Rob’s Dynafit Manaslu Guest Blog

22 Responses to “Rob’s Dynafit Manaslu Guest Blog”

1. ThomasB April 3rd, 2009 11:29 am

   I weigh 165lbs( 190? w/gear) and ski tour aggressivly on average of 75 ( big)days a year and will log a dozen or so fast aggressive days at the resort all on dynafits (TLT or Comfort) I have NEVER had a pre release and always ski with the toe piece down.
   I have released while cratering at high speeds just as I felt the hamstrings and calves stretch to almost injury length and was extremely grateful for having the toe piece down on such a great binding.
   So, while I admit that for bigger guys DIN setting may be a limitation I think it is important to tell people that the bindings work as designed. I also suspect that many people claim a “pre release” to hide some drivers error that produced a warranted release.
   For the record I know 5 different folks with broken legs/knees from torque produced by skis from a Dynafit that had the toe piece locked and therefore did not release in avalanches and falls.

2. Mike April 3rd, 2009 12:27 pm

   Hey Rob. I’ve got a pair of the FR 10’s, 187cm and love ‘em. I too am just over 6′ but tip the scales at 183 in my birthday suit. So what’s with the short length for a guy your weight? I plan on replacing them with the Mansalu also in 187cm. Just wondering what your (and everybody else’s) opinion is on the subject is.

3. Tony Z April 3rd, 2009 12:53 pm

   Great pics!!!

4. Dale Persing April 3rd, 2009 4:19 pm

   Ditto the great pics, esp #2.
   Is it me, or does the first make it look as if the skier’s going uphill?
   Are Dynafit’s REALLY that good (grin)?

   Dale

5. Greg Louie April 4th, 2009 10:37 am

   Hi Rob,

   I have to say I’m with Mike on this, especially if it took that long to find the sweet spot and the tail seems soft – I demoed the 178 at Crystal after the rando race, and it seemed the right size for me (165, 5′8″). The skis rocked in sun-crusted, tracked up heavy fresh as well as at speed on corduroy groomers. Tip flutter was no worse than many other widish skis, and the things rode over mank and debris like nobody’s business. They were still plenty light for touring.

   Did you try the 187?

6. Randonnee April 5th, 2009 6:57 pm

   Thanks for the comments, I have been away.

   Ski length is certainly a personal preference.

   The 178 cm length has become my favorite. I have my light setup with K2 Chogoris that I ski in 174 cm. My skiing is strictly touring except 5 days on lifts this season with my daughter- so it is a ratio of 10 to 1– touring/ lifts. The 178 length is just fine for me for stable turns and moderate to good speed- I do not feel that my speed is limited by the 178 length. I usually do not ski very fast in the backcountry, that is not my goal, speed on skis was something done when I skied lifts a lot, my enjoyment now of the backcountry is not focused on speed. On the uphill I find the shorter length to be good for kick turning and walking around. I now prefer shorter as possible for me in the backcountry. In the day when I worked on skis the length was 204 to 207 and my randonnee skis were 204. Then I was on 190s for years, then with the FR10 went to 178. I was a bit late to go short and wide on the skis. I think that I prefer easy over extra stability for touring. I do ski primarily the Wenatchee Mountains and feel that the snow conditions are quite different than the Crest- eg I would probably want longer and stiffer skis if I were skiing the Cascade Crest primarily

   Greg I did not try the 187 cm, I am not that interested with my preferences above. Yeah, I have enjoyed the Manaslu in mank, crust, and even corn down below the powder. If not deep snow I will probably ski on my Seven Summit or Chogori.

7. Randonnee April 5th, 2009 7:21 pm

   ThomasB, my weight likely exceeds the designed-use of a Dynafit binding, but I have used confidently my Dynafit bindings except for the problematic Tri Step toe.

   Except for the new FT12, I can just stand in boots in Dynafit bindings on skis and if the toe is unlocked I can push with the ball of my foot and release the toe. There is a limit of weight and force that I can exceed for the Dynafit binding. Only in powder can I get away with skiing my Speed and Comfort unlocked, on hard pack it is instant release from an unlocked toe. As I stated I compensate by locking the toe, which increases the DIN except in the straight-up direction. That increased DIN from locking the toe does not keep me in if I need to release, in fact on the uphill I walk out of full toe-lock easily if I am not paying attention.

   Rob

8. dan April 10th, 2009 11:48 am

   Hi Rob,

   I was considering going with the mansalus, or the seven summits. I am a PNW skiier as well, and I like high speed steep corn, and I plan on skiing well into the summer. I am 6′4″ 195, and have loved my 177 mantras – but it’s time to go lighter… you seem like the ideal person to ask about comparison between the mansalus and 7 summits as you are big like me, and have skiied both skis – any words of wisdom about wich ski might be a better ski mountaineering ski for our sublime maritime corn season?

   Thanks

9. Randonnee April 10th, 2009 6:10 pm

   Dan I would choose the Seven Summit for spring and summer. The Manaslu seems too wide for spring and summer- except for those times that we get the new snow dumps! I did turn some corn at a lower elevation below the powder that I skied, and the Manaslu felt surprisingly comfortable even using the 3-buckle Zzero3 C TF boot. I like the Seven Summit with my 3-buckle Zzero3 C TF. That light setup skis corn and hard snow well and even blasted powerfully through summer melted muck on Mt Adams last year surprisingly well. my take is that the Seven Summit is stiffer than the Shuksan, and not so easy to turn, but is good for my large carcass…I ski toured on my Seven Summit skis today on corn snow in the Wenatchee Mountains.

   Another thought is an 88 waist ski such as the Mustagh Ata or FT 10, or K2 Baker Superlight. I have the 88 waist FR 10 and that would do well all around with my 4-buckle Zzero4 C TF, but that is a lot more weight and I prefer to walk in the shorter boots. I see online that folks are using that width as all-around.

   Seven Summit is quite powerful and versatile for me in all conditions. I have skied some surprise powder and those skis did well also. With my weight it does not feel stiff at all, just right flex.

10. Eiko Amano April 10th, 2009 8:42 pm

    Hi Randonnee,
    I really appreciated your comments about the Seven Summitt since I am taking my Seven Summitt next week to the Silvretta tour. Thanks.
    Eiko

11. Randonnee April 10th, 2009 8:55 pm

    Glad that it was helpful. Have a great trip.

    Best, Rob

12. Mark Worley August 2nd, 2009 7:30 am

    Months after publication…
    I know someone who debated between the Manaslu and Mt. Baker Superlight. The Manaslu won and he RAVES about them. No surprise.

13. Randonnee August 2nd, 2009 10:33 pm

    Yes, Mark I am pretty stoked about my Manaslu. I dream of powder skiing the Manaslu during these hot summer days! For me, Manaslu is an easy flexy ski that I drive well with the 3 buckle Zzero 3- a very light setup. I do not like the Manaslu on hard snow, I prefer my 80 waist Seven Summit or my 70 waist Chogori on hard snow or corn. This past season my randonnee tour days were divided into > 30 days each on Seven Summit and Manaslu, and about 5 days each on FR10 and Chogori. My Zzero3 boot gets the most days now on the Seven Summit and Manaslu, the Zzero4 I use only on the stiff FR10, and I use my favorite comfortable TLT4 on the Chogori. I did not really like wider skis that much until I got the Manaslu, and I do continue to enjoy the narrow skis.

14. Lou August 3rd, 2009 6:19 am

    I use both the Baker SL and Manaslu, Baker is more of an all-around ski in my opinion, while Manaslu can’t be beat for any type of soft snow, breakable crust, that sort of thing. If I had to pick one ski for traveling, I’d bring the Manaslu for most parts of the season, but would tend to bring the Baker for spring backcountry skiing, such as our Silvretta traverse last spring. I’ve also got a pair of regular Mount Bakers, and they’re even better on hardpack than the SL, and do everything else the same, but weigh noticeably more. K2 Coomback is more along the lines of a Manaslu type of ski…

15. Mark Worley August 3rd, 2009 6:49 am

    Manaslu and Coomback have similar dimensions and design, with very noticeable weight difference–Coomback being far heavier. Again, both skis are excellent. Tried the new Coombacks and probably liked them best of the skis I tested that day.

16. Pete October 8th, 2009 3:57 pm

    My K2 Shuksans have been wonderful in all conditions besides crud (breakable crust) & powder in the backcountry. I’d like to get something a little fatter, skiing 80% backcountry, 20% at the resort (on the really good days). I’m leaning towards either the Coomback (135-102-121) or Manaslu (122-95-108 (178)). What are the major differences between the two? To me, it seems like the Coomback might be better for crud & powder since it’s a little fatter & has the rocker tip… What do you think?

17. Randonnee October 8th, 2009 5:03 pm

    Pete, perhaps Lou can speak to this. I am really a fan of narrower skis except for my Manaslu in soft snow, which I dream about…As far as the Manaslu I am one with “a bias” (see Backcountry Magazine review) for touring…touring is what it is all about. I am into the best light rig for touring that I may downhill ski comfortably and competently in all conditions. For me I think it is Seven Summit or Manaslu, both with the Zzero3 boot.

    Right now I am pondering whether to get the Seven Summit Superlight to replace my Seven Summit, or whether to try the new Mustagh Ata Superlight. I lean toward the narrower ski and to use with my Zzero3 boot for the comfort and light weight, and enough control to ski however I want to, nice for touring. I have the FR10 (88 waist), which skis fine with my Zzero4, but I do not like touring the Cascades on firm snow with the wider waist, and prefer touring and walking with the Zzero3. I am in central WA on the east slope of the Cascades, so my preference is shaped by this snowpack, and also influenced by many years of skiing skinny skis both alpine and tele.

18. Lou October 8th, 2009 5:11 pm

    Pete and Randonnee, I’d say the Coomback is a bit more of an all-around ski than the Manaslu, and the ’slu is lighter. I say this because the Coomback according to Louie is decent on hardpack for that sort of ski, while neither of us prefer Manaslu on hardpack.

19. Aaron November 8th, 2009 11:27 pm

    I’m debating between the Manaslu and the Mustagh Ata Superlight. Both are light and have the waist width I’m looking for. However I compared the pictures of both and saw that the binding mount is several inches forward on the Mustagh Ata Superlight versus the Manaslu. Certainly this affects the how a ski skis. In the deeper snow I like to sit more in the back seat. However the Mustagh Ata seems to be rarely talked about and is not carried by very many retailers. Any thoughts?

20. Mark November 9th, 2009 12:11 am

    Mustagh Ata is a fine ski, but is largely overshadowed by the Manaslu. Mustagh Ata has conventional camber, while the Manaslu has a rockered-type tip. The gradual rise of the tip effectively means the running length of the ski is less. Having the mount further back is likely due to this reduced running length.

21. Randonnee November 19th, 2009 3:43 pm

    Today we skied backcountry at Stevens Pass in 11 inches new snow that had .66 water content for the 11 inches. Typical Cascade Crest storm. The 184 Manaslu and my Zzero4 boot or even a larger boot would have been nice in that snow, I will admit. As I said, my usual touring in nice drier snow in the east-of-the-divide Wenatchee Mountains gives me a preference for the 178 Manaslu and Zzero3 boots, even though I am large. As Greg Louie commented above and I responded, if I did more skiing in the Cascade Crest snowpack I would want the longer ski and also bigger boots. Today’s conditions demonstrated this, although we did fine straightlining that Cascade ‘fluff’, sometimes pushing a 1/2 yard wetslab in front of one’s legs on some aspects…that reminds me of avy control days in the past, slogging through that type of snow! Big skis are well suited for this type of snow.

22. Christopher Nicolson December 29th, 2009 11:03 am

    Yes the 178 cm Manaslu skis are good but different.

    For an expert skier, most people I know want to be in the snow, not on the snow. For this reason, I actually don’t fully appreciate the early rise technology on the descent. Also, I prefer a longer ski. It provides more of a graceful flow down the mountain through the powder. The guy on wildsnow favoured short skis. I don’t agree, at least not yet.

    However, the early rise technology was definitely appreciated on the up track. When breaking trail, the ski popped out of the snow much more quickly which made for less resistance -a great asset. The shorter length will come in handy for narrow couloir entrances or tight turns in the trees. And it already made for easier switchback turns on the uptrack.

    So there is a compromise. The skis are marvellous for the uptrack, but I give up a little on the descent.

    I should note that we ski in pretty consistent dry snow conditions in the BC interior. If we had more crud, I might appreciate the early rise more.

    I would recommend that Dynafit look at a 183 length. If they made this length in the slightly narrower Mustagh Ata, I think this would be the perfect combination for me as an expert technical skier. Short enough for the tight areas and steep up tracks, but it allows for a deep, rhythmic and exciting powder turn (albeit giving up forementioned advantages of the early rise).

    I hope this help with some of the consumer feedback. I really appreciated the wildsnow.com site. It was a great source of info during my research.

    PS – I also purchased a set of G3 Zest’s for my wife. Huge brownie points. They are awesome. She is skiing terrain she has never touched before.

    C Nicolson
    6′1″, 210 lbs. Expert skier.

Got something to say?

Name (required)

Email Address (will not be published) (required)

Website

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail

Speak your mind

Anti-Spam Quiz: Which is warmer, winter or summer?

Due to comment spam we moderate most comments. Please do not submit your comment twice -- it will appear shortly after we approve it. Once you've had one comment published, your comments will be pre-approved and appear immediately if you're using the same computer and not blocking browser cookies. NOTE however that ALL comments with one or more links in the text will be held for moderation no matter what, again for spam prevention.