip in the rear - i.e. you can trust the back end to hold - sort of exactly like this type of ski design - a front that you can float in, but a rear you can trust you can lean on to exit with speed - it's a skier's ski. Now, this may not be the type of ski that works for you, where you ski and how you ski, but it reminds me in a way of my favorite Volkl RaceTiger SL 170, not the FIS spec race ski, but the 'retail' version - it has a small amount of front rocker and a wider tip - both that help you float over crap when needed but an amazing tail that holds even on ice. Maybe Dynastar/Rossi should try and use an All Mountain High-Performance Skiing Marketing pitch for these skis. Great review.
Great analogy, Paul! I do think they should be marketing the M-Pro line as a high-performance all-mountain ski for skiers with well established technique and lots of experience. It's almost like they're unsure of what they have, or tentative to really lean on that side of the conversation. They're noticeably different than most everything else on the market, and I think that's really cool.
Dynastar Mpro 90. Fits this description. Slightly playful fronts. Solid underfoot and tails. GREAT EXPERT ALL MOUNTAIN SKI. Ski essentials recommended them. I love them...
it is suposed to be fun,i used to think that really good skiers or heavy skiers need 2 sheets of metal etc... No more, i know now that in order to have fun you have to let go of your ego and misconception.thank's guys!
The move from fiberglass to metal between the 85 and 90 does make a difference in terms of available power and smoothness, but the mid-range of the skis are still pretty similar. I don't think the 90 is too much, although they both have relatively stiff tails.
It's actually a relatively similar shape to the Navigator 85 with the longer tip rocker, but minimal tail rocker. It's a little more powerful than the Navigator, however. More like if you were to take the Navigator 85 and the Brahma 82 and combine their feel. Shape of the Navigator, feel of the Brahma, although Brahma is a little stiffer/heavier/etc.
Hi, i'm 182 and have a weight about 154. I love fast quick turns, moguls and soft snow, but almost only on the trail. I ski with a more narrow foot position than the most others, more like a "classical" style. So i would like a ski without a bright front. I landed here or on the Brahma 82, am I right here? And which size do you recommend for me? I actually have a Giant Slalom sized ski and i'm very fine with it, but it's too old and short now. I'm thinking now of something different, that maybe fits better to my style.
Good conversational video. Yes, thank you in stressing some reality check. For light weight skier or recreational 8 skiing days per season overlook the idea is about having fun skis and there is no requirement to use burly skis (many are still doing, Hey look at I am on wide Ti skis and put lots of work to ski it. That is good if you had fun to work the skis). Should mention it, in Dynastar M-free & M-pro section of the "2023 men's 100 mm all mountain ski comparison with SkiEssesntiaal" to check this video (or for Nordica enforcer to check for santa ana may benefit recreational or light weight skier). Vise versa few stronger women skier may benefit stiffer men's skis. If I could pivot the lighter skis easier, reduce milliseconds of speed and gain more snow contact time on the mogul and maintain good control with M-free, why not and no need to do skipping dolphin style turn. For us looking for fun skis to enjoy, simple thankyou for them doing the testing and thumb up to the video.
Great Ski review and better conversation. It is amazing what you can reveal about ANYTHING, when you just kick things around a little with a trusted colleague, partner or Ski reviewer. I was ready to flip a coin on these or the Volkl Deacon 74's but based on the review - 'Wide Needs to be Tried!' (See what I did there?) Thanks guys! Great piece. Subscribed.
I like it! I think that if you're mainly on trail but still want something that will handle more than just the bulletproof, the 85 is a great option. If front side and racing is more your style then it's tough to beat Deacon. The versatility of the M-Pro certainly shines, and pairs well with the carving and on-trail prowess. The Deacon is more of a one-trick pony, but it does that trick quite impressively.
Just bought the M-Pro 85 1 hour ago because I wanted to hold carves in a way rental skis cant but I want forgiveness as I learn morguls which I am totally a beginner at. Love this reinforcement of my decision haha.
You guys have the best job in the world, for sure. As always, very insightful. As Geoff points out, more skiers should choose skis that enable them to have fun. I don't think the ski manufacturers have grasped that most of us would probably not be best served by their 'best' skis. There are lots of us, like me, who are middle aged and older, maybe quite heavy but who still want to ski well. We would drive large comfortable cars or 4x4s that are smooth, stable but can cope with anything. And can go fast if some silly teenager tries to race us off the lights. We are not interested in racing, tricks or really difficult runs. We can afford the best but maybe the 'best' skis are not meant for us. Anyway, thanks guys, always interesting and worth watching.
Hey Steve! I think there'a a lot of truth to what you're saying here. It's a conversation we have with manufacturers fairly regularly and historically it's definitely been a problem with how the industry in general markets and values certain skis. I do, however, think we're starting to see somewhat of a shift of manufacturers making high quality products that aren't too demanding to ski. You bring up a good point that your demographic of skiers can often afford the "best" skis, but that they're not always appropriate. I give a ton of kudos to brands like Elan who are putting a tremendous amount of technology in their skis (Ripsticks are the best example), and they're certainly high-end products, but they're relatively easy to ski, approachable, and never punishing or demanding. They've earned a strong following with those skis, and I think other manufacturers will take notice and respond accordingly, at least I hope they do.
HI Veselin! The Montero is quite a bit heavier and more stable. Very similar in terms of shape, but the Montero skier is likely looking for more performance and has a higher level of skill. The Dynastar skier values lighter weight and maneuverability while still keeping a higher-performance ceiling. I'd rather ski the Dynastar in bumps, trees, and off-trail situations while the Montero is more at home on groomers and firmer snow. Have fun! SE
I'm Bobs size and weight and ski closer to 100 days a year, bob is the norm. Be like Bob. I'm very happy to see they are putting out non noodles. For us bigger boys it makes such a difference.
Great Ski review!! It always has pained me to see people buy skis , and have NO knowledge of what they are buying,(thats why i am always asking you two about all the new skis) they like the color, they like the brand, etc and they do not even demo the ski, its sad!! I will never forget the day i went to a demo days and skied at least 10 different skis, and out of all of them, only 2 really impressed me (over what i had been skiing) and 1 was better then the other , and that is the one i purchased, if i had just walked into a ski store and bought off the rack, it probably would have ended up being one of the skis i did not like, but i would NOT have ever known what i was missing. And you hit it on the nose, about skis that are (99 to 110) I hope people that see your review take it to heart, they will have alot more fun. GREAT JOB AGAIN!! And i have one last question for the year, and this is ONLY for the skis that have NO metal in them, out of all the (skis and models and widths) , you have tested which would be the ski with the most vibration damping???
Hey Kim! Thanks. I agree. I hope skiers take reviews like this seriously. I think one of the biggest problems for certain skiers is the self-assessment process. Skiers are generally very ego driven, which can often get you in trouble. What you think you ski like might not actually be an accurate representation of what you ACTUALLY ski like, but that's kind of a different conversation. To answer your question, I still have to give it to Elan for "best vibration damping without metal." The Ripstick Black Editions in particular have incredible vibration damping and don't use any metal whatsoever. It's darn impressive.
Oh boy is this great!! Schools out for summer and we are still getting ski reviews
Whats the best ski for me: I want a double tip, rocker, really light ski, 75-84, 155-170, I ski the mountain, but look for the trails and small bumps, no black diamond and no downhill fast, I like to ski the mountain, side to side. Thanks.
Hello! It sounds like a narrower twin tip would be the best option for you. You might end up going a little wider than 84, however, as there aren't many skis that narrow with the characteristics you're looking for. Atomic Bent 90 would be a good example of something that checks all your boxes, but is a little wider than your range. The Volkl Bash 86 is similar, but a little narrower. There are quite a lot of options in that mid-80 twin tip category, actually.
The other option for you, which I think worth considering, would be eliminating the need for a twin tip. I know you mention you want it, but I'm curious if you really need the twin tip shape? If you're not skiing switch or using it in the park, you could stick with a more directional ski that may be more beneficial. M-Pro 85, Atomic Maverick 86 C, Black Crows Vertis, Elan Ripstick 88, Rossignol Experience 86 Basalt, Volkl Kanjo 84, those would all be good directional all-mountain skis to consider.
New graphics are soooo nice 🤩 Dynastar has been killing it lately
Agree 100%. It's nice to see somewhat of a resurgence from Dynastar over the past couple years.
How does this ski compare to a head Kore 87? Especially off Piste. I would imagine the m pro 85 is softer flexing and thus more forgiving, but that Kore 87 is much lighter and has more intuitive turn initiation. Curious to hear your take.
Kore is a little easier off-piste just because its lighter and has a looser tail. You're right that the M-Pro is a little softer, but it's not THAT soft, so the difference off-piste really comes from the difference in tail shape than anything else. Turn initiation is fairly similar between the two, actually, it's more how they finish the turn. Hope that answers your question!
I like mid 80s for "grab and go" if unsure of conditions, I do feel like someone could make a more camberd ski in the segment, the tip rocker of the deacon 84 v-werks annoys when super hard conditions, anything else is great.
If you think of what an aspirational track day car is, it's a Porsche GT3. Until you've driven one on track at speed, you don't really get it. The reason the car works so well is that at speed, you have so much grip in the rear - i.e. you can trust the back end to hold - sort of exactly like this type of ski design - a front that you can float in, but a rear you can trust you can lean on to exit with speed - it's a skier's ski. Now, this may not be the type of ski that works for you, where you ski and how you ski, but it reminds me in a way of my favorite Volkl RaceTiger SL 170, not the FIS spec race ski, but the 'retail' version - it has a small amount of front rocker and a wider tip - both that help you float over crap when needed but an amazing tail that holds even on ice. Maybe Dynastar/Rossi should try and use an All Mountain High-Performance Skiing Marketing pitch for these skis. Great review.
Great analogy, Paul! I do think they should be marketing the M-Pro line as a high-performance all-mountain ski for skiers with well established technique and lots of experience. It's almost like they're unsure of what they have, or tentative to really lean on that side of the conversation. They're noticeably different than most everything else on the market, and I think that's really cool.
Dynastar Mpro 90. Fits this description. Slightly playful fronts. Solid underfoot and tails. GREAT EXPERT ALL MOUNTAIN SKI. Ski essentials recommended them. I love them...
Thank you for the review. I love the 85-95mm category.
it is suposed to be fun,i used to think that really good skiers or heavy skiers need 2 sheets of metal etc... No more, i know now that in order to have fun you have to let go of your ego and misconception.thank's guys!
Yup! It's not like anyone's keeping score out there... Might as well make it as fun as possible!
So it seems like there's a pretty big step up between the 85 and the 90? Is the 90 going to be too much for an intermediate learning to carve?
The move from fiberglass to metal between the 85 and 90 does make a difference in terms of available power and smoothness, but the mid-range of the skis are still pretty similar. I don't think the 90 is too much, although they both have relatively stiff tails.
How does this compare to skis like the Nordica Navigator 85 and Blizzard Brahma 82?
It's actually a relatively similar shape to the Navigator 85 with the longer tip rocker, but minimal tail rocker. It's a little more powerful than the Navigator, however. More like if you were to take the Navigator 85 and the Brahma 82 and combine their feel. Shape of the Navigator, feel of the Brahma, although Brahma is a little stiffer/heavier/etc.
Hi, i'm 182 and have a weight about 154. I love fast quick turns, moguls and soft snow, but almost only on the trail. I ski with a more narrow foot position than the most others, more like a "classical" style. So i would like a ski without a bright front. I landed here or on the Brahma 82, am I right here? And which size do you recommend for me?
I actually have a Giant Slalom sized ski and i'm very fine with it, but it's too old and short now. I'm thinking now of something different, that maybe fits better to my style.
Good conversational video. Yes, thank you in stressing some reality check. For light weight skier or recreational 8 skiing days per season overlook the idea is about having fun skis and there is no requirement to use burly skis (many are still doing, Hey look at I am on wide Ti skis and put lots of work to ski it. That is good if you had fun to work the skis).
Should mention it, in Dynastar M-free & M-pro section of the "2023 men's 100 mm all mountain ski comparison with SkiEssesntiaal" to check this video (or for Nordica enforcer to check for santa ana may benefit recreational or light weight skier).
Vise versa few stronger women skier may benefit stiffer men's skis. If I could pivot the lighter skis easier, reduce milliseconds of speed and gain more snow contact time on the mogul and maintain good control with M-free, why not and no need to do skipping dolphin style turn.
For us looking for fun skis to enjoy, simple thankyou for them doing the testing and thumb up to the video.
Thanks for the thanks!
Did you ski this in South America or somewhere cold now?
I wish! We just filmed a lot over the past season and still have plenty of reviews and unseen footage to share!
Great Ski review and better conversation. It is amazing what you can reveal about ANYTHING, when you just kick things around a little with a trusted colleague, partner or Ski reviewer.
I was ready to flip a coin on these or the Volkl Deacon 74's but based on the review - 'Wide Needs to be Tried!' (See what I did there?)
Thanks guys! Great piece. Subscribed.
I like it!
I think that if you're mainly on trail but still want something that will handle more than just the bulletproof, the 85 is a great option. If front side and racing is more your style then it's tough to beat Deacon. The versatility of the M-Pro certainly shines, and pairs well with the carving and on-trail prowess. The Deacon is more of a one-trick pony, but it does that trick quite impressively.
Just bought the M-Pro 85 1 hour ago because I wanted to hold carves in a way rental skis cant but I want forgiveness as I learn morguls which I am totally a beginner at. Love this reinforcement of my decision haha.
Have fun!
You guys have the best job in the world, for sure. As always, very insightful. As Geoff points out, more skiers should choose skis that enable them to have fun. I don't think the ski manufacturers have grasped that most of us would probably not be best served by their 'best' skis. There are lots of us, like me, who are middle aged and older, maybe quite heavy but who still want to ski well. We would drive large comfortable cars or 4x4s that are smooth, stable but can cope with anything. And can go fast if some silly teenager tries to race us off the lights. We are not interested in racing, tricks or really difficult runs. We can afford the best but maybe the 'best' skis are not meant for us. Anyway, thanks guys, always interesting and worth watching.
Hey Steve! I think there'a a lot of truth to what you're saying here. It's a conversation we have with manufacturers fairly regularly and historically it's definitely been a problem with how the industry in general markets and values certain skis. I do, however, think we're starting to see somewhat of a shift of manufacturers making high quality products that aren't too demanding to ski. You bring up a good point that your demographic of skiers can often afford the "best" skis, but that they're not always appropriate. I give a ton of kudos to brands like Elan who are putting a tremendous amount of technology in their skis (Ripsticks are the best example), and they're certainly high-end products, but they're relatively easy to ski, approachable, and never punishing or demanding. They've earned a strong following with those skis, and I think other manufacturers will take notice and respond accordingly, at least I hope they do.
how would this beauties compare with the Montero AR from Stöckli
HI Veselin!
The Montero is quite a bit heavier and more stable. Very similar in terms of shape, but the Montero skier is likely looking for more performance and has a higher level of skill. The Dynastar skier values lighter weight and maneuverability while still keeping a higher-performance ceiling. I'd rather ski the Dynastar in bumps, trees, and off-trail situations while the Montero is more at home on groomers and firmer snow. Have fun!
SE
Another M Free review for the 90?
We'll try to work that in!
In which length did you test them?
I (Jeff) was skiing the 176 cm length.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks! How tall are you? I am 178. Would you recommend the 176 cm length for me?
@@MarcoBeierle Same for me, I'm just about 178 cm exactly. I weight around 160, sometimes slightly less. I would recommend the 176 for your size, yes.
@@SkiEssentials Thanks!!! Great ski reviews, always....
I see far more people out there that are under gunned on their skis, than are on too much ski.
Interesting take!
In June?
We filmed A LOT of skiing this past season and tested A LOT of skis, so we have plenty of footage and reviews to share throughout the summer!
I'm Bobs size and weight and ski closer to 100 days a year, bob is the norm. Be like Bob. I'm very happy to see they are putting out non noodles. For us bigger boys it makes such a difference.
Great Ski review!! It always has pained me to see people buy skis , and have NO knowledge of what they are buying,(thats why i am always asking you two about all the new skis) they like the color, they like the brand, etc and they do not even demo the ski, its sad!! I will never forget the day i went to a demo days and skied at least 10 different skis, and out of all of them, only 2 really impressed me (over what i had been skiing) and 1 was better then the other , and that is the one i purchased, if i had just walked into a ski store and bought off the rack, it probably would have ended up being one of the skis i did not like, but i would NOT have ever known what i was missing. And you hit it on the nose, about skis that are (99 to 110) I hope people that see your review take it to heart, they will have alot more fun. GREAT JOB AGAIN!! And i have one last question for the year, and this is ONLY for the skis that have NO metal in them, out of all the (skis and models and widths) , you have tested which would be the ski with the most vibration damping???
Hey Kim! Thanks. I agree. I hope skiers take reviews like this seriously. I think one of the biggest problems for certain skiers is the self-assessment process. Skiers are generally very ego driven, which can often get you in trouble. What you think you ski like might not actually be an accurate representation of what you ACTUALLY ski like, but that's kind of a different conversation.
To answer your question, I still have to give it to Elan for "best vibration damping without metal." The Ripstick Black Editions in particular have incredible vibration damping and don't use any metal whatsoever. It's darn impressive.