How does it stack up next to the Fischer RX8?

These skis are pretty wide for carving skis but still carve really well though.

Dynastar Contact 11 gear review by Brian

Head iXRC 1400 Chip (170) or Dynastar Contact 11 (172)? Thanks for your help!

Dynastar every time.

Demo’d them - loved them, bought them. Held their own and then some in crud and mixed. They held and held.

I was on ‘02 Dynastar Skicross at 178.  Should I stick with a 178 on these or go down to the 172?

I bought the 172s - 5’10”. 195 lbs…Hope that helps.

Took them for a Demo yesterday. 

I thought these were the best compared to the others I tried.  They were solid and easy to turn.  Felt like I was skiing on butter.  Held through the crud and bumps really well.

I have the same question as above.  I’m looking at a pair of the Skicross 11 also.  Anyone have insight to how these compare?

How do they ski in crud, powder, bumps? Do they feel as beefy as last years Ski Cross 11?

I’m looking for some recommendations that can help me wade through all of the marketing BS.  Right now I’m considering the Rossignol Zenith Z9, Dynastar Contact 11 & the Fischer RX8. 

I’m 39 years old, 5’ 6’ and weigh about 145 lbs.  I mainly ski at Mt. Hood & Bachelor in OR, but still make trips to UT and CO.  Currently I’m skiing on some bump skis that are old skinny skis - Dynastar Assualt at 180cm.  Previous ten years where spent on some slalom race skis - K2 KVC 195cm. 

I’ve just started bringing my toddler out on the mountain and consequently spend much more time on groomed runs than bumps ’ not to mention that my body just can’t take a day of the bumps like it once could, but bumps are still my favorite thing to ski.

I’m really looking for an all mountain ski that is great at short radius fall line turns.  I want a fun, lively ski with lots of rebound and great in the bumps.  I probably spend 50% of my time on groomed runs, 30% on bump runs and 20% doing some bowl skiing. 

I’m generally not a fan of making GS turns, but it seems that’s all you can do on the flats so it would be nice to have a ski that is competent in that area.  I know it’s tough to get it all, but ideally I’d love to have one ski that could also be used comfortably in crud and even on a few powder days.  Am I asking for too much?

Does anyone have any recommendations between these skis or maybe another that should be on my list.  Also a recommendation on the appropriate size of ski would be helpful.  Thanks!

Dynastar Contact 11s

The Dynastar Contact 11s are great skis!  I just returned from a week of skiing at Alta/Snowbird - mid January 2007.  On the first day of skiing the conditions were 6 inches of powder.  By the second day the powder had changed to mostly crud and packed powder.  The remaining days were mostly packed powder and hard pack - under very cold weather for Utah (temp ranged from -15 Fahrenheit to a high of 18 Fahrenheit during the week).

I started by demo?ing the K2 Recons and Apache Outlaws both in (167 & 174 cm), the Volkl AC4s (170 & 177), and finally the Dynastar Contact 11s (172 & 178).  All four of these skis performed well in the limited powder conditions.  Unfortunately, the powder wasn?t deep enough to really differentiate the four skis.

In the crud to packed powder conditions of the second day however, the Volkls and Dynastars clearly outperformed the K2s.  The K2 Recons were decent skis but seemed flat in performance when compared to the Volkls or the Dynastars.  The K2 Outlaws had more kick than the Recons but lacked the liveliness and quickness of the Volkls and Dynastars.  Just as important, the Volkls and Dynastars cut through the crud like a freight train - both of the K2s were not as stable in plowing through the larger piles of crud.

As the second day separated the best skis, so too did the third day?s conditions of packed powder to hard pack.  Surprisingly, the Contact 11s had better edge holding power, were quicker and even more stable than the AC4s.

My two biggest gripes with the AC4s were: (1) that they were so stiff you could not dictate how much energy you put into the turn or took out of the turn depending on your needs - the AC4s were always on full throttle 100% of the time - this can be a draw back if you like skiing in tight areas and chutes - whereas the damper Contact 11s could be dialed to any throttle level desired ; (2) on the flats at high speeds the AC4s were squirrelly and would consistently track off course unless placed on edge - unlike the Dynastars that would go where pointed even when the skis were not placed on edge and were merely rolling on the flats of the skis.

Unfortunately I could not get my hands on a pair of the Nordica Top Fuel or the Rossignol Zenith Z9s.  So far the Contact 11s are on the top of my list and it will take incredible ski to top the qualities of this Dynastar.

For informational purposes, I am 48 years old and have been skiing religiously for 43 years mainly in the Tahoe area.  I am a 5?9? male, weigh 165 pounds, like to ski the steep, chutes, the trees, and when its not any of the above, I ski to the bottom as quickly as possible to get back up to the steeps.

I skied the Dynastar Skicross 10 for four years, replacing them with the Contact 11 this year. Some have asked for a comparision. Both are great skis, but the Contact 11 is much lighter and has superior edge grip underfoot. The Skicross 10’s were great skis, and I loved them in heavy spring snow conditions ... the Contact 11 have more of a race carver feel, but I love them in moguls too. Both are versitle, both have autodrive, Contact 11 is more technology in a lighter package.

Having read the review submitted on 1/28 @ 22:30, I’m interested to hear more comparisons between the two referenced.  I too have been on the cross 10’s for 4 years and believe they’re the very best on hard pack HIGH SPEED longer radius carving.  I find when getting to a bit steeper slope and slowing my speeds down, I end-up sliding my turns.  I also find the Skicross 10’s to be submarines in powder.  Can you comment on the Contact 11’s powder abilities and shorter steeper turning characteristics.  I agree the 10’s are fairly heavy and find it hard to believe any ski could hold an edge better than the 10s!

Does anyone ski these three skis?  I would love to hear some input.  I think they have similar side cut and intended audience.  I believe Head Super shape will be Super Shape Magna this for 07/08. Thanks.

I’m 6’0”, 210 lbs, aggressive skier, 47 years old.  Bought 172cm Dynastar Contact 11 skis in early January.  Just returned from trip to Mont Sainte Anne & Le Massif (Quebec) where I skied primarily hard-packed man-made snow.  My old skis were hybrids (partly shaped) Rossignol Viper X 9.3 198 cm, so this is a big change for me.  The Contact 11 likes to be skied in a wide stance and loves big arcing turns at high speeds.  I found that the skis were not so impressive when doing short, quick turns.  These skis like to be on edge and are somewhat unstable when flat, especially if you drive them into trail-edge crud (tips “waggle”).  They have great holding power if you drive your knees into the skis in a crouched position, but will “let go” and chatter very suddenly if overskied on hard pack.  I was talked into the 172 cm ski by the salesman, but would recommend the 178 cm ski for someone of my size and ability.  I found the Look bindings can be a bit “fussy” getting into in cold weather.  They complain if you try to slam your boot into them and prefer a gentle push or two.  Overall, I’m pleased with the ski, but for the cost would have been content with my old ones were they not 7 years old and worn out.

With respect for the opinions submitted in some previous posts, please consider…

The Contact 11 has more taper angle than most skis, making them great in bumps and allowing the expert skier to choose any radius turn at any time, when skied like TODAY’S skis should be skied to get the most from them.

The wider (hip’s width) stance is not new to skiing. Racers have to use the most stable platform to stay on course and get the most edge grip from BOTH skis.

ANY ski with a lot of side cut (and the 11 has more sidecut than most skiers are used to) will “waggle” or feel unstable when FLAT. Imagine driving your car with the front wheels misaligned as much as the edges at the shovel of a SHAPED ski. We’re talking about 15m radius here. Tip ‘em just a little so both edges are not in conflict, and use the energy stored in a bent ski to accelerate from turns. You’ll find you can go faster making turns than a straight ski can go in a straight line. Racers have mastered and proven this technique. Use the tails to “jet” you from a few turns. Join the ranks of those who work the whole ski, and see if some huge grins don’t materialize.

We tested the 178 and found that unless you tip the scales at well over the 200 lb mark, the 172 will serve you pretty well, unless you only crave long radius turns and always ski at blistering speeds (that is not a bad thing).

Ya…the bindings like to be pushed into, and not forced down hard; but this tester will gladly accept that trait in order to get the amount of “return” or “elastic travel” that Look / Rossignol bindings offer. If your boots are going in hard, and IF YOUR BOOT HEELS ARE NOT WORN, have your local ski techs lube ONLY the pivot points of your heels and they may ease up a bit.

Its nice to ski at a REALISTIC D.I.N. setting without any concerns of your skis falling off (Premature ejection).

Some of us have put up with a lot worse from older Looks and Markers.

The 11 is a great all mountain carver, and remains in Dynastar’s line for next year with MINOR changes (graphics and a new name).

Hope this clears up a point or two.

I’m stuck between these two.  Anybody out there skied both?  Am an advanced to expert, athletic skier who will mostly be skiing in the East.  Any help or thoughts are appreciated.

Thanks for the info, caledonpro.  I’m now at the point of no return, where I definitely prefer my new Contact 11s over my old skis.  It takes a bit of time and experimenting to appreciate all of their attributes.

Just had a chance to try them in powder this week.  The wide tip loves to float and the skis turn effortlessly.