South American Ski Selections: Dynastar Cham 107

2012 – 2013 Dynastar Cham 107 – 184cm (130-137-107-122-98)

Dynastar Cham 107

With their new Cham line, Dynastar is jumping into the five-dimension game in an intriguing way.

The Cham 107 in an unusual, hybrid beast, the odd love child of a dedicated pow ski and an all-mountain carver.

Of course, manufacturers claim to have built a ski that blends “the best of both worlds” all the time, but with the Cham 107, it seems that Dynastar has taken things a step further.

Pow Ski:

The Cham has a pronounced tip rocker profile with a deep rocker line and a lot splay. (For a refresher on these terms, see our ROCKER 101 article.)

Also, the widest point of the ski’s shovel is 15mm wider than that of its tail—just like you might find on a pintailed powder ski.

Plus, the tip and tail are aggressively tapered like the fatter, soft-snow-oriented K2 Pettitor. All of that clearly says “pow ski,” but things get weird when we look at the rest of the Cham’s rocker profile.

Hard Snow Ski:

Behind its rockered-out shovel, the Cham 107 is built with a significant amount of traditional camber that runs all the way to the end of a flat tail. That’s nothing unusual on a race ski or an 80mm all-mountain carver, but it’s not something we’re used to seeing on a 107mm-waisted ski with such a heavy amount of tip rocker, taper, etc.

Dynastar appears to have combined the camber profile of a performance-focused all-mountain carver like the Experience 98 (only with markedly more tip rocker) with the tapered tip and tail shapes AND pintail-esque dimensions that we’re used to seeing on powder skis.

What exactly does that mean for its performance? Will the Cham prove to be more of an everyday charger for experts? A groomer-happy, powder-capable, all-mountain option for intermediate and advanced skiers? All of the above?

On paper, it seems that the Cham 107 will be locked down on groomers with a lot of snap and energy through a carve. But with its aggressively rockered shovel and significantly tapered tip and tail, the ski shouldn’t exhibit the hooky tendencies of a cambered, flat-tailed ski in powder and chop. (Right?)

We don’t really know of a ski that’s directly comparable to the Cham 107, so we’re that much more excited to check out this rather unique design.

We have one more ski to roll out before Las Leñas, and then it’ll be time to head south and find out what this new Dynastar can do.

You can now read Ryan’s review of the Dynastar Cham 107.

 

PREVIOUS: Fischer Watea 106  // NEXT: Praxis MVP

 

6 comments on “South American Ski Selections: Dynastar Cham 107”

    • ps. demoed them this last season at Mt. Baker on a 100% hardpack day. could lay down trenches like crazy, wanted to go fast. real fast.

  1. Hey lrn2swim,

    That’s a good point, the two do look pretty similar – virtually the same camber/rocker profile and equal amounts of taper from tip to tail (as you’ve noted). Looking at some differences: the Seeker is a little wider, so it has a markedly longer turning radius (28m in a 180cm vs the 21m on the 184cm Cham), plus it doesn’t have any taper in the tail itself, and is certainly stiffer than the Cham. While I haven’t skied it, just hand flexed it (damn is that a stiff tail), it’s not surprising to hear that the Seeker wants to mach. We’ll see if we can’t get on it once the season starts up in the northern hemisphere – seems like that could be an interesting comparison to the 107. Thanks for the note!

    Cheers,

    Will

  2. Hi Will and Jonathan! I have read somewhere that the camber in the tail goes beyond the contact point in the cham series. To me this sounds as if this could make the ski wash out in the tail. Is this correct – and if yes how does this ski – or is there a slight kick tail beyond the contact point?

    • Hey Hannes,

      Good question. Holding the skis base to base, the two touch at the tail about a 1/2″ before the end of the ski (that’s the Cham’s contact point). Beyond that there is a tiny, ~1/4″ high kick tail. The widest point of the tail (the contact point when the ski is put on edge) is about 10″ from the end of the ski. Frankly, we’re not so sure how this is going to handle on hard snow. Given how much camber the Cham has underfoot, its edge hold may still be very strong even with this shortened running length in the tail. We’ll be sure to let you know in the next few days. Stay tuned!

      Cheers,

      Will

  3. Thank you Will, I was not precise in my question, which you have answered nevertheless by referring to both contact points, the base and the edge contact point. My question related to the contact point where the ski is put on edge. So ist appears that the base contact point is closer to the end of the tail than the edge contact point and I have not come across this before in a ski.

    With 5 dimensional shapes like the JJ, FF5, etc. for example base and edge contact are somewhat identical and then comes the rocker curve. Then there are shapes where the edge length is increased by moving the taper towards tip and tail (eg line Opus and SFB). Yet, I have never come across that the tail taper falls within the cambered part of the ski – which is the case from my understanding from your above description – and my question is how this will ski. Hope I did not make it too complicated…

Leave a Comment