Skimo Co

Dynastar Mythic 97 Pro Ski


The Mythic 97 is like getting two skis in one! Essentially a hybrid of an alpine carver and a backcountry floater, it has a special feel. Turning on edge feels very solid on hard snow as if it’s running on rails. Get into soft or mixed snow and the generous tip with ample rocker will keep you going fast. It’s nimble through trees due to the short radius yet doesn’t have a problem opening up into bigger turns in open bowls. Best of all it features a lightweight, full-sidewall construction that will keep you slaying the trees and open bowls all day long. A high-performance lightweight ski? Some say that’s a myth. We say it’s a Mythic 97.

  • 5-point sidecut allows you to control the turn shape with a large sweet spot.
  • Carbon-ply construction offers stability at speed without excess beef.
  • Full-sidewall offers durability from impact and impressive edge hold.
  • Tip and tail rocker makes it easy to initiate and release from turns.
  • Paulownia wood core is the current standard in lightweight fun.
  • Reinforced binding area gives confidence to open ‘er up.

Update 2018/19: Just a new topsheet. The Mythic was already ahead of its time.

Update 2019/20: Dynastar added the word "pro" to the name, but no credentials are required to ski it.

Lengths (cm) 171, 177, 184
convert to ounces
1385g [171]
1425g [177]
1490g [184]
Weight (pair) 2770g [171]
2850g [177]
2980g [184]
Dimensions   133-97-113
Turn Radius   14m [171]
15m [177]
17m [184]
Skin Fix   Round tip, flat tail
Specs Verified Yes
Profile   Rockered tip & tail, camber underfoot
Shape   Big round tip, sharp sidecut, tapered tail
Construction   Full sidewall
Core   Paulownia wood
Skimo Co Says
Usage Crushing in all conditions from pristine to previously unskiable
Notes Large sweetspot makes it enjoyable
Bottom Line Easy turning backcountry bruiser that floats far better than its waist width suggests
Compare to other High-fat Skis

Related Products

Questions & Reviews

Question from Michael nowicki
Would these be suitable to hold a 22designs Axl Telemark mount?

Answer from Cole P
Hey Michael, the manufacturer does not specify if it can accept telemark binding or not. With that said it does have a metal layer in the construction that will help with the mount.
Answer this question:

Question from Joseph W
I’m trying to decide between the mythic and the movement vertex. Can you weight in on that for SkiMo/touring around the Wasatch?
Answer from Cole P
Hey Joseph, both skis are great. They are pretty comparable, but the lighter weight of the Mythics along with its early rise shovel, makes the ski very versatile in the Wasatch mountains. The Vertex is a little heavier and handles higher speeds and hardpack a little better.
Answer this question:

Question from Adam T
Coming from a Fischer Hannibal 94 and looking to upgrade (maybe this year maybe early next year). I'm torn between the Fischer Hannibal 96 and the Dynastar Mythic Pro 97. Touring around the Wasatch, I've thought I should go to a ski with a shorter radius for the trees and chutes. I wouldn't mind something that floats a little better than the Hannibal 94, but I'm also aiming for a hut-to-hut trip in the alps next year and trying to keep it to a 1-ski quiver. That may be a lot to ask. I was also looking at the MTN Explore 95 and the Atomic Backland 95. Any thoughts, recommendations would be helpful. Thanks!
Answer from TSB
Hey Adam, thanks for reaching out! Those are all awesome skis you mention and I don't think you could go wrong. I notice on your skier profile that you're rocking the Fischer Travers Carbon, which as a lighter boot might not pair quite as well with a more powerful ski like the Mythic. I would look at a lighter ski in those same mid-90s dimensions that would slot in well for those longer touring days without sacrificing too much powder performance. Here at Skimo Co we're partial to the offerings from the Swiss skimeisters at Movement, and the Alp Tracks 94 would be a great option for you!
Answer from Adam T
Thanks a lot! I'll take a look.
Answer this question:

Question from Michael M

I just received some 177 Mythics from you guys. Thanks, they look great. Should be a good lightweight pow ski.

A question on mount point:

There is a prominent line that traverses the width of the ski and then 2 smaller lines behind this that do not traverse the width of the ski they look to be 1 and 2 cm back of the larger line. Is the larger of the 3 lines the recommended mount point (the one that traverses the width of the ski)? I presume so but wanted to confirm.
Answer from jbo
Hi Michael, that is exactly right!
Answer from Michael M
thanks for the quick reply
Answer this question:

Question from mbillie1
Not related to this ski, but it's the only Dynastar I see. I am curious about the Dynastar Vertical and Vertical Pro, did you not like them, thus their omission from the site? Or did they sell out, or something else? An item being deliberately not-selected for would certainly mean something to me.
Answer from jbo
Hi mbillie1, the Vertical Eagle was a high-performance, but pretty demanding ski for most. It also broke a few too many times.
Answer this question:

Mav (used product a few times)
Purchased these in 177cm as my first lightweight touring/mountaineering ski to use in the Wasatch back. Coming from a beef setup, these feel soooo light—in a good way. Paired with the Ski Trab Titan Vario Adjustable binding and Arc'teryx Procline Carbon boots. After some resort days, a 8+ hours of fitness laps, and one standard backcountry adventure day, here are my thoughts:

Quick & dirty: Stiffer ski that can float and carve without weighing you down on the up. Highly recommend for a one-ski backcountry quiver without breaking the bank. The shop did a fantastic job getting me into such a great match with these skis.

What I dig: Skimo Co.'s description pretty much nails it. These pups carved like a boss on resort groomers, had great edge hold on steeper icier stuff, and have an uncanny ability to float for their waist width because of the tip construction and shape. I also skied the new Dynastar Legend x106 189cm this year with alpine bindings, and loved that ski, too. It felt in many ways like a bigger Mythic, so it's understandable why I liked it—stiff mid-rear flex, great carving hold, still able to smear as needed, and super fun floaty playfulness up front. The Mythic does not strike me as good a ski for beginners, though. My alpine daily driver is a Volkl Mantra M5 184cm (19-20), so I like stiffer fall-line skis. My boots are a good match for the Mythic, particularly in the shorter length for me (weight savings motivated). Even being stiff, though, the ski seemed to track great when in "auto-pilot mode" on a long traverse or flat trail section.

What I didn't expect: This one isn't a deal breaker, but more of a required adaptation for those who haven't skied such light skis before. Because the skis are so light, they don't weigh themselves down—in chopped powder, for instance. So, when the downhill ski is weighted, the uphill ski can potentially plane up and get squirrelly. To counteract this, one simply needs to apply a bit more pressure to the uphill ski (i.e. ski a bit more two-footed) than may otherwise be habit. The lightness is also noticeable at absolute max speed, in that the ski isn't as damp as a 2200gram ski (duh), but certainly doesn't feel unsafe. It just takes a bit more attentiveness when going supersonic.

Other thoughts: I modified my skin tips to use the Colltex Ace Tip attachments w/ hammer rivets, and they work really well with this ski, even though it has a very round tip. They stay put in transit, but remain very easy to remove for tip-first skin rips.
Comment on this review:

Question from David Malka
Hi, How would you compare this to the Fischer Hannibal? As far as stifness, float, dampness

I haven't had the chance to try the Hannibal but I could demo a pair. Currently I have zero g 85s and I'm in the north East skiing firmer snow in the Mount Washington, NH area. I'm looking to pick up something that does a little better when there is actually softer snow but could handle variable/firm conditions as well. The zero g's feel stiff and a bit tinny - I'd like something to be a bit more damp and compliant as well as provide more float.
Answer from Jeffrey
David, Need a bit more versatility. The Hannibal is a nice all around ski. Handles powder, cut up and OK on firm snow. It has just a little tip rise and fairly even flex. The Mythic has a good bit of rocker and a softer tip. But we just mounted up a pair and they even ski groomed resort runs well. If you are looking for more of a powder ski, the Mythic is the choice. Both are versatile skis and either would be an excellent choice.
Answer this question:

Question from Deb
How does this ski compare to the women’s Cham 97. I have the Cham 97 - the tourquoise one.

Thanks for any insight
Answer from Matt P
The Mythic 97 has the same shape and rocker as the Cham 97 but with only lighter construction. The Cham is more of an alpine ski, where as, the Mythic has a lighter core for a more focused backcountry use. Hope this helps.
Answer this question:

Question from Rune
Hi Skimo. I’m hesitating between the mythic 97 and the Salomon mtn 95 as a single pair of skis for all my skiing - 90% backcountry, steeps in spring. I’m coming from the old mythic light (89mm, no rocker) and ski the tlt5 boot. Which would you recommend?
Answer from Nate
Hi Rune, you really can't go wrong. They are similar in weight, construction, and profile. The MTN Explore 95 has a longer sidecut and less pronounced tip rocker, which you may find comfortable coming from the Mythic Light. The Mythic 97 has a shorter turning radius and a more pronounced tip rocker which will allow shorter turns and perhaps a bit easier skiing in super deep/breakable crust situations. I'd recommend choosing the ski that you believe sounds better based on those characteristics.
Answer this question:

Earn store credit by writing reviews. Learn more.

Model: Mythic 97

Follow us on social media

View full screen version