Free 2-Day Shipping on Orders Over $50* Up to 25% Off Marmot– Save on Clothing and Gear

Dig the original Dynastar Cham Series but looking for something a little lighter, more maneuverable, and backcountry-friendly? The Cham High Mountain 97 Ski is your new horse. It has the same dimensions, camber profile, and shape as the classic Cham, but uses a Paulownia wood core and fiberglass laminate to cut the weight by 25%, making it perfect for lighter riders or rippers who spend their fair share of time outside the resort boundaries. Lots of skis are light, but the High Mountain's rocker and sidecut profiles are what set it apart. Just like its burlier brother, it features a progressive five-point sidecut, which combines a tapered tip and tail with traditional sidecut and camber underfoot to create a feel that's solid and edgy on hardpack but can get loose and smeary in deeper snow, so you can rip all sorts of conditions with confidence.

The High Mountain also features a pin-tail shape and an extra-long tip rocker that work together to seriously improve float in powder, increase the ski's ability to comfortably make dynamic turns, and let you dump speed at a moment's notice. Paired with the sandwich construction and rugged vertical sidewalls, this gives the High Mountain a feel that's equal parts nimble and stable, so you can open it up down big backcountry faces, billygoat your way through peppery chutes, or rip frontside groomers without getting your undies in a bundle. 

  • 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

Share your thoughts



No file chosen

Rather attach a photo from another website?

Rather attach a photo from your computer?

    Add a:
  • Share a photo
  • Share a video


Only jpg, jpeg, png, gif or bmp files please.

Now review from the App.Download

Here's what others have to say...


light and nimble

    After demoing these last spring, I jumped at the chance to pick up a pair on sale over the summer. They are super fun and versatile, enough float to still be credible in deeper snow, stiff enough to power adequately through crud, but shine brightest on the days when not much deep (but lots of fun) is still to be had. I mounted a lighter binding to keep these nimble.


    True to the Dynastar name

    • Familiarity:I've used it several times

    Picked these up as a BC ski and mounted them with Dynafits. Really pleased with them so far after spending the last week touring in the Wasatch. Don't be dissuaded by the kinda funky shape of these skis. They're a different beast than Dynastar's older skis like the Pro Rider, but they share a lot of the qualities that made that line of skis so great.

    Despite the lack of metal, these are quite stiff. They seem happiest moving at a pretty good clip and making medium-large radius turns. Because of the stiffness, they feel a little dead until you get some speed, then they become really playful and poppy. Still, they're light enough and narrow enough that they're very managable for a few jump turns in tight spots or dodging aspens. Despite the rather substantial cambered section, they have enough tip rocker that you can throw them sideways and get a little of that slarvy pow-ski feel.

    I find these to really shine in variable, funky snow. The combination of the big rockered shovel that rides over everything and the stiff cambered section underfoot is quite confidence inspiring.

    Notes/disclaimers: I haven't skied these at the resort yet (and probably won't, due to the miniscule bindings I have on them) so I can't comment on how they do in chop, bumps, etc. I'm relatively light (160lbs) so bigger folks might not find these as stiff. I got the 184 and probably wouldn't go shorter, although tastes vary on ski length.

    Dynastar Cham 97 HM - 184CM

    Dynastar Cham 97 HM - 184CM

    The G3 Ion bindings with 95mm brakes work great with the Cham 97 HM.

    Unanswered Question

    I have last years version of this ski...Has anyone messed around with the mounting point on these? Just curious if everyone is happy with the recommended mounting line (assuming it is the same as last years) or if I'm better off going -1 or -2 cm. Thanks!