EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Every day ski plus a ski to teach on... (Cham 97 vs Bonafide vs S3)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Every day ski plus a ski to teach on... (Cham 97 vs Bonafide vs S3) - Page 2

post #31 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8M View Post

A ha! Not so fast says Tecnica Canada. They too are now sold out of the Bonafide.

 

Now I have two choices: Kabookie in the same length, or perhaps the Cham 97.
 

The Kabookie is fun!  If you can get them, but I haven't seen any in stock here in the states for awhile. 

post #32 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

The Kabookie is fun!  If you can get them, but I haven't seen any in stock here in the states for awhile. 

 



Would you describe it as a more playful version of the Bonafide? And does it perform as well on the groomed?

post #33 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8M View Post

A ha! Not so fast says Tecnica Canada. They too are now sold out of the Bonafide.

 

Now I have two choices: Kabookie in the same length, or perhaps the Cham 97.
 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyson Rockwood View Post

Well, the good thing about Pro Form is that by this point of the year, selection gets really spotty so decision making gets easier.


Not to say "I told you so" ... but, I told ya so.

post #34 of 45
Thread Starter 

Ha ha Tyson, that you did. beercheer.gif

 

As for my dilemma, they do have the 180cm Kabookie in stock (confirmed). I will be going with that, given all the reviews I can find seem to indicate it performs almost identically to the Bonafide but at a lighter weight. Does everyone agree?

post #35 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8M View Post

Ha ha Tyson, that you did. beercheer.gif

 

As for my dilemma, they do have the 180cm Kabookie in stock (confirmed). I will be going with that, given all the reviews I can find seem to indicate it performs almost identically to the Bonafide but at a lighter weight. Does everyone agree?

yes, very similar.  Quicker, not as damp (as the Bonafide), skis more like other non-metal skis like the Head Rock n' Roll, although that ski is a bit softer at the tip than the Kabookie and has a little more energy. It might also remind you in feel of a Nordica Hell n' Back, not in terms of performance though, just snow feel. 

 

E98 might not be a bad comparison either, in terms of snow feel. They are very different skis, but if I remember correctly, they didn't feel all that different on the snow; no metal, fairly damp, fairly stiff.

post #36 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post

yes, very similar.  Quicker, not as damp (as the Bonafide), skis more like other non-metal skis like the Head Rock n' Roll, although that ski is a bit softer at the tip than the Kabookie and has a little more energy. It might also remind you in feel of a Nordica Hell n' Back, not in terms of performance though, just snow feel. 

 

E98 might not be a bad comparison either, in terms of snow feel. They are very different skis, but if I remember correctly, they didn't feel all that different on the snow; no metal, fairly damp, fairly stiff.

 



The Head Rock n' Roll would be on my list of skis to check out, but I can't get by those graphics. I'm pretty tolerant of wild graphics, but the whole Motorhead thing makes absolutely no sense to me.

 

As for the E98, are you sure you're not thinking of something else? It definitely has metal in it!

post #37 of 45
Thread Starter 

In yet another turn of events, (the drama never stops around here) I will now be going with the Cham 97s and placing my order today.

 

Question: Is the 184 too much ski for what i'm looking for? I read that there is some serious tip rocker on this thing and wonder if it skis short as a result.

post #38 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8M View Post

In yet another turn of events, (the drama never stops around here) I will now be going with the Cham 97s and placing my order today.

 

Question: Is the 184 too much ski for what i'm looking for? I read that there is some serious tip rocker on this thing and wonder if it skis short as a result.

If you have doubts (well founded doubts on a polarizing ski) why are you getting ready to pull the trigger on it? 

 

The Cham has a tremendous amount of taper compared to most skis in this category. Have you ever skied a ski with +25mm of taper? They do ski different. How many of your students will be on skis like this? Very few if any. The technique yo will be using and demonstrating to them will be difficult for them to translate into their skiing. The Cham might be fine for a free skiing ski for you but not the best instructing tool. 

post #39 of 45
6' 170#? skiing the east mostly and teaching? Rossi E88 should be on your short list as well. It's a great compliment to your Super 7.
post #40 of 45

Ya', I think Phil has a strong point. Great ski, but for teaching, not a chance. It's a power ski, heavy and damp, 5 point sidecut for variable conditions. Stiff tail for gnarly steeps. Like the name, it's a Cham tool. Performs differently than most other skis made. How many people even used the much more conventional Legend Pro Rider for teaching? Not many.

post #41 of 45

Have not skied the Cham, have owned several Legends, associate them with big mountain conditions, patrollers, need for speed and/or freight train stability. I'm roughly your size, would not call a Legend "nimble." If the Chams are Legends + odd iteration of 5 points (which I also ski, just not these and not for carving), cannot fathom how or why you'd use them for teaching. Something like the E98 or Kabookie seems much more reasonable, although even there, curious why you'd want a rockered tail to demonstrate certain stuff. But obviously, doing a lot of extrapolation, certain you're a better skier than I, so grain of salt time. th_dunno-1[1].gif

post #42 of 45
Thread Starter 

Point taken. The reasons I am looking at the Cham are as follows:

 

1. Mostly positive reviews.

2. Carvy, smeary ability in spite of being a wider ski.

3. Nimble and maneuverable.

4. Still available on pro deal. (why I waited this long is beyond me)

5. Most of the students in our neck of the woods are young first time skiers, so there is little demonstration of advanced technique.

6. My Super 7's have a tapered design (not to the extent of the Cham however) and I quite like them.

 

Am I still out of my mind for considering these? I'm not seeing the reviews where it indicates these are a real rough and tough, burly ski.
 

post #43 of 45
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post

Have not skied the Cham, have owned several Legends, associate them with big mountain conditions, patrollers, need for speed and/or freight train stability. If the Chams are Legends + odd iteration of 5 points (which I also ski, just not these and not for carving), cannot fathom how or why you'd use them for teaching. Something like the E98 or Kabookie seems much more reasonable, although even there, curious why you'd want a rockered tail to demonstrate stuff like finishing a turn on packed powder. But obviously, doing a lot of extrapolation, grain of salt time. th_dunno-1[1].gif


From what i've read: although the Chams are replacing the Legend series, they don't seem to have the demands of the old Pro Rider, Big Dump, etc skis. I could be wrong.

post #44 of 45

No, suspect you're right. But my sense is (you need to talk to some who's actually skied the things, not someone who's deducing stuff) that they remain fairly burly construction, have used shape rather than flex changes to achieve easier (and very different) handling. As far as pintail, I own S7's, so relate to your enjoyment, and personally, I've never had an issue with a number of non-rockered pintails and traditional carving. YMMV. But what's surprising to me is that apparently the Chams also have absolutely flat tails, with a true 5 point design there as well as the front. Now as I have experienced 5-point, on edge it'll tend to push away from the direction of the intended turn because it's convex at that point. So it works fine in rockered designs where it's only touching snow in 3D conditions and comparatively low edge angles because the user is smearing or pivoting or skidding or slarving or drifting, whether he/she thinks it's carving or not. 

 

Otherwise on firm, as with the S7's, if you're actually carving, you're just working the section of the ski that has traditional sidecut. The rest is out of harm's way. 

 

But the Chams do away with that last condition. Carving on firm snow will necessarily involve the convex bit of tail cuz it's flat. Now I cannot say what that will do, but my hunch is that it will make skidding and smearing on firm snow a kick, but carving, ah, interesting. 

 

End of non-user hypothetical analysis. wink.gif

post #45 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8M View Post

In yet another turn of events, (the drama never stops around here) I will now be going with the Cham 97s and placing my order today.

 

Question: Is the 184 too much ski for what i'm looking for? I read that there is some serious tip rocker on this thing and wonder if it skis short as a result.

Wouldn't be my first choice.  Rock n' Roll is great though!  I hear you about the graphics, they don't bother me, but it rips as a ski.  As good as anything on the market, and better than most, if you are my size at least.  The Cham 97 was lacking a tail, and was too smeary up front.  I think it works for soft snow, not hard though.  Felt like a pow ski in a small package. I don't teach though: perhaps it works for you, but if I needed Dynastar, I was much more impressed with the Outland 87 for a true swiss army knife ski. Still has a bit of tip rocker, but very solid and stable.  It rips!

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 › Every day ski plus a ski to teach on... (Cham 97 vs Bonafide vs S3)