Anyone skied the Outland 87's?

[Skizoo]

I spent 4 days this past week skiing the Dynastar Outland 87's in some of the finest conditions Vermont has provided so far in 2014. In other words, rain, glop, slop, frozen cookies, soft cookies and just plain frozen to the bone.

I have the 178's. 132/87/114, 19m radius - My first impression was that the recommended mount point was WAY too fwd for my liking. I moved it back 2 notches, which is as far back as it seems to go, and it still felt a bit more FWD than I am used to but much more comfortable. The other important pre ski item -- they needed 3 grinds to get them flat. The out of the box tune is awful. These skis had a couple days on them but I wasn't going to trust a previous owners tune.

The skis have the PX12 bindings which are heavy. The skis feel heavy to carry but that didn't translate to on snow feel. They are fairly quick edge to edge for an 87. Visually the rocker profile is similar to the RnR, they have a 19M radius. They feel softer in the tip and tail, and more firm through the middle. The tips on these skis are huge.

I didn't get to ski these in quality fresh soft snow conditions. No bumps as all bumps in this part of the country are gone or frozen solid, no trees, as we have little to no snow in the trees, but in the slop and glop I was quite pleased with how they skied. They are not a ski designed to pivot, they seemed to respond well to PMTS technique, and I was most surprised that on the frozen did admirably. They are certainly not SS's on frozen, but they performed much better than I expected. I wouldn't normally even take them out on a frozen day but was curious as to what they would do.

I'd love to get these out on a few days where we have some fresh snow as I think they'd do just fine. Due to the mounting position I felt they skied shorter than the advertised length, I'm 5'10" and would not suggest anyone close to my size ski these in anything less than a 178.

I had no issues making High C turns on hardpack and the felt like they had a much smaller turn radius than 19M.

Of the skis I own I felt like I was comparing them more to the RnR's. The RnR's have a cleaner more smooth feel when carving, but the Outlands were not bad.. Again I need to get them in conditions that are more suited to what they are built for.

Bottom line for me after 4 days of use, is they are a good ski, & a fun ski that has potential for soft snow days.

Anyone else have any time on these?

[Max_501]

IMO the RnR is a much better ski.

[Basil j]

I demoed the 87's and the 80 XT at the beginning of the season and would have bought the 80,If I needed a mid width ski, but felt the 87 was a bit sluggish compared to the 80. The Legends and Outlands are heavy skis in hand but fairly light on the snow. I know some guys who ski the 87 and they like them as an every day ski for the East. Some of the teaching pros at cannon ski a variety of Dynastars and the 87 is one of them. My only complaint I have with Dynastar is that their all mountain skis can feel overly damp. I have a speed course, Motive 80 and Elan slx, and the Dynastar speed course is by far the dampest of the 3. The slx is the snappiest.

[Max_501]

I know some guys who ski the 87 and they like them as an every day ski for the East.

Wow! That makes absolutely no sense to me!

[jbotti]

I know some guys who ski the 87 and they like them as an every day ski for the East.

Wow! That makes absolutely no sense to me!

That's because no one ever told you that wide is the new thin

[Skiasaurus Rex]

Keep in mind, only over here is 87 wide anymore

I have been enjoying a narrower carving ski more this year than in a long time.

At Cannon, I could see why a heavy, damp, wider (in a PMTS sense of the word) ski like the Outland could be a 90% time ski. They have quite a bit of dense, wooded terrain that requires a bit of float to stay above the deadly-thickets below. Remember, 12 inches of snow opens up the Whole Mittersill area (a mad river-like area served by a newer double..it's very awesome terrain actually when open!) and Cannon's Glades. On the other hand, they maintain some of the steepest, firm groomed terrain in the east (like Avalanche off of the Zoomer lift), where a narrow, capable carver would be king. It's a tough call, I guess if you only have one good ski, and you really want to enjoy all of Cannon all season, something like the Outland 87 might make sense. I have never even seen this ski let alone skied it. I just ditched my Contact 4x4, which I liked in some places, but found too stiff for really versatile all-mountain use (again, more skilled skiers will have a different opinion).

My friends who are full time instructors over at Mount Snow seem to favor that Blizzard magnum 85ti. Don't know if that's similar to the Outland. Sounds a little like it.

Is the Outland similar to the Legend 94?? That was a popular instructor ski up in places like Sugarbush (because Egan pushes dynastars on everybody ) a few years back. Maybe the Outland is a narrower, better hard snow stick than those.

Also, Another ski that sounds like the Outland that had some caché around here a few seasons back was the Elan Apex. I could see that as a 90% time ski for a Cannon mountain employee. maybe worth shopping for a past season version of those. Max, did you ever ski the Apex? I know Dawgcatching and Philpug liked them a lot. I tried a very short one (somewhere in the 160's) on hard snow once. I was ok, don't really have a good opinion on it, though.

I still think most folks are over looking the best of this breed in the K2 Rictor 82xti. For those looking for a smooth, easy, capable eastern all-around. Not a pmts learning ski, but a good ski for those who want a narrower off-piste ski with on piste ability. But hey,one guy's powder ski is another man's carver.

[Max_501]

Max, did you ever ski the Apex?

The Apex is a good ski but I don't have a spot in my quiver fo 88mm skis. For groomers I like sub 70mm. For all around something between 75-80mm, and for deep pow 95mm+.

[Skizoo]

If I just had 1 ski to use all winter in Vermont it would still be the Monster 78/Peak 78 year 1. I've yet to find a ski that is better suited to the wide variety of conditions we see up here. I think you could use the IM78 about 90% of days here and be just fine.

[Basil j]

I know some guys who ski the 87 and they like them as an every day ski for the East.

Wow! That makes absolutely no sense to me!

Totally agree Max. I ski Cannon 40+ days a year and probably get, maybe 10 soft snow days there a season if lucky, where even in the trees would never need to go wider than an 80mm waist ski. I divide the bulk of my ski days between the 66 mm waisted SLX and 71 MM speed course and I am always skiing on the thinnest skis amongst my pack of ski friends and also have the easiest time on icy runs. The SLX has delightfully surprised me as a very responsive versatile short-med turner that has tenacious edgehold, yet is surprisingly nimble.
Ski marketing has brainwashed the bulk of the population leading them to believe that sub 75mm waisted skis are passe. Go over to Epic and start this discussion( which I mistakenly did last year) and you get all sorts of opinions about how if you can't ski a wide ski, then you can't ski.They come out of the woodwork over there. Some quite aggressivley and rudely.
It is absurd. I have a buddy (who is a good non PMTS skier) that skis a bonafide as his main ski and by the end of last season was complaining about back and knee pain. I let him take some spins on my speed course and he was amazed how quickly they went from edge to edge. He goes out and buys a Brahama for his skinny ski.????WTF I don't get it either.

[Skiasaurus Rex]

How's he doing on the Brahma??? I haven't seen one in the flesh yet. But after reading diverse, enthusiastic reviews from everyone from Keelty and Hogan to dawgcatching and all the magazines, I'd be shocked if it wasn't a capable all arounder. Does your boy like it on the local slopes??

[ToddW]

Dino Guy,

Why would you be shocked? Keelty mostly skis Clendenin skid around and pop up style these days. The magazine guys brutalize their skis to get them to turn.

A ski that works for them is likely a bad ski. Btw Dawg and Hogan have to play nice in the industry since that's where they earn their living. You saw how Dawg recently got machine gunned down on gapicski for questioning this publicly in a very mild way.

Have you ever skied with a PMTS coach or an experienced PMTS skier who can confirm your skiing movements? Based on your posting history, I think you have many exciting breakthroughs ahead of you if you buckle down and follow Harald's writings to the letter with zero deviation. Get out of the trees and hit the bunny slope with aocbaes 1. When you master book 1, we'll know from the change in your writing and your diminished fixation on mechanical crutches. Toys are nice, but dependence on crutches isn't.

[Skiasaurus Rex]

Uh, what prompted that, Todd? Basil said his buddy switched from the bonafide to the brahmA and I asked if he liked it. It is a ski a lot of folks in the reviewing game speak highly of and I'm always interested to hear how gear stacks up. Hogan liked it as well as Peter (and as per Haralds post he says Jackson is a good skier and a knowledgeable reviewer.

Just wanted to know if Basil's buddy gained much going from the brawny bonafide to the more svelte brahma.

And what's with the unwarranted shelling of Peter (a big and early supporter of pmts and a great guy) or Cledinnen??

[Max_501]

It is a ski a lot of folks in the reviewing game speak highly of and I'm always interested to hear how gear stacks up.

From a PMTS viewpoint you can skip it.

[ToddW]

He's not PMTS at present by any stretch of the imagination and thus an inappropriate authority to cite on this forum. That's what TGR, Epic, the neutral zone, and skiervillage are for.

Harald also noted that Jackson Hogan has to beware what he says, if you recall.

[jbotti]

Perhaps it is important to point out once again that the gear section is designed to talk about gear that supports PMTS technique. What other reviewers say is essentially meaningless to us. If they aren't skiing PMTS and doing it at a high level their comments are irrelevant with regards to this gear forum. We want this to be a place where learning PMTS students can get solid information about what gear will support them in the process of learning and mastering PMTS. Everything else creates confusion and is off the purpose of this gear forum.

Peter Keelty introduced me to Harald 11 years ago so I will always be quite fond of him, but several years ago he went to a system of sending out test cards to large number of skiers almost 100% of whom were not PMTS skiers. The results in his reviews tell the story, and from a PMTS perspective have been way off the mark. He was way wrong on the original SS, the TT80 which his testers hated and on the Head RNR (the comments that he later put up on the site are mostly mine). In the early years Peter relied quite heavily on Harald's comments and that's why he was so dead on from a PMTS perspective in the early years, but this has not been the case for many years.

The rest of the people doing reviews on other sites for the most part their comments are irrelevant. Has anyone seen Sierra Jim ski? He did a video review of the head SS Rally where he attempted to lay the skis over. Suffice it to say that anything he says about a ski is totally irrelevant here because he doesn't use one movement that we use.

Let's try to keep the BS from non PMTS skiers out of this gear and review forum!!