Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Discuss anything ski related here!

Moderators: SkiDork, bvibert

Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Postby Jstrong1976 » Sun Nov 17, 2013 9:15 pm

Does anyone know anything about the Fatypus BNasty mogul ski? I am currently trying to decide whether I want to purchase the Bnasty or the Twister. I currently own a pair of Rossignol Moguls and Hart F17 world cups. My Rossignols are beat and I am looking to replace them. I had an ACL reconstruction 3 years ago and find that mogul skis that turn more on the tips are easier on my knee. The Rossignols always skied that way and I loved them. My Hart F17 world cups tend to want to turn more right at the waist of the ski which tends to aggravate my knee. I love them but it can be tough on my body if I ski on them for any length of time. I heard the Bnasty is more versatile due to its side cut. I do like the idea of being more versatile all over the mountain but I am concerned about sacrificing performance in the moguls. I am not sure what to think about the early rise in the tip and I am not sure how stiff they are. I don't mind a stiffer ski but do not want one that is so stiff that it wears on my knee. I have not been able to demo a pair so I am a little cautious about spending the cash. I know the Twisters are proven in the moguls. I know they are not too stiff and they are fairly quick in the bumps. However, this ski has a fairly straight side cut and I know it will be pretty much worthless anywhere else on the mountain. I spend most of my time in the bumps but it would be nice to have a ski that could ski well in other places also. Has anyone skied both skis? I would love to hear their take on it.
Jstrong1976
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 8:50 pm

Re: Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Postby Chris Moore » Thu Nov 21, 2013 8:32 pm

In terms of all mountain performance I think you would get a similar experience from the Twister as you would from the F17 as they both have similar dimensions. I can't speak for the Fatypus as I haven't owned a pair. Personally I use my Twisters as all mountains skis and I think they work quite well. Obviously they aren't the right tool for powder but as long as I'm on hard pack I find them pretty ski-able.

-Chris
User avatar
Chris Moore
Site Admin
 
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 7:28 pm

Re: Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Postby Derkleiner » Sat Nov 23, 2013 3:09 pm

I own a pair of the Fatypus B-nasty skis and can't get off of them. I absolutely love the crap outta this ski. My local mountain is Crested Butte and I ski this thing everywhere on the mountain. That includes HeadWall and out into Pheonix bowl. For those that don't know, the Butte has some difficult natural moguls to ski. They are not very pretty most of the time. I can't speak enough about how the B-nasty makes skiing tough lines easy. I used to ski cabrawlers and when I switched to this ski it was like someone turned the dial up to 11. With that being said, I'm not overly familiar with the Dynastars. What I can tell anyone is the Fatypus ski has a sweet tip on it. On the website at one time it said it had a slight early rise which is a bit untrue of the actual shape of the tip. I would describe the tip as being a steep snub nose. It's not flat like alot of bump skis. As a result it does better in variable conditions like when you ski natural moguls versus seeded moguls. It seems to smooth things out a bit especially in comparison to the Cabrawlers. In regards to flex I would say this ski is not as stiff as the f17 world cup or the volkl wall mogul. It is stiffer than the K2 and IMO a very lively flex. The tails of the ski are actually not super stiff either. On my Cabrawlers I noticed If I got into the tails at all it would want to catapult me forward again where as this is not the case with the B-nasty. I feel it's forgiving of mistakes, and you don't have to be a world cup skier to tame this thing.If I had the money I would buy 20 pairs of this ski so I could ski it till I die.
I feel the more places I go the more squatchy this country feels.
Derkleiner
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 12:55 am

Re: Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Postby Jstrong1976 » Fri Dec 06, 2013 6:08 pm

I just received my Fatypus Bnasty ski in the mail. The first thing I noticed is the extreme amount of camber underfoot. When I stand on the ski, it feels like a spring board. Does anyone know if this is normal for this ski or could there be something wrong with it?
Jstrong1976
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 8:50 pm

Re: Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Postby bendtheski » Sat Dec 07, 2013 8:38 am

I think that's pretty normal for the B-Nasty. The QC out of Neversummer/Faty seems to be first rate, so I doubt they're defects. It also looks like the B-Nasty is pretty thick under foot, and based on my experience with a 4 year old pair of D-Senders, will likely hold its camber for a long time.

I really want to try a pair of B-Nastys. The closest thing I have to a bump ski in my quiver is a pair of 83mm waisted Salomon Thrusters in 171cm. They work well for my purposes, but are really soft. The B-Nastys look like they'ed be on the opposite end of the stiffness spectrum, and might be a handful after almost a decade on soft flexing, short Salomons, but based on my experience with the D-Senders, and a newer pair of I-Rock Flat Tails, my curiosity is piqued. Unfortunately, it can be pretty hard to find a pair to demo, but maybe Jared will let me borrow a pair of B-Nastys for a day before pulling the trigger.

Derkleiner's description of the B-Nasty's versatility makes me even more interdasted. I can't say I actively seek out moguls so much anymore, but they're always more fun with the right ski. Most days I feel like the narrowest ski I need is my 91mm wasted 179cm Salomon Rocker2 92's (re-named the remix for 13/14), but in firmer, or tighter spaced bumps, something shorter/narrower makes wiggling a whole lot easier.
Wag more, bark less
User avatar
bendtheski
 
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:17 pm
Location: Georgetown, CO

Re: Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Postby Gringuskahn » Thu Mar 27, 2014 5:52 am

Any follow ups on the bnasty? Am interested in buying a pair.

Given they have some side cut how do they turn outside the bumps and what did you do about bindings? They have a 72 waist and there aren't many good bindings like the Look Pivot 14 or Marker Griffon/Jester that seem to be a good fit in terms of break width.
Gringuskahn
 

Re: Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Postby SD_skier » Sat Mar 29, 2014 6:14 pm

Jstrong1976 wrote:I just received my Fatypus Bnasty ski in the mail. The first thing I noticed is the extreme amount of camber underfoot. When I stand on the ski, it feels like a spring board. Does anyone know if this is normal for this ski or could there be something wrong with it?


I'd love to hear an update on your experience with the Bnasty. It seems like they have some unique characteristics for a mogul ski and I'm dying to know what that translates to on the snow, first hand.
SD_skier
 
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 12:10 pm
Location: Park City, UT

Re: Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Postby pez » Mon Mar 31, 2014 1:58 pm

[/quote] I'd love to hear an update on your experience with the Bnasty. It seems like they have some unique characteristics for a mogul ski and I'm dying to know what that translates to on the snow, first hand.[/quote]

Here's my very humble opinion. I current ski a B-Nasty, 175cm with Salomon Ti bindings, Full Tilt boots. I've skied in the past Twisters, Volkl Dragonslayers, Salomon 1080 Mogul, and some others.

I am very, very happy with the B-Nastys. The turns in bumps are nice and quick, the ski is light, just like the other bump skis. By way of comparison, the BNasty is softer than the Volkl, but stiffer than the Twisters. The sidecut and underfoot are both a bit bigger than any of the others, but I have not found that to be a limitation in the bumps, and clearly that gives you a bit more versatility on the flats, and even in a bit of pow. I haven't put on a different pair of skis all season, in any conditions.

Hope that helps.
pez
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:32 pm
Location: California

Re: Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Postby Jstrong1976 » Mon Apr 07, 2014 7:53 pm

I have now skied the Fatypus B-Nasty all season in every possible condition east coast skiing can throw at it. The ski is lightning quick and very light. I would say it is stiffer than the Dynastar Twister and a little softer torsional than the Hart F17 world cup. It is very responsive in the bumps and on the flats. The slight early rise in the tips allows this ski to blast through powder and slush bumps with ease. It is very hard to get this ski hung up in cruddy snow. The only weakness I can find with the ski is in very icy bumps. In very firm bumps it tends to bounce around a little. I think the slightly wider waist and tip cause it to deflect a little. However, it is still very controllable. My Hart f17 world cups hold a little better when the conditions are rock hard. Overall, the ski is much more versatile than any other bump ski I have tried. It floats in powder and crud, is extremely stable at high speeds on the groomers, and absolutely rips in the bumps. Plus, the construction is bomb proof. I would definitely buy another pair.
Jstrong1976
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 8:50 pm

Re: Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Postby bendtheski » Fri Jul 25, 2014 10:08 am

^Good to read.

A friend bought a pair of B-Nastys last Spring and skied them 2-3 days, and doesn't want them anymore. I'm giving him $200, and hope I can use the same screw holes, but IME faty's do just fine with one set of speed-holes.

This will be my third pair of fatypus', and my first true bump ski in about a decade. My last pair were 1080 moguls, which I sold back in 2003, and have been using 80-83mm waist Solly twins ever since. I'm pretty stoked at the thought of having a ski with a little more beef than the solly's, and a little more width and shape than some of the other offerings for the (hopefully) softer bumps, and variable snow conditions in Colorady.

FWIW, my friend is not a bump skier, and probably wouldn't be happy with any dedicated bump ski.
Wag more, bark less
User avatar
bendtheski
 
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:17 pm
Location: Georgetown, CO

Re: Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Postby Old School » Sun Jul 27, 2014 10:36 pm

To bad they only make them in short sizes.
User avatar
Old School
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:30 pm
Location: Clifton Park NY/Killington VT

Re: Fatypus BNasty Mogul ski vs Dynastar Twister

Postby bendtheski » Thu Jul 31, 2014 11:36 am

Old School wrote:To bad they only make them in short sizes.

Hey, I resemble that remark! Nyuck, nyuck...

175cm should be fine for a midget like me. Actually, they'll be 4cm longer than the thrusters I've been hacking it up on for the last decade.
Wag more, bark less
User avatar
bendtheski
 
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:17 pm
Location: Georgetown, CO


Return to General Skiing Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron