- Home
- Ski
- Alpine Skiing
- All Mountain Skis
- Dynastar Legend Mythic Rider Alpine Ski - 2009
Dynastar Legend Mythic Rider Alpine Ski - 2009 BCS
Available Colors / Styles
Be the first to upload your photo of the Legend Mythic Rider Alpine Ski. >
It’s pow in the morning and crud in the afternoon. While your buddy goes to his truck to mull over his ski-quiver switch, you get in six more runs and an invite to a hot-tub party later on with some hotties. Too bad your buddy isn’t riding the Dynastar Legend Mythic Rider Alpine Ski like you are.
- Autodrive technology connects the rail to the core for quick turn initiation and sweet rebound
- Multiaxial fibers and titanal layer boost torsional and flex rigidity
- Multicell core uses tri-dimensional cellular uniformity for stability at high speeds
- Wide shovel rises above powder in the back bowls
- 3D construction mills the wood core to reduce weight
Bottom Line: Mythical snow-slinger.
Talk shop with all the gear freaks out there: ask 'em questions, upload/browse photos, and give your 2¢.
I'm 5'9" and 150lbs, improving advanced intermediate
I'm 5'9" and 150lbs, improving advanced intermediate skier and am looking at these for my everyday ski. Do you recommend the 172 or 178? I am leaning towards the 178 for the length and stability, but want to make sure that the length difference isn't going to make bumps, etc too much to handle. Thanks.
By: sea2913358
November 5, 2009
I am 5-6 and 138lbs and I ride Mythic riders in the East and (mostly) in the French Alps. I have 165's. If I were to buy another pair (a possibility), I'd go for 172's, not for greater stability (the 165's have plenty of that) but for a bit greater floaqt in the really deep and heavy stuff we sometimes get in France. I believe the 172 is all you need, and that the 178 at your level will be too much ski. This is a fairly technical ski, and skis best when pushed and skied with confidence and "abandon". The 172 will be easier for you to arc a skidded turn with, and unless you're a very accomplished "no skid" carver of turns, I'd stay with the shorter ski. In fact, the 165's would not be too little ski for you at your level, even in the deep stuff.
By: Davee tried it
April 5, 2010
I'm the same height as you but you've got me a bit on the lbs. Not knowing what you ski on now or where you're living, it's hard to say. If you live in the east and like trees/bumps, you may prefer the '72. If you live out west and like all mountain terrain, you might like the longer one. I would ski this in an '84, but ski at Snowbird where we have lots of wide open areas to go fast in. Go for the longer one!
By: Elias Littenberg
November 11, 2009
Change me.
Out of Stock
2009 Model No Longer Available
We have a lot more All Mountain Skis than that
All Mountain SkisResearch other out-of-stock versions:
- Lengths:
- 165cm, 172cm, 178cm, 184cm, 189cm
- Dimensions:
- 122 / 88 / 110mm
- Turn Radius:
- [165cm] 19m; [172cm] 21m; [178cm] 21m; [184cm] 23m; [189cm] 24m
- Construction:
- Autodrive Fluid Legend
- Core Material:
- Multicell core with titanal
- Base:
- UHMW
- Tail:
- Raised
- Binding System:
- No
- Binding Included:
- No
- Recommended Binding:
- Look PX 15 FS WB Ski Binding
- Recommended Use:
- All-mountain, powder
- Manufacturer Warranty:
- 1 Year