or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2009 Dynastar Contact 4X4
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2009 Dynastar Contact 4X4 - Page 4

post #91 of 118

As far as I know, they are the same except for graphics. 

post #92 of 118

Allow me to confirm what already seems to be the consensus.

I'm 6'5", 200lbs and just bought a pair of Contact 4X4's, 178cm, after extensive demo'ing. 

You are going to want the 178's, especially if, as you say, you are planning on hard charging the groomers (or choppy snow for that matter).  They turn plenty quick at speed, and are very manueverable for people our size. 

 

I would only consider the 172's (and only maybe) if I were going to spend more than 50% of my time in the bumps.  (My percentage is more like 10%)

 

I bought 'em just before Skier219 posted his 4X4's in Gear Swap, or I would saved myself some coin and worked out a deal for his.  Also, Sierra Skis has a pretty sweet sale going (another 20% off on top of 50%).

post #93 of 118

People, people - this site rocks - as a new user to chuck on a question and get all these responses is sweet! Definitely appreciate it.

 

Thinking more about exactly what I want to know - I realise that standard knowledge would say definitely a 178 for someone of my size, 6'4 and 200lbs. I guess I really wanted to find out whether I would lose much maneuverability and 'liveliness' at 178 compared to 172 (thanks for alluding to this rgeba), and whether a 172 would compromise stability at speed/through choppy snow. And thinking about it - I definitely would be spending most of the time on ripping out GS turns on groomers (probably 10% on bumps), but still a reasonable portion of time skiing steeps, and hence making short turns.

So after all of that I reckon I'll go with the178 (clearly a consensus - and seems the right choice given what I'll be using them for). Any other thoughts about weighing up maneuverability and stabiliy?

 

Thanks everyone.

Unfortunately I wont get to christen them until the start of August when I head up to Mt. Hotham, Victoria, Australia.

Cheers,

Vinnie

post #94 of 118

same dilemna here.

 

I'm 6 foot (184 CM), 205 pounds and a level 7 skier in Ontario (small mountain, mostly hardpack).

 

I'm aggressive and athletic and like high speeds.

 

I'm looking at the 4x4 to replace my Atomic SX10's in 173 length.

 

I also just picked up a set of Dynastar Speed Omeglass WC slalom skis for the short turn/gate days.

 

Would i be better off on the 172 or 178 4x4?

 

The Dynastar product selector has me on a 178.

post #95 of 118

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swerny View Post

same dilemna here.

 

I'm 6 foot (184 CM), 205 pounds and a level 7 skier in Ontario (small mountain, mostly hardpack).

 

I'm aggressive and athletic and like high speeds.

 

I'm looking at the 4x4 to replace my Atomic SX10's in 173 length.

 

I also just picked up a set of Dynastar Speed Omeglass WC slalom skis for the short turn/gate days.

 

Would i be better off on the 172 or 178 4x4?

 

The Dynastar product selector has me on a 178.


I'm about the same size #205 6'4 and I cant even imagine doing anything shorter than 178. I can even see myself on 184s :-)

 

178, it is. Now go to evogear.com and ask them to price match the sierraskis.com price by 5% and you can get them for about $432.00 shipped.

 

J.

post #96 of 118

^ what he said. aside from jancouver's brilliant working of the evogear.com system, if you've already got slalom race skis, why not mix it up with a little longer turning ski? 178 it is.

post #97 of 118

Thanks guys, I'm just worried it may be too much ski to handle in 178.

 

 

I wasn't able to demo them.

 

I did prefer the Head Supershape Speed in 177 to my 173 atomic's though.

 

I'm thinking the 178 4x4's would be fine.

 

Jancouver is 4 inhes taller than me though we're the same weight.

post #98 of 118

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swerny View Post

Thanks guys, I'm just worried it may be too much ski to handle in 178.

 

 

I wasn't able to demo them.

 

I did prefer the Head Supershape Speed in 177 to my 173 atomic's though.

 

I'm thinking the 178 4x4's would be fine.

 

Jancouver is 4 inhes taller than me though we're the same weight.



 

height means nothing... i mean, if two people BOTH weighed 250lbs. but one was 6'7" and the other was 5'2"... THEN it would be safe to say that they are of grossly different levels of physical fitness, which would THEN be something to consider...

 

rant aside. don't sell yourself short. you're over the 2-buck mark. you describe yourself as fit and agressive. who on EARTH do you think they make the 184 for if YOU can't ski the 178? they're skis. not rocket-powered sleds. you'll be fine.

post #99 of 118

I ended up settling on the 178s (I'm 6'4, 200lbs).

Can't provide a proper recommendation as it'll be August before I get to ski them here in Aus.

But, even just looking at them - I'm super-glad I didn't go shorter (which I know doesn't say much).

Nevertheless, I agree - the 178 will be sweet!

post #100 of 118

I tried the price match with evogear and was denied.

 

Sierra is selling with the PX14 fluid binding, evogear is selling with the PX12 Ti.

 

Funny, I thought the 4 x 4 and Groove would only work with the Fluid binding.

 

That's a hell of a deal at Sierra.

 

I can get them for the same price locally once you figure in the shipping costs though

post #101 of 118

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swerny View Post

I tried the price match with evogear and was denied.

 

Sierra is selling with the PX14 fluid binding, evogear is selling with the PX12 Ti.

 

Funny, I thought the 4 x 4 and Groove would only work with the Fluid binding.

 

That's a hell of a deal at Sierra.

 

I can get them for the same price locally once you figure in the shipping costs though

 

Shipping costs?  What's that?  At the top right of the page on sierraskis.com in red letters:

"Free Shipping Any Order"

 

Edit: You don't state your location, but I see the Canadian flag.  That's free shipping in the US only, so maybe that's the issue.

post #102 of 118

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swerny View Post

I tried the price match with evogear and was denied.

 

Sierra is selling with the PX14 fluid binding, evogear is selling with the PX12 Ti.

 

Funny, I thought the 4 x 4 and Groove would only work with the Fluid binding.

 

That's a hell of a deal at Sierra.

 

I can get them for the same price locally once you figure in the shipping costs though


Evo is selling with the PX12 Fluid.  You are right that the ski only comes Fluid.  If anything, Evo should charge less!

post #103 of 118

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swerny View Post

I tried the price match with evogear and was denied.

 

Sierra is selling with the PX14 fluid binding, evogear is selling with the PX12 Ti.

 

Funny, I thought the 4 x 4 and Groove would only work with the Fluid binding.

 

That's a hell of a deal at Sierra.

 

I can get them for the same price locally once you figure in the shipping costs though


I'm quite shocked as they always match/beat by 5%. Maybe because it is not the same binding, therefore it is a different ski? Skier219 is correct and they should charge even less for the PX12 binding. Go with sierra, still a great deal and you will be paying about $50 less than what I paid :-)

 

J.

post #104 of 118
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jancouver View Post

 


I'm quite shocked as they always match/beat by 5%. Maybe because it is not the same binding, therefore it is a different ski? Skier219 is correct and they should charge even less for the PX12 binding. Go with sierra, still a great deal and you will be paying about $50 less than what I paid :-)

 

J.

 

Hi J.

 

Same ski and binding system, just a different set of springs with a different DIN rating installed in the bindings.

 

Dynastar first imported the PX12 and then imported the ski with PX14 bindings on during 2008. Once the PX14 were available, the skis with PX12 started gathering dust. Now all remaining stock is being sold at off-season prices.

 

Michael

post #105 of 118

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaobrien6 View Post

 

Edit: You don't state your location, but I see the Canadian flag.  That's free shipping in the US only, so maybe that's the issue.


Canadian yes, I updated my info
 

post #106 of 118

Hello All,

 

I got to ski these at the end of the year for about 10 days in a 178.

 

I'm 280 about 6'2 and I guess I am about a level 7ish skier, not really good in bumps yet but working on it. This is my second season of skiing so take my review for what its worth. I am a pretty athletic guy, so don't be decieved by the weight. I skiied about 50 days this season.

 

First impression: These skis felt slightly short to me. I ski a smaller mountain in the east, and if I was on a bigger mountain I would definitely want the next size up. They are a little heavy, but I like how they feel.

 

The first day out was an icy, cold  eastern day...basically what I bought these skis for. These skis perform fantastically on this stuff and grip like crazy. They are rock solid at speed. The gps said I got them up to 90km/hr and they held rock steady. These are the most confidence inspiring ski I have ever been on at those speeds (Easily better than the AC50 in a 170). This may be partially because they feel fairly heavy underfoot. As expected, they carved like crazy. One thing I did notice, is that they delta on these bindings pitch me quite a bit forward and really burn my quads out. This is something I need to address by next season.

 

I then skied these in all sorts of more spring snow conditions. In the corn snow they behaved well, but most skis behave well in this snow. One day we had 6 inches of virgin late april powder, and they were decent...they got me around ok, but needed a little bit of speed to float somebody of my girth. After the powder the got tracked out heavily and windblown. These skis got me through this amazingly well. I thought the ski was pretty good in the bumps and trees too, but maybe this is because of my weight. I can see how a lighter skiier might be overwhelmed by them when the going gets tight.

 

During some of the warmer spring days, I did notice something about these skis that troubled me a bit. I'm not sure that it is specific to these skis, or just do to the fact that I am a skiing novice. When skiing tree runs on warmer days I noticed that the tails had a tendancy to break through the surface of the firm snow, whereas the tips did not. This locked me in for some distance until I could get enough speed up to get the fronts of the skis to turn, or I had to do a jump turn. Needless to say, this made me feel quite uneasy in the trees. It could have be due to my weight, the snow, the narrow tails of the skis, or a combination of both. But I guess this type of work is not what the skis are designed to do and a wider ski may have been a better choice for skiing like this.

 

Springers final thought: If my mountain was a little bigger, I would have preferred these in a 184, although I am quite satisfied with the 178 for what I ski. I feel like these skis are very suited to cold, Canadian eastern mountains. I feel like these skis have already made me a better skier. I can't wait until next year. Boy, am I hooked on this sport. If you are big and ski groomers alot and like to go fast, get this ski.

post #107 of 118

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedRoast View Post

One thing I did notice, is that they delta on these bindings pitch me quite a bit forward and really burn my quads out. This is something I need to address by next season.

 

The delta on the Dynastar PX12/PX14 Fluid is only 2-3mm, which is de rigeur these days, and minimal compared to system/discrete Markers and Looks of as little as 2 years ago.  You might want to measure them.

post #108 of 118

Thanks for the advice. I think I just may just need to get used to them.

post #109 of 118
I finally picked up a pair of 178 CM 4X4's with PX14's at the Toronto Ski Show.

Can't wait to try them out! 
post #110 of 118
i am currently very interested in the 4x4's, im 5'8 150 lbs and an ex racer looking for a slightly softer ski with all mountain ability, in the advanced catagory.  I am also looking at the contact TI's and i was hoping for some feedback on their differences and which you would recommend.
i ski at blue mountain (in ontario) primarily so conditions are usually groomed to choppy with some icy spots and lots of man made snow, no back country or big powder bowls. any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
post #111 of 118
 Chris, check your private messages, sent you something about the Contact Ti you might be interested in.
post #112 of 118
Hey!

I've got my eyes set on a pair of these skis, in a 184 cm length. I'm 197 cm tall, weighing in at about 109 kg (athletic). I should mention that I'm a beginner, mostly hitting the groomers. I like to do it all, including going relatively fast downhill. After reading numerous reviews and posts like the ones in this thread, I'm convinced this is the ski I want.

First and foremost I'm wondering whether or not the PX12 binding will hold me? I was told from the experts at www.sport-conrad.com, I should have bindings with a higher DIN range because of my weight and height.

Do any you guys around my size have a word of advice regarding this? Will I be fine with PX12?

I was also recommended maybe not buying this ski, as it may be too soft for me. This doesn't seem to be a problem, though, reading through the posts in this thread. Am I right?

Considering the fact that most of you seem to choose the length to be a bit shorter than what you would normally would prefer with other skis, would 184 cm be a good length for me?

I'd be very grateful for your advice!

Robert
post #113 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swerny View Post

I finally picked up a pair of 178 CM 4X4's with PX14's at the Toronto Ski Show.

Can't wait to try them out! 

I have about 4 days on them so far and like them a lot.

Conditions ranged from frozen hardpack, ice to a powder day last weeken with everything in between.

The 4X4's handled everything very well.

I will even be racing house league on these this year.
post #114 of 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swerny View Post

I finally picked up a pair of 178 CM 4X4's with PX14's at the Toronto Ski Show.

Can't wait to try them out! 
I have 4 days on them so far in varied conditions from solid ice/hardpack to powder (believe it or not) and I am loving them so far.

great grip and very confidence inspiring.
post #115 of 118
I'm 193cm tall, 94kg, aggressive advanced skier. I own the '09 4x4, 179cm and have about 15 days on them. I love to rip groomers with high edge angles and venture off piste whenever the snow's good enough. As is consensus, they indeed have crazy edge grip, are super stable and responsive. Love them - from boilerplate ice to 4' of fresh they kill it.

I have my DINs set at 10 and haven't yet released when I shouldn't have. The Contact 4x4 is a fairly stiff ski so I doubt you would have any probs with them being too soft. However, they are considered an 'expert' ski and thus kick your arse a bit if you get in the back seat - so maybe something to think about if you are a 'beginner' - sounds like you may be more of an 'intermediate' if you're going "relatively fast downhill" although in my experience this is certainly not always the case..

As I understand some of the other 'Contact' models, e.g. the Contact 10, may be more forgiving and thus more appopriate for your skill level whilst still facilitating progression - food for thought. Regarding length, I'd be happy with the 178 or 184 (maybe). But I've never found the speed limit for the 178, so have never thought - 'Gee I could use the extra stability of the 184'. Thus, the 178 is ideal for me, cause it has a slightly tighter turn radius which is fun for SL turns and is a bit less ski in the trees.

Hope this helps.

Quote:
Originally Posted by keano16 View Post

Hey!

I've got my eyes set on a pair of these skis, in a 184 cm length. I'm 197 cm tall, weighing in at about 109 kg (athletic). I should mention that I'm a beginner, mostly hitting the groomers. I like to do it all, including going relatively fast downhill. After reading numerous reviews and posts like the ones in this thread, I'm convinced this is the ski I want.

First and foremost I'm wondering whether or not the PX12 binding will hold me? I was told from the experts at www.sport-conrad.com, I should have bindings with a higher DIN range because of my weight and height.

Do any you guys around my size have a word of advice regarding this? Will I be fine with PX12?

I was also recommended maybe not buying this ski, as it may be too soft for me. This doesn't seem to be a problem, though, reading through the posts in this thread. Am I right?

Considering the fact that most of you seem to choose the length to be a bit shorter than what you would normally would prefer with other skis, would 184 cm be a good length for me?

I'd be very grateful for your advice!

Robert
 
post #116 of 118
Thanks for your reply, Vinski! Appreciate it.

I ended up settling for the 178 cm, despite your advice concerning it's considered an expert ski. Will I be pleased, or is it maybe gonna be too short?

I got a good deal at a local shop in Oslo, with 50% off. Saved me about 1500 NOK (about 250-300 USD) compared to what I had to give online at sport-conrad.com. Skis aren't cheap in Norway... However, it's last years model. But from what I've seen online on different skiforums, it's the exact same ski with different graphics. Am I right about this?
post #117 of 118
Length isn't your problem, that ski is Dynastar's stiffest, most advanced ski.  If you are only a beginner you should invest in some lessons and buy a ski that you can learn on.  That would also be much cheaper.


But yes, it is essentially the same ski.
post #118 of 118
Straight up - the 178 ain't gonna be too short.
It is indeed the same ski with different graphics - I actually like the 08-09 graphics better - black and grey with gold stripe is on the money.

FWIW, I found the 4x4 to be compliant and quite easy to ski doing slow to medium speed turns on blue terrain (following the girlfriend). Its when you get these up to speed that staying on top of them becomes very important.

Quote:
Originally Posted by keano16 View Post

Thanks for your reply, Vinski! Appreciate it.

I ended up settling for the 178 cm, despite your advice concerning it's considered an expert ski. Will I be pleased, or is it maybe gonna be too short?

I got a good deal at a local shop in Oslo, with 50% off. Saved me about 1500 NOK (about 250-300 USD) compared to what I had to give online at sport-conrad.com. Skis aren't cheap in Norway... However, it's last years model. But from what I've seen online on different skiforums, it's the exact same ski with different graphics. Am I right about this?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Member Gear Reviews › 2009 Dynastar Contact 4X4