# Dynastar Mythic Riders vs ???



## polski (Oct 27, 2009)

Looking to double the size of my quiver, i.e. buy a second pair of skis. Have done various research including this helpful AZ thread. Now I have questions specific to my own situation as I am homing in on a pair of Dynastar Mythic Riders at a very attractive price and want to make sure I'm not passing up a better alternative, all things considered: 


age 46, 6'0", 230
Level 7+ skier I'd say, maybe 8 except for the "good technique" part when on the most challenging terrain ... Reasonably aggressive but not a big air or speed freak. First skied 35 years ago but mostly fell away from it for a while and have only really gotten serious about it in the last four years or so. For those of you familiar with MRG, let me put it this way: I've now hit everything on-map there except Paradise and Lift Line; often have fair to pretty serious trouble on Fall Line/Creamery, Chute and Panther but keep working on those; have become increasingly confident and proficient skiing Catamount Bowl, Lynx, Beaver and Canyon; absolutely love and have a blast on Lower Antelope; and haven't done much off-map yet other than the Rat and one tentative foray on demos into Jay's Glades. 
I seek out powder days and primo spring corn. Happy in chowder and am learning to ski low/medium-angle glades (at MRG I do OK now in Gazelle Glades; had fun last year at Wildcat in Catacomb Glades and the ravine at Ragged). I'm not up to real tight/steep trees just yet but in part this may be because of my current equipment. Groomers don't do much for me anymore and I'm mostly going to pass on the bulletproof days. Yeah I'm a snow snob ...
I'm not an avid mogul skier but enjoy them from time to time, especially in the spring. I had knee problems in the past so try not to inflict undue wear & tear on them.
I currently have Atomic Beta Ride 8.20 in 190 (106/66/90) with Marker 1300 Ti Pistons. This rig is five or six years old and it's fine for cruising groomers but not so much for the kinds of skiing I've now come to enjoy most (since discovering MRG and powder, to boil it down to the essentials). They are particularly atrocious performers in big corn bumps -- they just want to run in the troughs, not turn.

If I had my druthers I'd be looking to add two pairs -- one a real fat ski for serious powder days, and something in between that and what I have now. But I'm barely in a position to add one pair at this point. Given this constraint, I'm thinking a waist in the high '80s probably makes the most sense, with good responsiveness/pop but not too noodly.

I demoed Mythic Riders last year on spring corn and liked them a lot. I see 07-08 leftovers new on eBay with PX14 Ti lifter wide bindings for $329 buy-it-now including shipping, from a reputable seller. Comps from what I understand include the Elan 888 (though from one side-by-side review I read, I think the Mythic Riders are a bit more up my alley) and the Head Monster 88s but I'm not finding either of those online for anywhere close to the $329 price. (My understanding is only the graphics have changed on the Mythic Riders since they were introduced in 2007.)

Am I missing some other viable option for what I need and at similar bang/buck?

Also I'm thinking of the MRs in 178. My 190s are definitely too long for most of the skiing I do now. MRs in 184 are an option but since I'm looking to improve my tree skiing I'm leaning toward something shorter.

If you've read this far, thanks ... and thanks in advance for any advice.


----------



## riverc0il (Oct 27, 2009)

Is this going to be a one ski quiver or are you adding a powder ski? Mythic Rider seems like it would make a good one ski quiver for someone that really enjoys natural snow and does not spend much time on groomers. Turn preference, moderate. Not quick and tight radius. As a powder board, I think you can do better by going for a little more width. If this is going to be a one ski quiver and you have a lot of groomer time, maybe not the best bet. 

178 fits your height but I worry about your weight. Maybe up for the 184 if you don't plan on dropping a few pounds. I don't know about the Mythic Rider, but I really lost a lot of pop in my 8000s last year when I packed on a few extra pounds (currently holding at 210lbs at 6'1"). Another option is looking at a ski with a bit more beef underfoot. Especially as a one ski quiver, the Volkl Mantra in 177 might be up your alley. Haven't skied the Elan 888 but I might take that over the Mythic Rider based on specs alone (haven't skied either) but different strokes for different folks. For $329 with PX14 including shipping, that is a steal for the Mythics and if you liked them a lot, what are you waiting for?


----------



## polski (Oct 27, 2009)

I worry about my weight too! Yes I "plan" to drop some pounds, but I've learned I shouldn't base purchases on such plans coming to fruition ...

Literally I'd now have a two-ski quiver, with the old Atomics for cruising groomers/hardpack, though judging from my last two seasons I'd be surprised if I use those more than 10-20% of the time out.  Realistically as I do further research I see what I'm in effect looking to do is upgrade to a one-ski quiver much more in line with the kind of skiing I've come to prefer.

I do wonder if perhaps that one ski should be more like 90-100 in the waist, e.g. the Mantra, Line Prophet 90, Rossi S5. Again my top priorities are fairly steep EC powder and increasingly tighter trees but I don't want to get killed in corn bumps. 

And budget is definitely limited, which from what I've seen so far leaves me with the Mythic Riders and possibly the LP 90s (about which I'm reading good things except for some reports of flimsy top sheet).


----------



## Puck it (Oct 28, 2009)

For your size,  I would stay away from the Mythics's.  I would recommend the Monster 88's but not the Peak 88's(lost the metal core).  The Elan's are probably beefy enough for you also.  I am not sure about the Line's though.  I would say skis with a metal core are best for your size.  I am 5'10" 220lbs and I got rid of my Recons and went with the Monsters.  I was overpowering the Recons.  I just saw Monster 82's on Tramdock for $349 2 days ago.  Also, try Spadout.com and search on the size that you are looking for.


----------



## ta&idaho (Oct 28, 2009)

polski said:


> I demoed Mythic Riders last year on spring corn and liked them a lot.



What size did you demo?  If you liked the 178s, I'd pull the trigger.  Tough to find a ski at that price point (meaning a few years old) that you've demoed and confirmed you like.


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 28, 2009)

If your looking for something in the 90s waist range, check High Society Free Rides.  I'll have more Beta on them as the season goes on, but I think they're going to be a great natural snow, corn, crud ski for me.


----------



## polski (Oct 28, 2009)

The HS are out of my price range unfortunately.

Doing further research now on what would work for my size. I'm pretty sure I demoed the MRs in 178 and as I said I liked them, but since I didn't have anything else to compare to (other than my Atomics, which simply where unsatisfactory for those conditions), I'm reluctant to pull the trigger on that basis alone. The price is mighty tempting though, especially considering the '07/08 is if I'm not mistaken exactly the same ski as the 09/10, aside from the graphics.

Of course now as I read up some more I'm reminded what I *really* want to do is get something AT-capable. For one thing, I'm seeing new Marker Dukes on eBay for $299 shipped ...


----------



## o3jeff (Oct 28, 2009)

I just sold a pair of 169 MR's(the MR 169's seemed shorter than my other skis which are all in the 165-169 range), just felt too small for me (5-8, 185lbs). If I was to do it again I would go with the 178's for my size.

Overall not a bad ski, probably would of been better if it was the next size up for me. Before you make your decision I would demo the Elan 888. I have a pair of Elan 777 and love them for an all around ski.

Not sure if he sold them yet http://forums.alpinezone.com/64161-fs-elan-888alu-177cm-w-eld14-binding-used.html


----------



## polski (Oct 28, 2009)

thanks but I can't spend $600+ for boards alone, and I need more than 84 cm underfoot.

I've read a couple reviews suggesting the Elan 888s aren't great in trees, but others that say they're ok there. ???

Meanwhile, anyone have firsthand experience with Bluehouse Districts? I realize I'm getting pretty far afield of my initial focus in this thread ... but if they'd work for me, new Districts at $376 incl shipping + new Dukes for $300 would solve a few problems at once.


----------



## riverc0il (Oct 29, 2009)

eBay has Fischer Watea 94s going for around $350 which is a great option if you want a powder board that is great in the trees. You start getting that fat though and I think the ski becomes fairly one dimensional. Solid wood core ski without any sheets of titanium. Rocks in powder.


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 29, 2009)

polski said:


> The HS are out of my price range unfortunately.
> 
> .



I purchased mine off of Tramdock for around $250.


----------



## polski (Oct 29, 2009)

riverc0il said:


> eBay has Fischer Watea 94s going for around $350 which is a great option if you want a powder board that is great in the trees. You start getting that fat though and I think the ski becomes fairly one dimensional.



But that's the dimension I want & sorely need now. Can always fall back to my Beta Rides on any predominantly groomer/hardpack days.

The more I read, the fatter I'm thinking ... though this too many pass ;-)  

& thanks DHS. I admit I haven't paid too much attention to gear but now that I'm undergoing this crash course (wait, maybe I should rephrase that), before long I should be positioned to jump on the right deal when I see it.


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 29, 2009)

That's basically what I did last spring.  I was looking for something similar to what you are.  The Watea was high on my list, but I decided to go with a small lesser known brand for a change.


----------



## wa-loaf (Oct 29, 2009)

polski said:


> But that's the dimension I want & sorely need now. Can always fall back to my Beta Rides on any predominantly groomer/hardpack days.
> 
> The more I read, the fatter I'm thinking ... though this too many pass ;-)
> 
> & thanks DHS. I admit I haven't paid too much attention to gear but now that I'm undergoing this crash course (wait, maybe I should rephrase that), before long I should be positioned to jump on the right deal when I see it.



I got the  08/09 Watea 94's (186) with dukes. I haven't ridden them yet, but I sure do like looking at them! :lol:

I did demo the 09/10 Watea last spring. It's a little different from last years model because they started putting their "powder hull" tips on them and bigger turned up tail. I think it made it feel kind of floaty and a big turner. It did have pretty good hold on the icy stuff. I'm hoping without the powder hull it will be a little snappier, but I'll be happy with it either way.


----------



## polski (Oct 30, 2009)

My wife: "Somebody's got a birthday coming up."

Me, looking up from gear reviews on the laptop: "Ah, RIGHT! And I know exactly what I want for a present."

My wife: "Yes?"

Me: "Skis."

I am pleased to report the conversation merely screeched to a halt at that point rather than devolving into a "no way," reminder of certain financial realities, etc.


----------



## deadheadskier (Oct 30, 2009)

polski said:


> My wife: "Somebody's got a birthday coming up."
> 
> Me, looking up from gear reviews on the laptop: "Ah, RIGHT! And I know exactly what I want for a present."
> 
> ...



:lol:

yeah, short of a lottery win, I'm forbidden to buy new skis for a season or two.  3 pairs over the past three years has my non-skiing wife a bit perplexed.


----------



## WJenness (Oct 30, 2009)

deadheadskier said:


> :lol:
> 
> yeah, short of a lottery win, I'm forbidden to buy new skis for a season or two.  3 pairs over the past three years has my non-skiing wife a bit perplexed.



I hope you explained to her that you forgot to change the binding fluid at the end of last season (because you were so busy with housework), and as a result, had to buy new ones this year, because if you didn't it just wouldn't have been safe.

-w


----------



## bigski6969 (Nov 8, 2009)

*Mythic Rider*



polski said:


> Looking to double the size of my quiver, i.e. buy a second pair of skis. Have done various research including this helpful AZ thread. Now I have questions specific to my own situation as I am homing in on a pair of Dynastar Mythic Riders at a very attractive price and want to make sure I'm not passing up a better alternative, all things considered:
> 
> 
> age 46, 6'0", 230
> ...



I agree with your weight I'd rather see you on a 184 also the Dynastar Legend Pro Rider seems that it would suit you a bit better than the Mythic. Bit wider in the shovel, so can handle both groomers as well as powder. Saw some new not drilled Legend Pro Riders online for $380, 09/10s that's a smokin deal. PM me and I'll give you the site, have to go look for it under my pile of papers! LOL Wrote it down somewhere!:uzi:


----------



## bigski6969 (Nov 8, 2009)

*Watea*



wa-loaf said:


> I got the  08/09 Watea 94's (186) with dukes. I haven't ridden them yet, but I sure do like looking at them! :lol:
> 
> I did demo the 09/10 Watea last spring. It's a little different from last years model because they started putting their "powder hull" tips on them and bigger turned up tail. I think it made it feel kind of floaty and a big turner. It did have pretty good hold on the icy stuff. I'm hoping without the powder hull it will be a little snappier, but I'll be happy with it either way.



LOVE the Watea 94s and 84s. Sold my 94s to buy the new Watea 101... SWEET RIDE! Love them demoed them last year, and just had to have a pair. My husband, well he doesn't understand why I need so many pairs. He skis and has 3 pairs, I just go a little overboard! LOLOLOLOL


----------



## riverc0il (Nov 8, 2009)

bigski6969 said:


> I agree with your weight I'd rather see you on a 184 also the Dynastar Legend Pro Rider seems that it would suit you a bit better than the Mythic. Bit wider in the shovel, so can handle both groomers as well as powder. Saw some new not drilled Legend Pro Riders online for $380, 09/10s that's a smokin deal. PM me and I'll give you the site, have to go look for it under my pile of papers! LOL Wrote it down somewhere!:uzi:


Not sure if that is the right ski for a skier that rates themselves as 7+ maybe an 8 except for not great technique. No offense intended towards polski. The weight is definitely an issue but that is a lot of ski for someone with less than the best technique.


----------



## polski (Nov 8, 2009)

riverc0il said:


> Not sure if that is the right ski for a skier that rates themselves as 7+ maybe an 8 except for not great technique. No offense intended towards polski. The weight is definitely an issue but that is a lot of ski for someone with less than the best technique.



No offense taken. I appreciate the frank advice. I'm looking for a ski that will help me improve my technique in the conditions I now prefer.  I suspect that at times my technique was worse than my actual ability because I was bringing the wrong tools to the job (chicken/egg question), but I won't overestimate my ability. 

My current thinking is the Legend Pro Riders are not for me and the Mythic Riders would be a solid upgrade at a great price (new 07/08 184s are a little more than the 179s, $369 incl shipping with PX12 Fluid bindings -- I'm an 8 DIN so those are plenty), but I might get even greater ROI if I can increase that investment to spring for something even fatter. 

So, long story short, what can anyone tell me about 08/09 Volkl Gotamas? I've done a lot of research (keep investigating other options too) and think I have a line on a nice deal for these. My main concern is durability as I've read of some problems with Goats the past two or three model years.


----------



## polski (Nov 8, 2009)

WJenness said:


> I hope you explained to her that you forgot to change the binding fluid at the end of last season (because you were so busy with housework), and as a result, had to buy new ones this year, because if you didn't it just wouldn't have been safe.
> 
> -w


Binding fluid, love it. But I gotta say the "so busy with housework" line is so implausible it would succeed only in getting me my butt kicked and thrown out of said house. 

Yesterday the shop tech going over my newly tuned skis pointed out a number of edge dings, nothing compromising integrity but the sticks are showing their age. I dutifully reported this to my wife and she was sure I'd paid him to say that :-D


----------



## RootDKJ (Nov 8, 2009)

WJenness said:


> I hope you explained to her that you forgot to change the *binding fluid* at the end of last season (because you were so busy with housework), and as a result, had to buy new ones this year, because if you didn't it just wouldn't have been safe.
> 
> -w


ftw :beer:


----------



## bigbog (Nov 9, 2009)

_Files_ and _stones_ are great things....


----------



## polski (Nov 11, 2009)

Thanks all for the input. I ended up fairly far from what I'd initially been thinking, in ski dimensions, bindings and to some extent budget. (Birthday presents and a sweet deal helped with the latter though. I'll be lucky to get a couple lumps of coal for Christmas, but I'm fine with that.) So ...... I've put in an order for the 08/09 Gotamas in 190 with Barons.  

I figure with a two-ski quiver I'm going to have some gaps no matter what. With the goats' 105 waist and my existing pair at 66, one gap may be somewhere in between, but I can live with that, seeing as I have for years now. And I should be so lucky to have days where the 105s are too skinny, especially on the EC. Basically I opted for planks designed for the conditions and kind of skiing I most frequently target -- to get the most out of the really good to great days.

I'm slightly nervous about violating the try-before-you-buy rule but I've researched this enough that I don't think I can go too far astray with this choice. Also very psyched to start earning turns.

Now SNOW PLEASE


----------



## wa-loaf (Nov 12, 2009)

polski said:


> Thanks all for the input. I ended up fairly far from what I'd initially been thinking, in ski dimensions, bindings and to some extent budget. (Birthday presents and a sweet deal helped with the latter though. I'll be lucky to get a couple lumps of coal for Christmas, but I'm fine with that.) So ...... I've put in an order for the 08/09 Gotamas in 190 with Barons.
> 
> I figure with a two-ski quiver I'm going to have some gaps no matter what. With the goats' 105 waist and my existing pair at 66, one gap may be somewhere in between, but I can live with that, seeing as I have for years now. And I should be so lucky to have days where the 105s are too skinny, especially on the EC. Basically I opted for planks designed for the conditions and kind of skiing I most frequently target -- to get the most out of the really good to great days.
> 
> ...



Wow you went big. I think some Watea 84's will fill out the middle for ya ...http://www.sierrasnowboard.com/Fischer-Watea-84-Skis.asp


----------



## bigbog (Nov 12, 2009)

Great stuff polski!...from all I've seen, have yet to read where they sink...


----------



## o3jeff (Nov 12, 2009)

polski said:


> Thanks all for the input. I ended up fairly far from what I'd initially been thinking, in ski dimensions, bindings and to some extent budget. (Birthday presents and a sweet deal helped with the latter though. I'll be lucky to get a couple lumps of coal for Christmas, but I'm fine with that.) So ...... I've put in an order for the 08/09 Gotamas in 190 with Barons.
> 
> I figure with a two-ski quiver I'm going to have some gaps no matter what. With the goats' 105 waist and my existing pair at 66, one gap may be somewhere in between, but I can live with that, seeing as I have for years now. And I should be so lucky to have days where the 105s are too skinny, especially on the EC. Basically I opted for planks designed for the conditions and kind of skiing I most frequently target -- to get the most out of the really good to great days.
> 
> ...



I just received my Gotamas yesterday, now I am trying to decide on what to do for the bindings.


----------



## polski (Jan 30, 2010)

Thought I'd give a quick update on the 08-09 Gotamas with Barons now that I've used them a bit in a fair variety of conditions:

The skis do take some getting used to. They benefit from an aggressive over-the-balls-of-the-feet stance even in powder (not that I've had major pow days with them yet, but some shots of up to 18" or so). Last weekend at Burke I felt I was starting to really charge with them, although there wasn't any pow to speak of then.

They're surprisingly versatile despite being 105cm underfoot. I haven't used my old 66mm boards once this season and can see doing so only on days with serious hardpack/ice. Could have used the skinny skis at Burke last week but the Gotamas did fine except they did get very slightly squirrely at higher speeds on groomers. In powder or chowder they are great fun. I'm hitting glades and some other more challenging terrain now that I might have been hesitant to try before. I look forward to DEEP pow and epic corn snow ;-)

Complaints: The topsheets are ugly (the infamous "Tokyo Whorehouse" motif) and not durable. I've gotten by far worse chipping and even a little peeling after half a season than I had with my older skis in five or six years. It doesn't affect how they ski and I'll epoxy the topsheet edges but it annoys me that I have to do so. 

The bases, on the other hand, seem bomber (whereas I'd read complaints about soft/damage-prone bases on some earlier models of Gotamas). I'm not one to baby my equipment and I've definitely hit some nasty rocks with little to show for it. Also no issues with the sidewalls, something that also reportedly was a problem with Gotamas at one time.

The Barons feel like full-fledged alpine bindings yet also serve well for skinning. Have only started to get a taste of AT use thus far though and don't have anything to compare to re weight etc. Some people don't like how you have to step out of the binding to switch from AT to alpine and vice-versa, but I see that as a feature not a bug - assurance that I won't suddenly go free-heel while bombing downhill.


----------

