I tried to dry mount using an ordinary flat iron - and the experience almost caused me to get out of photography altogether. I know there are people who claim that it works, but it was a total disaster for me. Fortunately for me, just before I did something totally rash I found someone who wanted so sell a used press.
Randy notes that dry mounting has "fallen out of favor". Actually, I suspect that there are a couple of factors that are driving that change. The first is that some archivists are discouraging dry mounting because it's not truly reversable. Good point - although not one that is persuasive for me. I am more concerned about how my images look now than I am about whether they can be remounted a hundred years in the future.
If the print is smaller (say 11x14 or less), and if it has wide borders, hinge mounting behind a matt produces a fairly flat and attractive image. That said, I was in a gallery in Vermont this morning where many of the prints were printed out to the edge of the paper, and then dry mounted, with the edge of the print and a small amount of the mounting board exposed through the cutout in the overmatt. The edges were tight - which means that those prints were dry mounted.
The other factor is that increasing popularity of non-chemical processes that result in prints that are inherently flatter than traditional wet-process silver prints. Those images tend to have a lot less curl and can be attractively hinge mounted.