Dynastar 8000-8800

[marcski]

Like Quattro...I'm in the market. I've skied both of these and still can't figure out which one to get and in what size. I know a few of you guys ski the 8000's, Rivercoil, Gregg..and others, what sizes do you guys ski on? I'm 5'11"ish 190. I've skied the 8800's (and this year the mythic ryders) in a 178 and a 172. I think I liked the 172's in that ski best. So, I'm thinking the 178's in the 8000's might be best since the majority of my days are out here in the east.....Any feedback?

 

[Greg]

6' 1" and 165 lbs. My 8000s are 172 cm. I haven't skied the 8800 but it's my understanding that the 8000 is more lively and quick. I love mine on any sort of loose snow / powder and I can get them working just fine in the bumps.

 

[SKIQUATTRO]

i'm just pondering what size underfoot to goto...an 88 or a 95/99 as my 2nd ski....my metron is 74 and awesome carving and decent in 4-5"....what would you jump to for your next ski if you were to have only a 2 ski quiver?

 

[Greg]

i'm just pondering what size underfoot to goto...an 88 or a 95/99 as my 2nd ski....my metron is 74 and awesome carving and decent in 4-5"....what would you jump to for your next ski if you were to have only a 2 ski quiver?

Personally, I don't ski deep powder enough to go any wider underfoot than my 8000s. Of course I said that about my AC3s too which only had a 74mm waist. It seems the consensus lately is much fatter is better so what do I know...? :???: :wink:

 

[SKIQUATTRO]

I know, its nuts, seems like the 70's are the new 90's.....i am seeing more and more guys using 95ish underfoot as an everyday EC ski....i just dont want any overlap in my 2nd ski as compared to my metrons at 74

 

[bvibert]

IMHO, if you already have a ski with a 74mm waist and you want something bigger you may as well go big, 90+ is my vote...

 

[BeanoNYC]

IMHO, if you already have a ski with a 74mm waist and you want something bigger you may as well go big, 90+ is my vote...

Ding Ding Ding. We have a weiner...er...um...winnner. I want my second pair to be real fat with great shape...Mantras for a example.

 

[SKIQUATTRO]

thats what i'm leaning towards....now to find a deal!!!

 

[Greg]

IMHO, if you already have a ski with a 74mm waist and you want something bigger you may as well go big, 90+ is my vote...

Ding Ding Ding. We have a weiner...er...um...winnner. I want my second pair to be real fat with great shape...Mantras for a example.

thats what i'm leaning towards....now to find a deal!!!

I don't know about that. My 8000s are only slightly wider underfoot than my AC3s but it's a totally different ski. Same purpose, but the Legend is much more suited to my style. I have to imagine that an 8000 or 8800 is going to be radically different than a Metron.

 

[bvibert]

I don't know about that. My 8000s are only slightly wider underfoot than my AC3s but it's a totally different ski. Same purpose, but the Legend is much more suited to my style. I have to imagine that an 8000 or 8800 is going to be radically different than a Metron.

Yeah, but it's so much cooler to say that you have 90+mm underfoot...

 

[Greg]

Yeah, but it's so much cooler to say that you have 90+mm underfoot...

Says the guy with the skinny bump skis with snakes on them...

 

[Hawkshot99]

I don't know about that. My 8000s are only slightly wider underfoot than my AC3s but it's a totally different ski. Same purpose, but the Legend is much more suited to my style. I have to imagine that an 8000 or 8800 is going to be radically different than a Metron.

My new powder ski is a Scott Mission(89 under foot) only 4mm wider than my old Public Enemies(85). However they float so much better . I don't know what it is about them but they are far superior in the soft, but lacking on the hard pack compared to the PE.

 

[marcski]

My new powder ski is a Scott Mission(89 under foot) only 4mm wider than my old Public Enemies(85). However they float so much better . I don't know what it is about them but they are far superior in the soft, but lacking on the hard pack compared to the PE.

How do you like those Scott's? And are your other ones (not the missions) are they more of an all mtn ski? I've heard just a couple of things about the scotts....all good...but too small of a sample to gather any consensus.

 

[bvibert]

Says the guy with the skinny bump skis with snakes on them...

I never said that I'm cool, no argument there. Someone asked me why my skis have vipers on them the other night... I told her it was because I was a bad ass mofo! :lol:

 

[Hawkshot99]

How do you like those Scott's? And are your other ones (not the missions) are they more of an all mtn ski? I've heard just a couple of things about the scotts....all good...but too small of a sample to gather any consensus.

Love them both. The Mission is awesome in the soft, like I said earlier. However it is just a bit too soft to let them run at high speeds at my weight. They get a little bit unstable.

The P3 is a awesome all mountain ski. Super stiff twin tip, that rip up the mountain real hard.

 

[Greg]

I never said that I'm cool, no argument there. Someone asked me why my skis have vipers on them the other night... I told her it was because I was a bad ass mofo! :lol:

No you didn't... :lol:

 

[riverc0il]

Like Quattro...I'm in the market. I've skied both of these and still can't figure out which one to get and in what size. I know a few of you guys ski the 8000's, Rivercoil, Gregg..and others, what sizes do you guys ski on? I'm 5'11"ish 190. I've skied the 8800's (and this year the mythic ryders) in a 178 and a 172. I think I liked the 172's in that ski best. So, I'm thinking the 178's in the 8000's might be best since the majority of my days are out here in the east.....Any feedback?

The 8000 is my primary ski in a 178 (6'1" 210 lbs). I also have an Inspired which is the predecessor to the 8800 (same dimensions) and Mythic Rider (which has more shape). If you are interested in a 178 Intuitiv Big, I am about to unload a pair cheap once my freerides come off, so let me know. Cheap like $100-200 with minor base ware, no core shots just scrapes.

These are two completely different skis. Just check out the difference in shape profiles and turn radius. There are fatter skis than the 8800 that are easier to turn and swing around (I just bought one to replace it, in fact). 8800 rules on big open stuff, love them on Mount Washington. Not good in the tight stuff (from my perspective). Just too many compromises. Fun ski to let rip in natural snow, not a one ski quiver for the east.

I am surprised you are trying to decide between these two skis. What is your criteria, what are you looking for? A mid-fat or a powder ski? A quiver ski or a one ski quiver? Snappy quick light weight forgiving turns or a little more meat that prefers a little running room and more open spaces. Lots of possibilities here, but you are currently looking at skis in two different categories that are not related in terms of performance even if they are related in terms of construction and design.

 

[marcski]

The 8000 is my primary ski in a 178 (6'1" 210 lbs). I also have an Inspired which is the predecessor to the 8800 (same dimensions) and Mythic Rider (which has more shape). If you are interested in a 178 Intuitiv Big, I am about to unload a pair cheap once my freerides come off, so let me know. Cheap like $100-200 with minor base ware, no core shots just scrapes.

These are two completely different skis. Just check out the difference in shape profiles and turn radius. There are fatter skis than the 8800 that are easier to turn and swing around (I just bought one to replace it, in fact). 8800 rules on big open stuff, love them on Mount Washington. Not good in the tight stuff (from my perspective). Just too many compromises. Fun ski to let rip in natural snow, not a one ski quiver for the east.

I am surprised you are trying to decide between these two skis. What is your criteria, what are you looking for? A mid-fat or a powder ski? A quiver ski or a one ski quiver? Snappy quick light weight forgiving turns or a little more meat that prefers a little running room and more open spaces. Lots of possibilities here, but you are currently looking at skis in two different categories that are not related in terms of performance even if they are related in terms of construction and design.

I'm in these two categories (although these days, as some here have said, 95-100 are where the "fat" skis start, so while definitely different, I'm not so sure they're in two totally different categories...but be that as it may) because I'm curious as to what the 8800's (mythic ryder) feel like out here on some good grade "A" Vt. hardpack. If they really won't be able to handle it, I'm more interested in 8000's. I haven't skied the 8800's in the east. Given your height/weight dimensions, the 172's are probably a better fit for me and I've seen some good deals on them of late.

To answer one of your questions, I'm probably more interested in a one ski quiver at this point. Especially since I'm going to be trying out my bro's tele gear this weekend. And knowing my somewhat obsessive personality...and the fact that I'm spending some of my time on gentler terrain these days and in the near future with my daughters, I'll probably be in the market for a tele setup by next week.

 

[riverc0il]

Neither is overly good on hard pack and groomers (compared to other skis in the given class). Similar offerings from Volkl, Head, Elan, Fischer, etc. are better in the one ski mid-fat that handles both groomers and powder with aplomb (but still not without sacrifice of specialized performance).

 

[madskier6]

i'm just pondering what size underfoot to goto...an 88 or a 95/99 as my 2nd ski....my metron is 74 and awesome carving and decent in 4-5"....what would you jump to for your next ski if you were to have only a 2 ski quiver?

I just pulled the trigger on a pair of Volkl Gotamas as my powder ski. The waist on those bad boys is 105. They ski so smoothly though that they don't feel that wide. I will now have a 2 ski quiver that I like: Atomic Metron B5 for all mountain use & carving on most days & Volkl Gotama for powder days & spring skiing.

I know, its nuts, seems like the 70's are the new 90's.....i am seeing more and more guys using 95ish underfoot as an everyday EC ski....i just dont want any overlap in my 2nd ski as compared to my metrons at 74

Fatter is better seems to be the trend these days. There are certain limitations with skis that wide for your average East Coast day but many skiers seem to be adapting. I picked the Gotamas because I really like the way they ski but also because there will be no overlap in my quiver. To me, getting Volkl Mantras with what I already have would result in some quiver overlap.