New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dynastar Legend 8000

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 

The Test: Skied a few runs at Beaver Mt, UT

The Ski: 184 cm Dynastar Legend 8000

Conditions: Firm fast groomers, Dust on crust off piste.

Other skis: I use the 179 K2 PE and a 191 Scott P4 as my every day skis. Also, 185 Praxis Powder Boards.

 

The verdict:

 

I found the ski fun and easy to use. The ski has an light feel and good energy to it. I felt like I was skiing with alot of flow on these. I had no trouble what so ever finding the sweet spot or trying to figure out what the ski was going to do. In any situation, it was as easy as point and shoot. I guess I like the dynastar half cap / half sidewall construction.

 

As an AM ski I think this is a really good compromise ski between on and off piste performance. The 8K improves on my PEs in two important respects... groomer performance and stability. On piste the 8K is really solid for railing long turns and can "carve" some shorter ones. The grip was totally sufficient for me. The 8K also has a surprising ammount of crud bustin' stability. I was looking to pin-it in the crud where conditions ranged from dust on crust to soft cut up. They didn't disappoint.  In bumps, its not a PE, but they are close. I am guessing they aren't as much of a tree and pow ski as the PE either.

 

This ski made me want to ditch the PE.

post #2 of 28

The 8K is a true classic.  I have it in the older less shapely version and the newer slightly more shapely version, both mounted with Pivot bindings.  Neither one disappoints but I prefer the older one.  The ratio of positive to negative reviews must run 100 to 1.  I don't get it when somebody doesn't enjoy this ski.  And the ski is always available for a good price.

post #3 of 28

Yep....absolutely one of the best designs ever. I also have a 184 (old shape) that is now so beat up that it doesn't get out much. The new "Sultan" model for '10 will be the first direct replacement for the L8K in what? 6 years? It will also be a winner.

 

SJ

post #4 of 28

I've dumped my PEs in favor of the latest fluid 8000.  The deciding factor was hardpack edge grip, even though the 8000 isn't phenomenal in this area.  I enjoyed the PE in all conditions last year but this year I couldn't make the damn things grab for some reason.

 

Also, despite the smaller waist, I prefer the 8000 in powder...it bucks me around less.  Then again, I thought the 4800 with a 74 waist was a damn good powder ski.  The PE was so much fun in spring conditions last year I'll be tempted to take em off the wall but, again, I'm thinking I'll prefer the Legend performance.

post #5 of 28

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post

 

Yep....absolutely one of the best designs ever. I also have a 184 (old shape) that is now so beat up that it doesn't get out much. The new "Sultan" model for '10 will be the first direct replacement for the L8K in what? 6 years? It will also be a winner.

 

SJ

Yeah, I got to ski the Sultan 85 (Legend 8000 replacement) and man were they a blast.  Really fun ski...the conditions were push piles of granular snow and these guys layed down some sweet arcs.

post #6 of 28

I demoed the Legend 8k at Snowbird for several days last spring. I was looking for an AM ski to replace my very old K2 612's. I also demoed several other skis but kept coming back to the 8k. I was going to pull the trigger and buy them when I saw the Scott Mission on SAC for $215.  I had always wanted to try the Mission, so I bought figuring I could always resell if I didn't like the.  I love the Scott's. They are not as good as the 8k on hardpack groomers but I feel they are much better in the powder. If the Scott's turned out to be something I didn't like, I would have definitely bought the 8k. Great ski.

post #7 of 28


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJB View Post

 

...I don't get it when somebody doesn't enjoy this ski....


 

If everyone enjoyed the same ski, we'd all be skiing it.  Isn't there a whole variety of reasons why one person's fave is another person's ho-hum.  Don't get me wrong, I did enjoy the 8K's (for about 2 hours), but I prefer to be wowed by a ski and the 8K's didn't quite do it.  It actually felt more like my idea of an intermediate ski (which is saying alot since what most Epicskiers like are usually too powerful for me at 130lbs).  Frankly I couldn't get it to edge well (it liked to skid more than carve) and it wasn't happy turning at different radius's (radii?).  Does that make it a bad ski or me a bad skier.  Neither!  That's why there's so many different ski designs (and growing).  OK some of the differences are pure marketing, but you get my drift....

post #8 of 28


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post

 

On piste the 8K is really solid for railing long turns and can "carve" some shorter ones. The grip was totally sufficient for me. The 8K also has a surprising ammount of crud bustin' stability. I was looking to pin-it in the crud where conditions ranged from dust on crust to soft cut up. They didn't disappoint.  In bumps, its not a PE, but they are close. I am guessing they aren't as much of a tree and pow ski as the PE either.


 

Funny, other than it's stability, my take was the exact opposite.  It didn't rail or carve well for me, but it was uncanningly as floaty and maneuverable in 12"+ of fresh as the other wider (84mm) skis I tried the same day (though none were PE's).  So who knows how the 8K's will do for you in the deep.  Very interesting

post #9 of 28


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post

 


 


 

Funny, other than it's stability, my take was the exact opposite.  It didn't rail or carve well for me, but it was uncanningly as floaty and maneuverable in 12"+ of fresh as the other wider (84mm) skis I tried the same day (though none were PE's).  So who knows how the 8K's will do for you in the deep.  Very interesting


 

As MJB said - "The ratio of positive to negative reviews must run 100 to 1.  I don't get it when somebody doesn't enjoy this ski. " You're apparently the 1 in 100. Everyone that's been on a pair of mine wants a set.

 

Also as SJ indicated - "one of the best designs ever". Dynastar hit it out of the park with the Legend line, and for mere mortals, the 8k and MR are the epitome of the Legends. Beyond that there's a reason why the LP and XXL are the unofficial official skis of Snowbird.

 

"Intermediate ski"? Umm, no, that would be the 4800, although I'd sure love to have a set of 4800's in Steamboat powder again like a couple of years ago - just right for slicing through trees at high speed with 12 inches of freshies - the 8k's a little stiff for that environment.

 

Last weekend, all in the group at K-Mart had about the same bsl - 4 different skis - the go-to for everyone the L8k by a wide margin - "what a blast", "handles everything perfectly" etc.

 

Of course, when the hill gets bigger, the it's the MR's turn to shine. 

post #10 of 28

Last week on the same day, I skied the Mantra and the Legend 8K in 15" of fresh at Taos.  The Mantra is heavy but extremely stable and smooth.  It is also deceptively fast and rails.  However, mounted at the boot center mark it tended to nose dive.  The Mantra requires an attentive skipper.

 

The 8K is lighter, much friendlier, slayed powder bumps on the steeps, had much better float than the Mantra, did not nose dive, and was far superior in cut up powder.

 

For me, the 8K is pretty much perfect.

post #11 of 28


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post

 

As MJB said - "The ratio of positive to negative reviews must run 100 to 1.  I don't get it when somebody doesn't enjoy this ski. " You're apparently the 1 in 100. Everyone that's been on a pair of mine wants a set....

 

...I'd sure love to have a set of 4800's in Steamboat powder again like a couple of years ago - just right for slicing through trees at high speed with 12 inches of freshies - the 8k's a little stiff for that environment....

Doesn't matter if the opinions are a gazillion to 1, it still doesn't mean that there is no reasonable explanation as to why someone wouldn't enjoy the ski.  I gave my explanation and it is just as viable as those in favor of the ski.  Your preference for the 4800 vs. the 8k in Steamboat trees only adds credence to the idea that it may not be the perfect ski for everyone (Steamboat trees are my favored terrain and at 130lbs. a stiff ski is even less appropriate for me - funny thing though they actually did well for me in tight/deep trees, so who knows). 

 

Not trying to get the last word in on this issue...just reacting to the "mass hysteria" that sometimes accompanies certain ski discussions around here (the Goat is a perfect example - I can already see the pitchforks amassing should I say anything bad about that ski). 

 

BTW - I'm not the only one whose posted less than perfect scores for the L8K, though that might only make it a gazillion to 2 or 3...and while we're throwing around SJ quotes (he's a legend, so why not), he also said that there's no "no best ski" in a recent post praising the 8k...so we ?


Edited by ski-ra - 3/31/2009 at 11:55 pm
post #12 of 28


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post

 


 

Doesn't matter if the opinions are a gazillion to 1, it still doesn't mean that there is no reasonable explanation as to why someone wouldn't enjoy the ski.  In fact I gave my explanation and it is just as viable as those in favor of the ski (I even tried to explain why they felt like intermediate skis to me, and it may have something to do with the 165cm length that is appropriate for me vs. the longer versions that most others are skiing). 

 

Not trying to get the last word on the issue...just reacting to the "mass hysteria" that sometimes accompanies certain ski discussions around here (the Goat is a perfect example - I can already see the pitchforks getting ready should I say anything bad about that ski). 

 

BTW - I'm not the only one whose posted less than perfect scores for the L8K, though that might only make it a gazzilion to 2 or 3....


 

At your weight, my guess is that the 4800 would have been outstanding for you.

post #13 of 28


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJB View Post

 

At your weight, my guess is that the 4800 would have been outstanding for you.


 

You could be correct, though I didn't demo that ski and given my "intermediate" reaction to the 8k I wasn't even thinking of going that way - I ended up with the W84's.  I love 'em even though they're not perfect (i.e., I won't be the one saying that everyone should love the ski).

 

P.S. I ended up slightly editing my previous post while you were scribing this one - who knows, maybe I added more fuel to the fire....  Take Care! 

post #14 of 28


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post

 


 

Doesn't matter if the opinions are a gazillion to 1, it still doesn't mean that there is no reasonable explanation as to why someone wouldn't enjoy the ski.  I gave my explanation and it is just as viable as those in favor of the ski.  Your preference for the 4800 vs. the 8k in Steamboat trees only adds credence to the idea that it may not be the perfect ski for everyone (Steamboat trees are my favored terrain and at 130lbs. a stiff ski is even less appropriate for me - funny thing though they actually did well for me in tight/deep trees, so who knows). 

 

Not trying to get the last word in on this issue...just reacting to the "mass hysteria" that sometimes accompanies certain ski discussions around here (the Goat is a perfect example - I can already see the pitchforks amassing should I say anything bad about that ski). 

 

BTW - I'm not the only one whose posted less than perfect scores for the L8K, though that might only make it a gazillion to 2 or 3...and while we're throwing around SJ quotes (he's a legend, so why not), he also said that there's no "no best ski" in a recent post praising the 8k...so we ?


Edited by ski-ra - 3/31/2009 at 11:55 pm


 

"Doesn't matter if the opinions are a gazillion to 1, it still doesn't mean that there is no reasonable explanation as to why someone wouldn't enjoy the ski". Huh? No doubt that was meant to convey some thought .

 

The 8k generally gets excellent scores from the majority of people that try them - even some that you describe as legends, but one that you would have to admit gets to try more things than any 50 people here. Probably has some semblence of credibility, no? Or are you THE source for opinions?

 

And at 130 lbs - well, this is getting a bit silly - OK, I can well understand why the 4800 would work well for you, and the 8k might not be the best. Gee, an XXL might be a bit much too . Yup, the 4800 was great for steamboat trees in pow - for Mineral Basin with crud - no, I'll take the 8k's (or bigger).

 

For a general go-to ski, the 8k is a wonder for an amazing variety of conditions, for well beyond intermediate skiers.

 

Feel free to get the last word.

post #15 of 28


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by snofun3 View Post

 


...Or are you THE source for opinions?....Feel free to get the last word.

Not THE source, just a source of my opinions that are no more or less valid than any others - which was my point to begin with (like they say "opinions are like a**holes - everyone has one").  Otherwise, no need for any other final words from me (even though I just put one in) since we have essentially agreed to disagree and we've .  Time to move onto the next discussion.
 

post #16 of 28

Ski-Ra,

 

I'm not as light as you, but at 155 lbs pretty light for a male...

 

I just spent 2 days on a 176cm LP, and enjoyed it immensely...wrote a review in "gear reviews"

 

I don't know if there is a shorter than 176 size, but you might want to try the shortest sized LP...

It's a skier's ski in that it requires your input , but it''s a blast as a 1-quiver western ski for smaller folks...

 

Cheers

 

PS...I dislike any length of Gotama, so there!

post #17 of 28


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nfp158 View Post

 

Ski-Ra,

 

I'm not as light as you, but at 155 lbs pretty light for a male...

 

I just spent 2 days on a 176cm LP, and enjoyed it immensely...wrote a review in "gear reviews"

 

I don't know if there is a shorter than 176 size, but you might want to try the shortest sized LP...

It's a skier's ski in that it requires your input , but it''s a blast as a 1-quiver western ski for smaller folks...

 

Cheers

 

PS...I dislike any length of Gotama, so there!


 

Yeah the LP's come in a 166cm which sounds short for what I am used to (and the 176's are undoubtedly too long) but...it was one of the skis that I was considering before buying the Goats.  The concensus here was that the LP's would be too stiff for both my weight and the lighter CO snow.  Even though the Goat's don't ski stiff (and I actually do like how they ski most conditions - especially mixed/packed snow and bumps), given that they dive on me in powder must mean that they are too stiff.  Therefore, I'll probably be going with something even softer and potentially rockered (a 1-ski quiver with great edge grip ain't my priority given that these are to be my powder skis - ease and enjoyment in the deep are...heck I may even end up with something with pink flowers on 'em if that's what it takes). 

 

While most would consider me an aggressive expert skier, my "input" doesn't amount to much given my weight and height - a sad fact that I've been unsuccessful at ignoring for more years than I care to tell.  Nevertheless when I get to demo some of my choices I would like to try 'em anyway - who knows (whenever I demo skis the results are usually surprising).

Thanks!

post #18 of 28

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post


While most would consider me an aggressive expert skier, my "input" doesn't amount to much given my weight and height - a sad fact that I've been unsuccessful at ignoring for more years than I care to tell.

 

Perfectly stated. I think we are living parallel lives. Just had a discussion yesterday with several ski buddies about how I've realized that even though I'm a fairly strong skier technically, it's becoming increasingly clear to me that I like skis that ski reviews - often euphemistically - call "forgiving." "My girlfriend really likes this ski," etc. Two cases in point: I am exactly your size, but in the east. For several years I've been using the "intermediate" 4800 (172cm) as my soft snow ski. We had a couple of 12 - 18" powder days this winter and they were a blast in that, as well as being superb in bumps and trees, powder-filled or otherwise. They are also great in spring conditions, as I proved again yesterday. I love being on a ski that long - what feels like the right length to me, on a pure-length basis - and having it not be too stiff. Also, after demoing several other models, I just had my first couple of days on a new hard snow ski that's been touted here and in the ski press as "forgiving" and "versatile"  and "wide performance envelope." (Often such terms are code for "wimpy" or "boring".) My early impressions are that it's going to make a great duffer race ski for me, and it's amazingly grippy on the hard stuff. Bottom line: our mileage does vary.

post #19 of 28


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by qcanoe View Post

  

Perfectly stated. I think we are living parallel lives. Just had a discussion yesterday with several ski buddies about how I've realized that even though I'm a fairly strong skier technically, it's becoming increasingly clear to me that I like skis that ski reviews - often euphemistically - call "forgiving." "My girlfriend really likes this ski," etc.

Thanks - good to hear from a fellow lightweight!  Yeah most of the time I look for these same words and phrases, though going too far in the direction of an intermediate ski hasn't worked for me either (I like that expert ski precision as long as I don't have to fight the ski to get it).  I really think we have a narrower range of ski choices especially if you like 'em longer than the salespeople want to sell you - they usually throw a 160cm ski at me (I hate that).  Anyway, just because a ski is available in a 165cm or so length doesn't mean it's flex is appropriate for a smaller person...then again, I only need a pair or two or three at a time. 

 

I look forward to sharing further thoughts with you about hunting for that "forgiving enough for a lightweight" ski.  BTW - I looove my Watea 84's - forgiving yet plenty powerful when needed so you can ski 'em in a more manueuverable 167cm size (and man do they float in powder/crud)!  Now if I can only find a more dedicated powder ski that works better than my powder-diving Goats....


Edited by ski-ra - 4/3/2009 at 01:42 am
post #20 of 28
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ski-ra View Post

Funny, other than it's stability, my take was the exact opposite.  It didn't rail or carve well for me, but it was uncanningly as floaty and maneuverable in 12"+ of fresh as the other wider (84mm) skis I tried the same day (though none were PE's).  So who knows how the 8K's will do for you in the deep.  Very interesting

 

I am 200+lbs.I was on the 184 (longest length). You are little and skied something much shorter. Not surprising we have different impressions. Honestly, I don't listen to anything a person less than about 180lbs says in any ski demo reports... its not relvant to me. And vice versa I am sure.

post #21 of 28


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tromano View Post

 

 

 

I am 200+lbs.I was on the 184 (longest length). You are little and skied something much shorter. Not surprising we have different impressions. Honestly, I don't listen to anything a person less than about 180lbs says in any ski demo reports... its not relvant to me. And vice versa I am sure.

Indeed!  That (along with my Napoleon complex) explains why I get rankled when some big (or not) guy says that some-such ski will be enjoyed by everyone (as if a skier's height/weight and how a ski's characteristics vary in the different lengths available is not a factor). 

Take Care

post #22 of 28

I am probably guilty of having opinions of a ski, and assuming those opinions scale to other people just based on length.  It's sort of based on my own experience honing in on the right size in a particular ski. 

post #23 of 28


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by skier219 View Post

 

I am probably guilty of having opinions of a ski, and assuming those opinions scale to other people just based on length.  It's sort of based on my own experience honing in on the right size in a particular ski. 

Time for a public flogging?  Heck we all do this to some degree (I just happen to be more sensitive about the matter)!  I think within a reasonable range (in both weight and skill) there is probably good reason for it.  But there's a big difference between saying you like a ski and explaining your reasons (which is how I read most of your posts/threads on this forum) and pronouncing that a ski will be enjoyed by everyone without qualification (which is essentially what I was reacting to earlier in this thread).
 


Edited by ski-ra - 4/6/2009 at 03:00 pm
post #24 of 28
I have to agree with all previous posts. I live in the midwest- mainly ski ice. Usually take 2 trips out west every year. The Legend 8000 is by far  the best and most fun ski I have ever used. I usually stick to the trees and bumps. I have found this ski more versitile and more fun than any other ski I have owned or demo'd. I used to rely on slalom skis for their stiffness and durability for my skiing style. Generally took about one season to break them in and get the shovels soft enough to ski the terrain I preferred. Went thru several pairs of shaped skis when the fist came out in the mid 90s. Finally stumbled upon the Dyni 8Ks. I was love at first 'bite'. The shovels are soft enough to handle bumps, the skis are forgiving enough to ski tight trees, but still have enough edge to ski groomers (rarely) and ice (more than I care to). The only complaint I have is that the tips will chatter a little a high speed on ice. With that said, they still deliver absolute control, and it is a small price to pay for the broad range of versitility the offer.

I have had 2 pair of these and am looking to buy a third. The problem I am having is that I still love my old-style Marker's- M9.1 Turbo SC MRR w/kevlar riser. I have relied on these bindings over the years, and still have a love affair with the old turntable style. I like the direct control and feel of the heel directly under my boot. I am sure why, but I have broken two pairs of Legend 8000 over the last few years. The damage has occurred when the skis are being heavily torqued on mogul runs. The delam always happens directly under the binding. Dynastar was great! The gave me a brand new pair of skis the first time this happened, no questions. After the second time- they told me the warranty was over two years and could not help- which is OK.

My question is- Is it likely that the binding I am using is too stiff for the ski and is causing the delamination? At least that is what my local tech thinks. I broke my last pair on my second day on a trip to Telluride last year. Rented a pair of K2 Apache Explorers. This was a ski I wanted to demo anyway. Tried a 184cm length- too much. Went down to a 177cm and had a great week. The K2 is a screamer- very fast, great edge, but the shovels are too stiff for bumps. I want my Legends back. I was kind of bummed out that the Explorers didn't perform to my expectations- They looked like a good alternate.

So now I want to buy a new pair of 8Ks, and plan on upgrading my bindings- question is - too what? Want to put Markers on  (like Barons or Jesters). Does anyone know if that is possible, or does Dynastar make their skis so that you have to use their bindings?

Thanks for your help!

Mud
post #25 of 28
mud,

This year it's the Legend Sultan 80 and Sultan Fluid. The Fluid version has the integrated binding track and would be a great choice with the PX 14 binding. If you want to go with a different binding grab a pair of the Sultan 80's which come flat.
post #26 of 28
Rossi Smash (er)-
Yeah! I did look at this year's new Dynastars. But you know the old saying- "If it ain't broke- don't fix it." The 8Ks did everything I wanted in a ski. The were great at home on ice, unbelieveable in bumps, go thru trees like they have radar, handle powder good enough for my broad range of skiing conditions, even high speed runs are good- even if they chatter a bit- they still rail. I weigh about 200 lbs. and can easily manhandle these skis. I can cut off my turns, jam the shovels, even sit back (cautiously)- bottom line- they are just plain fun- I think that is the point of skiing, right?

Anyway- I did look at the Sultan 80s and 85s- still not sure if I really need the change. I would like to get another pair of 8Ks- but don't like the idea of being forced to buy a binding I am not comfortable with. Would really like to slap my M9.1 Turbo SC- MRR's back on, but after delam-ing 2 pairs, I am apprehensive to say the least. I still can't figure out why I broke both pairs of my 8Ks. My first though was that the Marker  bindings  were just too stiff and did not allow the skis to properly flex. My only other concern is that, even at 184cm, I am just too heavy for Dynastars, or Rossi's or French made skis in general. I skied Fischer WC SL for years- back in the day- usually around 207's. Of course, Fischer, Volkl and Atomic are always stiff and fast. Did look at the Watea's- Still not sure. I gotta say- the 8Ks, when operational, have been the most fun and versatile ski I have been on since my old PRE M5Ks (now that really goes back). So what's and old 'bump dog' to do? Still would like to figure out if I can slap a pair of Marker Jesters or Barons on a pair of 8Ks. Any clue? Dynastar USA has been pretty good to me. They neve even asked how I broke my first pair. Am working with them on at least getting a discount or small credit on a new pair. And they actually e-mail me back. Oh, I might add I am a dedicated Lange wearer also. Not just 'cuz of Dynastar either- Have been wearing Langes since my old Fischer days. Great lateral quickness, lightweight. Only problem is my feet get cold when it is minus 0 degrees F- solution don't ski in below zero weather.

Thanks for your input RS- any further comments would be greatly appreciated-
Still searching for the Perfect turn! I know its out there waiting for me- One day!!

Regards
Mud
post #27 of 28
You can get the flat '06-'07 8K at www.geardirect.com for a decent price.
post #28 of 28
I use the look Pivot 12s on the 8k and think it is a wonderful set up.  I also have them on a set of Rossi B2's.  Those bindings are on their 4th set.  Maybe there is a pattern here...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Member Gear Reviews