or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › What happened to Dynastar Chrome?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What happened to Dynastar Chrome?

post #1 of 24
Thread Starter 

When I was at the ski show last spring the Chrome looked like one badass ski. I have not seen one pair on the hill this year do people just not buy ripping badass carvers or what. You'd think in a winter with nothing better to do than rip the groomers, these would be all over the place.

post #2 of 24

Well, you know it's not because it wasn't shiny enough. :D

post #3 of 24

That's a really good question. Looked great, assumed they were the new 4x4. There was one poster here who said they were super stiff in the store, said he skied them, never posted a review or explained more. And I've not seen a single pair on the slopes either. But yeah, they looked perfect for half the U.S. so far this year. 

 

Dynastar may be surpassing Elan as the world's worst marketer. I've seen a fair number of Elans this season, mainly rentals, but at least that's something. Amphibios and narrower carvers. The only Dynastars I see are the racing skis. Period. So their response, brilliant in its, ah, simplicity, is to expand their line of 5 point big mountain skis that no one wants to 5 point carvers that no one wants. :rolleyes

post #4 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post
 

When I was at the ski show last spring the Chrome looked like one badass ski. I have not seen one pair on the hill this year do people just not buy ripping badass carvers or what. You'd think in a winter with nothing better to do than rip the groomers, these would be all over the place.

 

 

I'm curious about this ski, too.  Maybe it's more of a Euro thing, carving, these days.

post #5 of 24
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post
 

That's a really good question. Looked great, assumed they were the new 4x4. There was one poster here who said they were super stiff in the store, said he skied them, never posted a review or explained more. And I've not seen a single pair on the slopes either. But yeah, they looked perfect for half the U.S. so far this year. 

 

Dynastar may be surpassing Elan as the world's worst marketer. I've seen a fair number of Elans this season, mainly rentals, but at least that's something. Amphibios and narrower carvers. The only Dynastars I see are the racing skis. Period. So their response, brilliant in its, ah, simplicity, is to expand their line of 5 point big mountain skis that no one wants to 5 point carvers that no one wants. :rolleyes

 

I do see a lot of Chams every day, but not sure if anyone paid for them or not. Maybe there will be lots of nearly free Chromes soon. Chrome 78 looks like a wide Course though, what's not to like?

post #6 of 24

^^^^ Yeah, totally agree. If it's what it seems to be, I'd snatch a pair even if I wasn't sure what to do with them. You take the 178's and I'll take the 172's...

post #7 of 24

I saw 2 pair this week on my hill. They ski really well.  2 pair of Course Pros as well.  I was thinking of getting a pair, but am really loving the RX12 Kastle and Blizzard Power 800s I have been skiing. 

 

Funny, the people skiing carvers right now are locals. Go up on a weekday, and about 1/3 of the people are on either on race skis, race carvers, carvers, or high performance frontside skis.  Everyone has this image of "locals" being on super wide skis all the time: around here, lots of people race or used to race, and so they ski hard snow skis when the conditions are hard, and soft snow skis when it is soft.  This year, we have had 1 soft snow day where you had enough snow to venture off-piste, and around 50 sunny/icy/firm days where groomers were the only option, either due to a patina of ice, or lack of snow, away from groomers.

 

Went up Saturday, and it was all moderately old people/weekend warriors who couldn't turn their way out of a wet paper bag on Super 7's, Gotamas, and Shiros.  Odd choice, considering the concrete snow; then again, seeing who was skiing them, I am sure those skis just slide around easily with minimal fuss. Great choice for pivoting and heel pushing down the hill. I am sure if you put them on a carver, it would be like strapping them into a fighter jet. 

 

The conditions were perfect for carvers, however.  Some of the most loaded turns of the season.

post #8 of 24

IMO, nothing happened to the Chrome except it was/is overshadowed by the Course Pro. I'd agree that Dynastar is miserable at marketing but they do have some great skis........always have. In our case, we sell the Course Pro instead of the Chrome largely b/c every year that we test on piste skis, the older Course Ti and the newer Course Pro rise to (or near) the top of the heap. We have a longish history of promoting the Course models to our technical skiing customers and thus....... despite the marketing issues, the Course family of skis has established some serious cred while the Chrome thing is a very good ski but an unknown to most folks.

 

SJ

post #9 of 24

Which brings up an interesting issue about internal competition. Do the designers ever get together with the marketers and talk about how one line will likely cut into the sales of another? Or are the economics of pressing skis such that it's not important, you just throw out a bunch of skis and see what, ah, floats? This is an issue that seems to be more common - Kastle, Head, and Blizzard also come to mind - so there must be some coherent rationale. 

post #10 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by beyond View Post
 

Which brings up an interesting issue about internal competition. Do the designers ever get together with the marketers and talk about how one line will likely cut into the sales of another? Or are the economics of pressing skis such that it's not important, you just throw out a bunch of skis and see what, ah, floats? This is an issue that seems to be more common - Kastle, Head, and Blizzard also come to mind - so there must be some coherent rationale. 

 

You'd think so but unfortunately, in many cases, there isn't. In most cases, they don't want to miss a possible sale in any mini-micro segment of the market so instead of just building a tight collection of great stuff.....they just throw it all against the wall in the hopes that some of it will stick.

 

SJ

post #11 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgcatching View Post
 

I saw 2 pair this week on my hill. They ski really well.  2 pair of Course Pros as well.  I was thinking of getting a pair, but am really loving the RX12 Kastle and Blizzard Power 800s I have been skiing. 

 

Funny, the people skiing carvers right now are locals. Go up on a weekday, and about 1/3 of the people are on either on race skis, race carvers, carvers, or high performance frontside skis.  Everyone has this image of "locals" being on super wide skis all the time: around here, lots of people race or used to race, and so they ski hard snow skis when the conditions are hard, and soft snow skis when it is soft.  This year, we have had 1 soft snow day where you had enough snow to venture off-piste, and around 50 sunny/icy/firm days where groomers were the only option, either due to a patina of ice, or lack of snow, away from groomers.

 

Went up Saturday, and it was all moderately old people/weekend warriors who couldn't turn their way out of a wet paper bag on Super 7's, Gotamas, and Shiros.  Odd choice, considering the concrete snow; then again, seeing who was skiing them, I am sure those skis just slide around easily with minimal fuss. Great choice for pivoting and heel pushing down the hill. I am sure if you put them on a carver, it would be like strapping them into a fighter jet. 

 

The conditions were perfect for carvers, however.  Some of the most loaded turns of the season.

Jesus,

I thought I was the only one that noticed this. Most younger people, and kids seem to be on ski's appropriate(ish) for the conditions. While everyone I see on pow ski's seem to be the older (more thoughtful) set.

 

While I am more than happy these days to ski my Influence that is tuned for more hard snow performance. I AM looking to add a sub 90 ski to the quiver next year.

post #12 of 24

I just returned from a trip to Val Thorens in France. Have to say that there were loads of people skiing on Dynastars. I would guess because it is a 'native' ski to the area. I saw everything from various older Sultans, Chams, Chromes, etc. I must agree that their marketing strategy here in North America is quite poor. Great ski's though!

post #13 of 24

I've seen a few pairs of Chorme skis this season.  I wouldn't say that they are ubiquitous, but some folks bought them and  are skiing on them.

 

I tried a pair last season, and thought they were ok, but not as good as my Course Ti..  Likewise, I didn't find the Outland as good as my Legends. For a one-ski quiver, either the Chrome or the Outland  would be a good choice, but I'm looking for two different models to cover a lot of ground - I want my hard snow skis to be a no-compromise groomer slayer, and then I'm looking for something soft and forgiving when it's soft.                                        

post #14 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecimmortal View Post
 

Jesus,

I thought I was the only one that noticed this. Most younger people, and kids seem to be on ski's appropriate(ish) for the conditions. While everyone I see on pow ski's seem to be the older (more thoughtful) set.

 

While I am more than happy these days to ski my Influence that is tuned for more hard snow performance. I AM looking to add a sub 90 ski to the quiver next year.

 

Since you like the feel of the ON3P, as do I, you might want to look at a narrower ski from Head.  The feel isn't all that different: stable, powerful, but not overly stiff or planky.  Kastle MX series are always a great bet, too.  Something like an MX78 will rip bumps and go as fast as you can bear on the groomers.  83 is close, 88 is more do-everything, not as powerful or grippy on truly concrete groomers.  I have been skiing the Blizzard Power 800s, and the Elan Waveflex SLX: both are a boatload of fun on these conditions.  Some of the turns seem like I am getting 3g's on the exit if I load them properly.  

 

I guess at Bachelor, most people, if they want to ski a lot, are going to have multiple pair.  Narrower to mid width all-mountain and a bigger soft snow ski at the minimum.  We are selling a lot more carvers this year though: sold out of the Head Rally, Blizzard R-power, one pair left of the Titan, RX12's are almost gone.  Definitely, this is the crowd that wants a responsive ski, and has a decent skill set.  The other people I referenced are using wide skis as a big bear hug, getting themselves down the hill safely, as those skis won't grab or accelerate in any way. Works great for lower skill levels; one thing a Shiro does really well on ice is slide sideways, no grab, no pushback, no unexpected things happening.  It works pretty well for those still in a partial stem who slow down by throwing their skis sideways.  Permanent training wheels, yes, but what is wrong with that for people who have no desire to ditch the training wheels?  If they are more confident skiing ice on a super detuned, wide ski, good for them. Otherwise, they would just stay home, and we need people on the hill this year.  

 

I know of a couple of guys on Hellbents up there as well, but they are ex-racers, totally committed to the fall line, which is how you have to ski a 120mm ski on ice if you are going to see it hold arc to arc.  I tried that on the Super 7 the other day, but I didn't have the commitment required to really get the ski to hold. It felt like it was going to break loose at any time, and send me down hard.  In that case, what I needed is even more angulation and countering to really stick it; but my brain said "back off, this is scary!"   People who grew up skiing icy gates have that sort of confidence; my skill set isn't that good, nor are most anyone else's outside of a really elite skier.  Maybe my skills are good enough, but I still lack the confidence and repetitiveness of gate training on slick conditions to really work on feel and trust. 

post #15 of 24

At the risk of reviving old threads, and in the spirit of being self-contradictory, I'll note that not all criteria for firm snow are driven by width. Saw a solid skier run a very credible GS time on Mantras last weekend. (He wasn't named Picabo.) And I suspect that Stockli 107's or Kastle 104's would hold on hardpack at speeds we'd pucker over. The mythical new Kastle MX98, when it arrives, will seriously rip up hardpack, guarantee. 

 

Which is not to say that most narrower skis won't do it ultimately better or more easily. Or that Ecimmortal shouldn't get an 80-something. Or that I'm going to sell my narrow skis. Just that I'd trust some wider skis on ice waaaay more than others. And that in all honesty, a good hardpack ski that's 98 mm will make variable death cookies/ruts/refrozen rubble/crud a lot more enjoyable than a great hardpack ski that's 78 mm. 

 

Yeah, those edge angles, with a good dose of projection downhill, help, don't they. 

post #16 of 24
Plus if you're like me you neither run such an aggressive tune on your wide skis nor maintain it as assiduously as you do on your race skis.
post #17 of 24

I skied the Speed course for 2 seasons and loved it. Got rid of it to buy GS skis for my 11 year old daughter. These kids grow like weeds. Anyway I have been happy on my 170cm SLX's for the hard snow days up here in New England. I tried an elan ripstick in a 176cm last week and a Chrome 74 fluid in a 175cm and found both skis, albeit different, very fun and I would be happy on either one for  turning on a  Hard snow ski. The Chrome snapped short turns easier than the Rips stick, but held long turns equally as well. Both were fairly damp. I liked the 74 mm waist on the chrome as it gave me a better platform yet I was still able to change edges easily and quickly. I did not take either into bumps as it was a cold frozen day both I really liked the chrome and am looking at it as a replacement for my SLX as it holds speed and larger turns a little better than a 170cm slalom ski.

post #18 of 24

Finished the weekend up at Cannon on a pair of 178cm chrome 74's. Conditions were hard pack with about 2" of fluff on top. Amazing mid winter conditions for March 29! Anyway the first few runs were tough. The ski was very grabby, and hopping a lot, wanting to run straight, so I immediately went down to the pro shop and sure enough, the base was flat and the side was at 1D. I had them put on a 1d base/3 d side bevel and off I went. perfect set up for this ski. This ski is a lot snappier than my old speed course. I felt it also skied shorter than it's 178cm length and I probably could have gone a little longer as it felt short on big Gs turns. It held well, but I felt like I was looking for a little more length under foot. Where this ski shines is in medium and short turns, which surprised me a bit based on it's specs. It rolls onto edge easily and you can ski it hard or just cruise and the ski behaves well in either scenario. The  tail will throw you a bit at high speeds when you load it up, but behaves very well at slower speeds. The ski feels stiff in hand when you flex it, yet on the snow it feels much softer and I was getting some real nice arcs today with minimal effort. I took it into some small ice bumps and it was okay, but where this ski shines is on the groomers and hard snow. It is damp, but not as much as the speed course. I found it to be a fun carver that will probably become my go to ski on the hard snow days when I may want to rest my SLX's. All in all another excellent Dynastar ski!

post #19 of 24

What do people think of this Dynastar ski?  Is it good value for the price ($239)?

 

Dynastar Chrome 68 Skis + Xpress 10 Bindings 2014

http://www.evo.com/outlet/ski-packages/dynastar-chrome-68-skis-xpress-10-bindings.aspx#image=84467/383237/clone.jpg

Tip/Waist/Tail: 124/68/104

Turning radius: 12m

170cm skis

 

I am

5'11"

~230lb

Ski in PA/NJ/NY

 

I would consider myself as a lower intermediate skier (comfortable on Greens and most Blues) and plan to increase the amount of skiing I do to 10 to 20 days per season.

 

Would I be better served renting next season and look for deals next spring? (I already have boots:  SALOMON X PRO 90)

post #20 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyPilgrim View Post
 

What do people think of this Dynastar ski?  Is it good value for the price ($239)?

 

Dynastar Chrome 68 Skis + Xpress 10 Bindings 2014

http://www.evo.com/outlet/ski-packages/dynastar-chrome-68-skis-xpress-10-bindings.aspx#image=84467/383237/clone.jpg

Tip/Waist/Tail: 124/68/104

Turning radius: 12m

170cm skis

 

I am

5'11"

~230lb

Ski in PA/NJ/NY

 

I would consider myself as a lower intermediate skier (comfortable on Greens and most Blues) and plan to increase the amount of skiing I do to 10 to 20 days per season.

 

Would I be better served renting next season and look for deals next spring? (I already have boots:  SALOMON X PRO 90)

Even the 170cm version is too short for your size.  You need something closer to 180.  Did a boot fitter put you in those boots?  At your size you should be skiing at least a 120 flex in the X-Pro series.  I only weigh 150 pounds and a heat moldable Salomon like the X-Pro  or X-Max at 90 flex is way too soft for me.  I can handle the X-Max 120 without difficulty.  You need stiffer boots.


Edited by mtcyclist - 3/30/15 at 6:20am
post #21 of 24

I would agree, you are far too heavy for this ski. too heavy for a 90 flex boot too , if you are committed to improving. You need something that is going to hold an edge .Take a look at ASOgear.com. They have some real good blowouts right now. Realistically, spend the extra $50-$100 and get a ski you can grow on that will perform for you, yet allow for you to learn on.

post #22 of 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyPilgrim View Post
 

What do people think of this Dynastar ski?  Is it good value for the price ($239)? Will disagree with others here given what you say about yourself. These are OK, for now, although IMO you could do better for $50-$100 more, as stated above. These are a little short for your height, but acceptable. They are a nice basic design, for the class (which is a function of the ski's construction and cross sectional area, not its length), but will be fairly flexy for someone your size. If you want to use them for moderate skiing on groomers, learning to carve at low to normal speeds, should work. But they will overflex and become, ah, eventful at speeds north of 35 mph for someone your weight. They will not be great on ice. And the bindings will need to be set toward the top of their range, say 9 or 10. Not sure I agree the solution is a longer version, if you want to blast, or go off groomers, you need a different ski. You might look at the Chrome Pros in 74, or some similar by Rossignol. But these are OK for your present purposes

 

Dynastar Chrome 68 Skis + Xpress 10 Bindings 2014

http://www.evo.com/outlet/ski-packages/dynastar-chrome-68-skis-xpress-10-bindings.aspx#image=84467/383237/clone.jpg

Tip/Waist/Tail: 124/68/104

Turning radius: 12m

170cm skis

 

I am

5'11"

~230lb

Ski in PA/NJ/NY

 

I would consider myself as a lower intermediate skier (comfortable on Greens and most Blues) and plan to increase the amount of skiing I do to 10 to 20 days per season.

 

Would I be better served renting next season and look for deals next spring? (I already have boots:  SALOMON X PRO 90) These are soft. My 12 year old will be moving to a 90 flex next season; he weighs 85 lbs. If they fit, that's the most important thing, but you will need stiffer boots - think 110-120 - if you want to get past basic intermediate. For now, they will also work for your mission. Put another way, we are almost constitutionally incapable of saying, "It's fine, don't spend more money on gear than you need to." We all think everyone should plan for their elite racing career immediately. But sure, go with the good price, have fun, upgrade when and if you need to. Which will be in a year or two.  :)


Edited by beyond - 3/30/15 at 7:12am
post #23 of 24

Beyond, Basil J, and Mtcyclist:

 

Thank you for your feedback.

 

If the conditions are good I'll try to ski @ Camelback this Friday on a pair of 180cm skis.

 

I'll see what difference I can notice from the longer ski length.  Until this March I only skied on 150 and 160 cm skis.  After I bought the boots, I skied on 170cm skis.

 

The link to ASOgear was good.  I agree that at $300-$400 one can find several quality skis.

 

My best choice might be to get a season rental for 2015-2016 at about 180cm and get some time in skiing.  Then I should have a better sense of what works better for me.

 

I'd like to get a ski to avoid dealing with ski rentals.  Since I ski in the Mid-Atlantic, I focus my search at <80mm waist skis in the Beginning to Intermediate type skis.

 

When I rent, I classify myself as a Type II skier.  IIRC, the ski bindings are set at the 8-9 DIN setting.

 

RE:  Stability at speed.  Although I am not positive, I do think the 170cm were more stable at speed than the 160cm skis. (I tend to avoid too much speed [I do not think I ever skied over 20mph :eek ;) ], but that might have been a result of skiing on 160cm skis.)

post #24 of 24

Here is my advice and take it for what it is worth. If you are serious about improving and know you will get at least 10 days next season, then purchase or do a seasonal rental. You don't want to be getting on different skis every week and having to adjust to a different ski every time you hit the slopes

Second IMO when learning skills, shorter and narrower always is the way to go. Learning releasing-edging-transfer skills is better learned on a sub 80cm waisted ski. Learning short turns and edging movements are best done at slow to moderate speeds on a narrow ski so you can learn to balance on one ski.

To this day, when I do skill training or practice movements that I need to improve on, I use a 66cm ski. You don't need to go that thin, but low to mid 70's will give you good feedback and some versatility for different types of snow.

Lastly, if you want to purchase something, get a pair of boots that are appropriate for your skill level and physique.

Get a custom foot bed and if possible get an alignment done so you can learn the movements without fighting your gear. I would not buy boots online only because fitters are never happy when you bring in a model that you bought somewhere else  that they carry in for modifications.

Good luck .

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 › What happened to Dynastar Chrome?