or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Are Dynastar Legends out of date ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Are Dynastar Legends out of date ?

post #1 of 16
Thread Starter 

last year I purchased Legend 85"s and a Legend 94, didn't spend a lot of days on them because lack of snow, spent most of the days on my rock skis. Now Dynastar has come out with there new ski and design. There 87-97-and there wider one (I'm not sure what is is underfoot. I also have Rossi S7 for powder, wich I love.  Wow--I didn't really get to ski my new ones, and I am already on (they don't make them any more skis) now what-wider and wider. How about carving a ski with using some talent.

post #2 of 16

Try the new Dynastars. You'll be glad you have the older ones.

post #3 of 16

looks like you didn't even have enough time to evaluate your new skis.  Technology changes, but that does not necessarily make skis obsolete. Unlike snofun3 I really like the new Dynastars, but I think your old Legends are just fine.  Ski them, enjoy them, come back next year. 

post #4 of 16

Still great skis and if you like them then why worry? Too much hype about always getting the newer, better, bigger, cooler, faster etc. skis!!

post #5 of 16

The new dynastar chams are very 5-point-ish. If you want skis that are more oriented towards soft snow than the sultans are then its worth changing over. The sultans are more conventional in shape and a very solid all around ski and probably more versatile in terms of skiing anything on the mountain pretty well. But not great for anything in particular. If you only have one ski and live somewhere with less than ~350" per year of fresh, I think the sultans are probably the better ski. 

post #6 of 16
Got to agree with Alex, you haven't even tried your Legends. Sounds to me like you have a nice quiver, along with the S7's.

Now, if a pair of skis in your quiver were 4-5 years old, then replace something. If you've skied something for a year and are underwhelmed, replace it. But to upgrade before you know what you're upgrading from? You could be spending money that could be used for a ski trip or something.

FWIW, I demo'd the Cham 97. I was expecting to like it based on reviews and what other people were telling me. However, the Chams really like big turns and speed, when I wanted something a little more lively and turny. It was just too much work for me to use them as an all-around, middle-of-the-quiver daily driver. Great ski, but still not for me.
post #7 of 16

The Dynastar Outland 87 is more the spiritual successor to the legend 85/94 than the Cham series. The Cham has an entirely different target and they are very much soft/mixed snow biased skis. To some, that means "all mountain" to others.......it doesn't.

 

FWIW.....there are tons of great hard snow/carving tools available out there and Dynastar makes one of the best in the Course Ti. The Outland 87 is also a very good ski on firm snow up to just shy of bulletproof.

 

IAC......the skis you have are very very good examples of traditional shapes and flexes. They are just as good now as they were when you bought them. The industry is changing for sure, but I'm not really sure that the market is. That is really for you to decide cuz.......you is de market!

 

SJ

post #8 of 16

Jimmy A - They're useless now and by 2013 will not even slide on snow due to compatibility issues. If they're 172 or 178 lengths, PM me and as a courtesy, I will provide fedex labels so you can ship them to me for proper handling.

 

tromano - "very 5-point-ish".  What does that mean?

post #9 of 16

I love my Mythic Riders, freaking great ski in the spring/bumps and crud.  Use them, if you don't like them , sell them...but you have to at least try them.  Along with the S7's you'd be ready for whatever the mountain throws at you.

post #10 of 16
Thread Starter 

Thanks Guys for the input-----I'm stickin with my 85"s and 94"s  plus my S7"s . 180 lbs 5"10------85"s and 94"s are 178 length, I find that length works best for me, the S7"s are 188
 

post #11 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by ts01 View Post

Jimmy A - They're useless now and by 2013 will not even slide on snow due to compatibility issues. If they're 172 or 178 lengths, PM me and as a courtesy, I will provide fedex labels so you can ship them to me for proper handling.

 

tromano - "very 5-point-ish".  What does that mean?

 

The  Cham series have a 5-point shape (similar to DPs 112RP, S7, JJ, etc...) , basically roeckered tip with taper and early taper in the tail as well (though tail is flat). They are soft snow off piste oriented. 

post #12 of 16

I was looking at a photograph the other day of my Legend 8800 (188cm) which I took to Kashmir in 2008 and left there (baggage/weight issues on return home) and wished I still had those skis.  Out of date?  Fark no.

post #13 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post

 

The  Cham series have a 5-point shape (similar to DPs 112RP, S7, JJ, etc...) , basically roeckered tip with taper and early taper in the tail as well (though tail is flat). They are soft snow off piste oriented. 

Probably not relevant to the discussion, but the Chams have a real tail and they ski like a ski with a real tail. 5-pointish skis feel quite a bit different.  To some that tail is the major draw of the Cham, to others its a distraction.  

post #14 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyA View Post

Thanks Guys for the input-----I'm stickin with my 85"s and 94"s  plus my S7"s . 180 lbs 5"10------85"s and 94"s are 178 length, I find that length works best for me, the S7"s are 188
 


i have a pair of mythic riders that i moth balled for a couple years then brought out last year and i was so glad i kept them as they are really good for cruising at warp speed on hard snow as well as soft . I didn't appreciate them at first for some reason

post #15 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by natrat View Post


i have a pair of mythic riders that i moth balled for a couple years then brought out last year and i was so glad i kept them as they are really good for cruising at warp speed on hard snow as well as soft . I didn't appreciate them at first for some reason


I still have my 8000's sitting on the least coast for occasional duty there, and a pair of Mythic's as part of the quiver in SLC. I've just gotten a pair of Kastle LX94's to take the ME's place in SLC, but who knows, it might be like bringing in a hot rookie to take the place of an old vet, but the vet somehow comes through.

 

In any case, the MR's will either go to one son of the other, or become another least coast quiver ski. Will not let them go.

post #16 of 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexzn View Post

Probably not relevant to the discussion, but the Chams have a real tail and they ski like a ski with a real tail. 5-pointish skis feel quite a bit different.  To some that tail is the major draw of the Cham, to others its a distraction.  

 

I was talking about the shape of the skis. 

 

As for feel. On piste yes you are correct. in deep snow and crud, the taper actually feels kind of 5 point ish, they are not all the way there, but I could slarve them no problems. 


Edited by tromano - 9/30/12 at 10:56am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Are Dynastar Legends out of date ?