New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dynastar Legend 8000

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
Skier stats - 5'-8" 175 lbs. expert skier.

Skis - Dynastar Legend 8000 (120-79-103) 172 cm.

Weather and snow - Mostly sunny, 20 - 28 degrees, minimal wind. There was a combination of groomed, broken powder, soft powder in the trees and some powder that began to get a bit heavy from sun exposure.

I started out on a groomed beginner/intermediate run that is really wide. This trail lends itself to big sweeping high speed arcs and has a small steep section where you can cram in 20 or so short turns. I tipped the Legends over and the ski took off without me the first time. A bit of a surprise there. I was at a pretty high rate of speed, big arcs, and one ski faltered a bit. I thought I had just hit a soft spot, but then it happened again. I switched feet and that was the end of that. I suspect a tuning issue. No more problems after that.

One thing that was noticable was noise. The skis are pretty loud vs what I am used to, with noise comming from the tips when skiing groomers. I got used to it after one run and skied on.

I can make this short. I took the ski down the exact same route as the Recons I tested previous to heading out on the Legends. These were different skis. In short, THEY DANCED.
No matter where I took them (including the heavy sun burnt tracked out stuff on southern exposuers) they just took it in stride. They were lively, energetic and had some power you could call on when you needed it.

I did find it a little tough to steer shorter turns on this ski on groomed intermediate terrain. I really don't see that as a big factor as that isn't a common move we use much anyway. (they did do a "brushed carve" though)

They didn't like it too much if you made a mistake. They were nowhere near as forgiving as any of the K2s I own or tested. But if you are on your game with this ski, it is a trip.

One thing of note. Though the measurements are much the same as the Recon I tested, in powder the tips on these were WELL out of the snow. I was pleasently surprised how well they handled the deep stuff.

The best compliment I can give this ski is this. I stopped testing it after 20 minutes and just went skiing. I was trying to spend an hour and 20 minutes on each of the three skis I tried today. When I checked the time I had already been out just over 2 hours on them. It's one fun ride.

Oh, one more thing. So far the folks at www.skinet.com have been pretty close in their ski reviews. They missed on this one. It's a lot better than they rated it.
post #2 of 28
Nice review.

I've owned (and still do) a many a ski, but the 8000 is probably my all time favorite. Like all skis it has it's weakness, but it's still a great ski.
post #3 of 28
The 8K is one of my favorites. I also would describe it as lively and energetic. Kind of a old style ski, as it is very easy to slip turns and can rip the bumps.
post #4 of 28
This ski allowed me to reduce my quiver. It has just replaced my Dynastar C11s and Volkl AC4s. Not quite as quick and agile as the C11s or power railers like the AC4s, but does it all almost as well.

If my C11s were Jack Russell terriers, and the AC4s were Pit Bulls, the Legends would be a Golden Retriever.
post #5 of 28
I just tried out my 8ks for the first time last weekend. Although I don't have the experience on multiple pairs of skis like most of you, these things were great. Huge improvement over my old Head C140s. I found they were rather easy to turn, compared to my old skis with a 67mm waist. I guess I was expecting it to be a lot more difficult, given the width? I was only mostly hardpack and crud. Can't wait to try them in Summit county all next week.
post #6 of 28
I've been on mine for about 5 years now. It's still a great ski. Still easy to ski in knee deep pow, and then switch to bumps or groomers in the afternoon. I have to ask, at your weight and skill level, why you went with a 172cm length? The 178cm ski gives you so much more stability, and pow performance, w/o giving up any of the turn capabilities that you get w/ the 172 Legend.
post #7 of 28
I'll second the 178 recommendation. I'm the same weight as you UL and if I can turn 'em in anything and also at speed with excellent stability, I know you can. Excellent ski across the board for versatility and a no-brainer quiver, except for hard and steep carving, IME.
post #8 of 28
Heading to UT Sat night. Doesn't look like much snow is in the forecast so I'll be bringing my 8Ks for sure.
post #9 of 28
The L8K is a classic. It has been around for 5 or more years without significant changes and still fits a wide range of skiers. The K2 Recon has been around for approximately the same amount of time, again without any really significant changes. In a business when last weeks news is sometimes sorta old stuff, these two skis still stick around and sell well. How can this be????.......(you axe)

It's simple, they both work................admittedly for different skiers and different reasons.....but the fact is that they do.

After all this time, it is a wonder that a company that is so inept at marketing (Dynastar) can hang onto a core market......yet they do. Their products are the reason that they survive and even prosper in a limited sense. The 8K and the Legend series in general are some of the reasons why they hang in there. They just build great stuff for better than average skiers. Above all else, Dynastar seems to understand (better than most) that a great ski is truly a blend of characteristics and capabilities. OTH, K2 and the Recon in particular prosper over the long haul for different reasons. They generally build skis that anyone can ski on and have fun. Are they the best skis for the top 20-30% of skiers?....probably not. But....they fit the general masses so well and they market so widely, it's no surprise that they do well.

The L8K is a ski that should achieve iconic status in the industry, If it were sold by a different company with huge distribution and marketing, it probably would. From a smaller sort of niche player like Dynastar it will be remembered but possibly not with the reverence that it might deserve. I understand that the L8K is changing in a fairly significant way for '09-10. I don't know the details yet but hopefully, they won't mess it up.

SJ
post #10 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
I understand that the L8K is changing in a fairly significant way for '09-10. I don't know the details yet but hopefully, they won't mess it up.
Which always keeps me wondering why ski companies tinker with a good thing, unless they are sure it will be a true improvement for the same reasons. I still have fond memories of my Rossi SMs.
post #11 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Louie View Post
Skis - Dynastar Legend 8000 (120-79-103) 172 cm....

THEY DANCED. No matter where I took them (including the heavy sun burnt tracked out stuff on southern exposuers) they just took it in stride. They were lively, energetic and had some power you could call on when you needed it....

I did find it a little tough to steer shorter turns on this ski on groomed intermediate terrain. I really don't see that as a big factor as that isn't a common move we use much anyway. (they did do a "brushed carve" though)....
Demo'd the 8K's last year and pretty much agree with your assessment. For me however, the need to do a "brushed carve" (vs. getting them to arc into a shorter turn) was the deal-breaker. Anyway, I ended up with the Watea 84's instead (given your other threads on the Xplorer and Recon this is a ski your should definitely try - they also "dance" but in a very differnt way than the 8K's).
post #12 of 28
SierraJim, from the consumer side of things I've always been happy to know that I can pick up a pair of Dynastars as good as anything in their class for half of what I might spend on another ski.
They are my go to brand for the last five years.

Am I mistaken in thinking that the parent company preferred to promote Rossi in the US because of the easier to ski characteristics? (Just a few weeks ago I saw young kids taking intermediate lessons on really short B3s - in New England!)

The same should probably be said for Look bindings. How often do you see them mounted to a flat non Dynastar or Rossi ski, yet they excel in ways that other bindings do not. (though I lament the elimination of the turntable.)
post #13 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by aschick View Post
SierraJim, from the consumer side of things I've always been happy to know that I can pick up a pair of Dynastars as good as anything in their class for half of what I might spend on another ski.
They are my go to brand for the last five years.

Am I mistaken in thinking that the parent company preferred to promote Rossi in the US because of the easier to ski characteristics? (Just a few weeks ago I saw young kids taking intermediate lessons on really short B3s - in New England!)

The same should probably be said for Look bindings. How often do you see them mounted to a flat non Dynastar or Rossi ski, yet they excel in ways that other bindings do not. (though I lament the elimination of the turntable.)
The parent company may have chosen to place more emphasis on Rossi and I s'pose it may been successful from the mass market side of things. OTH, Dynstar has chosen to stay in a more niche driven market and has done very well within the scope of their market while Rossi has struggled somewhat.

There is no difference in LOOK/Rossi bindings and both sell quite well in technically oriented shops. Out west, you see a whole lot of flat Volkls, K2s, 4Frnts, etc. mounted with one or the other.

Re the turntable: There is some talk that Dynastar will book one time preseason orders for turntable bindings this upcoming year. This means build to order with no backup, no close-outs, and probably not cheeeep. This also means that all the dealers that have been beeetching about the demise of the TT will have the opp to step up, put up, and buy them. The same will go for the consumer that is distraught over the demise of the TT. If it happens, we'll see how much is just typical consumer BS and how much is true product loyalty. FWIW: I'm not sure that there is much of an advantage over the current PX (racing) heel but some think there is. IAC, we'll see if there is any truth to the rumors of a limited revival of the TT in a few weeks.

SJ
post #14 of 28
If UL liked it , its got to be good but now he's confusing me because I thought he was going with the Sharks!
post #15 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
The L8K is a classic. It has been around for 5 or more years without significant changes and still fits a wide range of skiers.

. . .

The L8K is a ski that should achieve iconic status in the industry, If it were sold by a different company with huge distribution and marketing, it probably would. From a smaller sort of niche player like Dynastar it will be remembered but possibly not with the reverence that it might deserve.

SJ
I know the relationship with a ski should never get more serious than dating, but after the Intuitiv and Legend lines I'm ready for marriage.
post #16 of 28
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpinord View Post
I'll second the 178 recommendation. I'm the same weight as you UL and if I can turn 'em in anything and also at speed with excellent stability, I know you can. Excellent ski across the board for versatility and a no-brainer quiver, except for hard and steep carving.
I agree. I was demoing from the demo center at the top of Vail. Some stuff was already out, like the Legend in 178. I went with what they had. I consider MY ideal length for skiing here in Summit County to be on the plus or minus side of 175, depending on what I need it for.


I'm also not a huge fan of really fat under foot. Personal preference there. I think if I still lived here I would go with something in the 100 plus range under foot, but POW days are hit and miss for me here averaging about 4 per season. I need something versatile that WORKS in POW.

Quote:
Originally Posted by roundturns View Post
I thought he was going with the Sharks!
I did, I got a pair of T-Shark 10's with the switch last Spring !It's a great "frontside" ski esp it the snow is firm. It chews up broken powder and crud and spits it out. It's also a submarine in anything over 10" deep)

My Crossfires are dead.....and I need a second so I'm exploring.
Wait 'till ya'all get todays report
post #17 of 28
I'm still waiting on the Watea 94s.
post #18 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toadman View Post
I've been on mine for about 5 years now. It's still a great ski. Still easy to ski in knee deep pow, and then switch to bumps or groomers in the afternoon. I have to ask, at your weight and skill level, why you went with a 172cm length? The 178cm ski gives you so much more stability, and pow performance, w/o giving up any of the turn capabilities that you get w/ the 172 Legend.
I'm 5' 11", 180 lbs., and I went for the 172s myself. That's what I demoed and they made me feel comfortable in bumps...I was thinking about trees too. I may have made a mistake but I skied the 4800s for a couple years in the same length and felt good. I will try the 178s sometime just to see.
post #19 of 28
+1 for Dynastar Legend skis. My L8Ks and MRs are are both truly phenomenal skis. L8K is a bit more "danceable" and MRs a bit more unflappable. MRs is my main ski nowdays. Dynastar seems to be a real sleeper brand with some of the best skis on the market (I FWIIW prefer my Dynastars to certain overhyped Volkl models...)

SJ- An interesting info on turntables. One of my friends is a real fan who tracks the old turtntables down on E-Bay... My personal feeling now is that the PX racing heel is a fine substitute.
post #20 of 28

Here's the answer (in French) to SJ about 2010 D-Star

Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
I understand that the L8K is changing in a fairly significant way for '09-10. I don't know the details yet but hopefully, they won't mess it up.

SJ

Du lourd du coté de Sallanches pour ces premières indiscrétions sur les gammes 2009/2010, coté freeski.
Coté Freeride, a grosse nouveauté qui va faire parler, c'est le Dynastar Legend Big Dump, qui affiche des mensurations de 140-120-130 avec une spatule très progressive Rocker de 300 mm... Un monstre qui reprend les technologies habituelles de la gamme (noyau bois et titanal, chants toute longueur...).

Coté Freestyle, la gamme porte désormais le nom de 6th Sense, avec entre autres modèles, le Dynastar 6th Sense Huge qui comme son nom l'indique est un gros freestyle backcountry (140-115-130) et le Spin, plus polyvalent avec ses 87 mm au patin. Coté fabrication, Dynastar introduit la technologie "Spring Blade" qui est, nous citons, "une mécanisation par des fibres dégradées réparties selon les zones de contraintes du ski"
Le Huge et le Spin en photos :

post #21 of 28
Legend Big Dump... is this an unfortunate name choice or what?...
post #22 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexzn View Post
Legend Big Dump... is this an unfortunate name choice or what?...
Don't think the Big Dump replaces the 8k. It's a completely different type of ski. As for the name... it better be a good ski, or it'll "backfire" horribly on Dynastar.
post #23 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexzn View Post
Legend Big Dump... is this an unfortunate name choice or what?...

Are you kidding? If it was a twin tip and had graphics of a dude sitting on the john with a pained expression it would instantly be the most popular park-pipe-powder ski.
post #24 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by aschick View Post
Are you kidding? If it was a twin tip and had graphics of a dude sitting on the john with a pained expression it would instantly be the most popular park-pipe-powder ski.
I thought that was K2's demographic...
post #25 of 28
I not sure where they are thinking of selling it, but the French market might associate "big dump" with a lot of fresh snow and not even think of other meanings...
post #26 of 28
The L8K is being replaced by a ski called the "Sultan" It will be 85mm underfoot with full length sidewalls and wood/metal.

Obviously the BD is something very different.

SJ
post #27 of 28

dyna 8k's 172cm

FYI, I'm 5' 7", 180lbs and ski the 07/08 8k in a 172cm
At first the ski seemed a little short. My Lange WC130
has a 308mm sole and was right on the mid sole mark
with the Dyna Fluid binding that came with the ski.
I moved the toe forward to the next position ( 7mm forward)
and moved the heal 6mm forward. After a few runs
this felt like a better position for me. If your 8k's seem
hard to initiate a turn, try moving the toe and heal forward.

If Dynastar is monitoring these threads, I would recommend
them modifying the toe adjustability increments to be the
same as the heal; 3mm increments.
post #28 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexzn View Post
Legend Big Dump... is this an unfortunate name choice or what?...




sorry...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews