Free 2-Day Shipping on Orders Over $50* – Limited Time Only

Dynastar's Cham 107 High Mountain is a burly, hard-charging freeride ski just like it's cousin, the classic Cham, but with one major difference—actually, make that 2.75 differences. That's how many pounds lighter the High Mountain is than the traditional Cham, thanks to the Paulownia wood and fiberglass core. It's ditched the metal layer to make it a better touring ski that's also suited for lighter riders, but hasn't lost much of the Cham's big-mountain deep-snow performance. It's retained the progressive five-point sidecut—traditional sidecut underfoot with a tapered tip and tail—so it can still rip through all conditions, smear pow turns, and turn on a dime, and kept the floaty, surfy pin-tail shape, too. Along with the extra-long tip rocker, this helps the High Mountain plane up and over soft snow, and gives you the option of sitting on your tails to dump speed when you realize you're bearing down on a cliff band you weren't expecting. Dynastar also built it with traditional camber underfoot for rugged edge grip when you run into those firm spots, and vertical sidewalls for power and durability when you're pinching the throttle, making it a super-versatile powder ski that excels in the variable conditions that are part of riding outside the resort.

  • Traditional camber underfoot with an extra-long tip rocker
  • Paulownia wood core
  • Fiberglass laminate
  • Progressive five-point sidecut
  • Pin-tail shape
  • Sandwich construction
  • Vertical sidewalls
  • Reviews
  • Q & A

What do you think about this product?

Have questions about this product?

Surprisingly versatile

  • Familiarity: I've put it through the wringer

I picked up a pair of these in the 190cm about five weeks ago thinking that they would be primarily/only a touring setup. Turns out I've been using them for just about everything we've had in the Wasatch for the past several weeks. I've skied these on everything from groomers to trees to untracked powder to rain soaked icy trash. I've been really surprised at how versatile these are - decent edge hold on groomers and hard snow, quick to release a turn in chop and trees, and good float on the few powder days that we've had this year. The aggressive pintail shape and light swing weight make it pretty easy to toss these around in variable terrain and snow, even without having even a hint of tail rocker. These are relatively stable at speed, but things can start to feel a little spicier if you truly open them up on hard snow. The long tip rocker keeps the front pretty soft, but I haven't had issues with the tips folding up on me unless I'm really far forward in deep snow.

There are definitely other skis out there in the 100-110mm range that do a specific task better than these (lighter touring options, stiffer options for really opening it up, etc), but these skis cover a lot of different bases really well, especially if you've got much touring thrown in the mix. These haven't replaced my powder skis for deep days, but if I've got much touring on the menu I have a really hard time reaching past these for my pow skis at 2+lbs heavier...

I've got these mounted with Dynafit TLT Radicals, mounted ~2cm back from the standard line (mine have a 0/standard line and a -2/freeride line and I'm roughly on the -2 line). I'm happy with this - I'd start to be a little worried about tip dive if I had them mounted farther forward. I'm 6'1" / 220# and tried both the 184cm and 190cm - the 184s are fun and very playful, but had a bit more of a speed limit on them. If I was primarily skiing tight trees, bumps, etc. I would go for the 184s,but the 190s are just that much more fun to open up in steep open terrain.

I'm exactly you size / weight aspiring advanced-intermediate. I've skied the HM87 in 184 and found them to be really easy and fun but when it got deeper they somehow didn't provide enough platform (I thought I could go longer). Do you think 107 in 190 would be a lot more demanding / difficult?

I don't think the 190 cm length is necessarily more demanding than the 184's - more than anything I would say you should let the terrain and type of skiing you do dictate which length you go with. If you're spending more time in trees, bumps, tighter and more technical terrain, the 184's will generally be easier to throw around and make quick, tight turns. If you're generally skiing more open fall-line terrain, the 190's will give you better stability at higher speeds and a more solid platform underfoot.

Like I said, the 190's aren't necessarily harder to ski - I think the most important consideration with these skis is matching the length to your style