post #1 of 1
Thread Starter 
Got to spend a day on this ski this past weekend. It's not a full review because I didn't get to use the ski in its natural habitat, so I will just post a few impressions. The conditions were Squaw, frozen "death cookies" in the morning which somewhat softened up by lunchtime.
First a few speculations. The original Cham was and remains a polarizing ski! some people love it some people hate it. It was certainly a departure from the well-loved Legend series. The Cham was and is nothing like the Legends, which were burly damp strait sidecut all mountain chargers with just enough softness in the flex to make it accessible to mortal men. I feel that the genesis of Cham goes back to the HugeTrouble ski that was not very popular with the general public but beloved by its owners. the Huge was a very peculiar take on a wide soft snow ski. Instead of using ski flex to turn Dynastar gave it a stiff wide shovel and a more flexible, thinner tail, so the whole ski would plane in 3D snow like a surfboard. The upside was that the stiff forefront would not get deflected in chunky snow, so the Huge was at its best when the powder turned into cut up crud. The original Cham had a huge shovel with a lot of splay and a lot of taper (to keep that shovel from hooking up). That front was attached to a weird shape pintail with camber going all the way to the end of that pintail. It didn't look as comical as the BBR but was close (and being better built it performed a lot better too). Enter. Cham 2.0. The main elements of the ski are still there, it still has a wide shovel with quite a bit of rocker, but apparently less than before. The tip taper is still there but subjectively less than in the original Cham. The major changes are in the tail, it's wider has less taper, and a far more conventional profile.

Cham 2.0 still skis like a quality Dynastar- damp solid, and fairly powerful. You can ski the death cookies with confidence, but the big shovel will transmit the snow conditions to you in no time. I feel that my own skis- the Bonafide or the old ProRider- would be slicing through the chop, the Cham2 was going over the tops ( perhaps not surprising for a 117 ski). I didn't find a speed limit to this ski, but the ride was bumpy. It's a way better bump ski than the width and stiffness would suggest - this was my surprise of the day. Not enough good snow for serious groomer evaluation, but the ski felt very un-exciting on the groomers with fairly vague enagagement and and a tendency to slide, which made me wonder if there was an issue with the tune on that ski. Even then the tail felt like a definite improvement over the old model, it's easier to feel it, it's a lot more solid in mixed snow. I did manage to find two legitimately deep turns that day, on those the tails went into the snow readily and the shovel stayed up, so the design does work as advertised. My major issue with the ski is that it still does not have enough tip. The taper that is necessary to keep the shovel from hooking up still makes the tip feel vague compared to the more modern rockered tip designs. On the Cham the tip engages too close to the front if the boot to my taste.

Overall, this is definitely feels like a step in the right direction for Dynastar, I hope they continue the evolution and bring us back something that would approach the versatility and performance envelope of the Legend series. I believe the 117 is the widest Cham, so I think the narrower models would skis a lot more conventional and with the new wider tail, they can be an option for the more mixed snow days.