or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › CHAM 97 or 107 for Colorado
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CHAM 97 or 107 for Colorado

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 

Hi Guys:

 

Long time lurker, first time poster...

 

Anyway, found a sweet deal on Dynastar Cham 97s & 107s at my local shop.  Trying to choose between the 2.  I am 6'2", 215 lbs and I would say an advanced skier (I can get down anything but don't always look great doing it)... I probably get about 20 or so days in a year in Colorado (mostly at Ski Monarch or Summit County) with the occasional trip somewhere powdery.

 

The Chams are available in 184 lengths in both waist sizes or 190s in the 107 size.I am going to mount them with Salomon Warden bindings so I can run my AT boots.  FYI, These are NOT the HM touring version of the Cham ski.

 

What do you guys think?  Thanks for the input! 

post #2 of 12
Thread Starter 

Little more color...  I am currently on a full AT setup with Rossi Powderbirds and Naxo AT bindings... Garmont G-Ride boots.

 

I like skiing trees, powder and enjoy going fast.  Not crazy about moguls but I am getting better at them so would like my next ski to at least be more up to the challenge.

post #3 of 12

The 97 is a great ski.  The best modern crud busting ski I've yet been on.  Big spoon tip with rocker, then a very solid ski for the rear two thirds. They're quite stiff underfoot, with a flat, tapered tail that gives a lot of support when carving on harder snow.  Despite the rockered tip they're actually a ski that likes to be driven ... likes to be told what to do.  

 

The section of the ski varies - it becomes thinner very quickly as it moves rearwards from underfoot and into the tail. They're built with a relatively short turning radius between the contact points, and they have the torsional rigidity to handle a bit of oomph, so they carve pretty nicely on a hard groomer.  The tips flap a bit but it doesn't affect how they ski ... just don't look at your tips and that particular problem goes away.

 

I'd happily buy a pair of the 97, although I have no idea about the 107, sorry.

 

If you're going AT you might prefer the High Mountain (HM) version of the same ski, if they're available.

 

I'm 6'4" and 210lbs.  I skied the 178 but I'd buy the 184.  It's plenty of ski and I wouldn't consider the 190 for my purposes.

 

Best of luck.

post #4 of 12
Thread Starter 
Appreciate the reply... Exactly what is was looking for. I am going to use this as resort/side country skis so I don't need the HM version. I will keep my Powder birds for touring.
post #5 of 12
Do you get to pick your days or are you more of a weekend warrior?
How much longer do you think your Naxo's will last?
post #6 of 12
Thread Starter 
Mixed... Sunday is ski day but I take about 4 or 5 powder days off from work. The Naxos are in fine shape but I will put fixed on these skis. Soly Wardens...
post #7 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by pjo33us View Post

Mixed... Sunday is ski day but I take about 4 or 5 powder days off from work. The Naxos are in fine shape but I will put fixed on these skis. Soly Wardens...

 

Yes, I saw that, but your a big dude and Naxos aren't very burly.  There are no replacement parts and once they go, your back to one pair.

 

I'd go with the longest pair of either.

post #8 of 12
Thread Starter 
That's not a huge concern as I tour maybe 3 to 4 times on pikes peak per season. And I would beg to differ on the Naxos... I have never had issues and they have been my only binding since 2007 or 2008. I figure I am semi retiring them by mounting the Wardens on my resort set up. I also have a set of Damirs I could use as well. Not the burly ones though.
post #9 of 12
Thread Starter 
Anybody else have an opinion on these? Going to try and pick them up this weekend and maybe get a day or two on them before we say goodnight to this season.
post #10 of 12
Thread Starter 

Alright, this is not going to work...  The 97 is sold out at CS&G so it is back to the drawing board.  Most of the shop guys that I have been speaking to are telling me that a 100 to 110 waist is becoming the new normal for all-mountain West skis.  Is this right?  Am I over thinking the whole waist thing?  I realize there is way more to this than just measurements but should I be considering a ski like the Rossi Soul 7 or Solly Q-105 (or the Cham 107 for that matter) versus something a little narrower?

 

I am really looking for something that will ski all mountain 90% of the time for what we see in the Front Range (I mostly ski Monarch or Crested Butte)...  If I need to rent pow skis for a sick dump than so be it.  I like to ski trees, steeps and cut up snow for the most part, and want to be proficient in the bumps.  I am 6'2" 215 lbs.  I am completely open to suggestions at this point although I am trying to find a decent deal. THANKS!

post #11 of 12

I'd suggest a) no more than 100 wide if you want to be proficient in the bumps, and b) trying to demo this weekend to try out a number of different skis, then take your time and find a deal on them this summer, and c) at 215lbs you should stay away from the Soul 7 and other softer flexing skis.

post #12 of 12
Thread Starter 

Thanks TBALL...  That is kind of what I figured on the Soul 7.  Demoing this weekend is a great idea, maybe I can get up to Copper or WP/MJ.

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 › CHAM 97 or 107 for Colorado