Is the Dynastar Powertrack 84 a good Tele ski?

[BigJohnS]

I'm looking for a ski to use mainly on trail at the resort to work on my technique. I found a couple pairs of Dynastar Powertrack 84s for sale at a good price, one in 183cm and one 176cm. Does anybody have an opinion on if the powertrack would be a good tele ski or have experience with it? I would definitely go with the 183 for an alpine ski but would the shorter 176 be better for telemark, I'm 6'1" 170lbs? I would be using T2X and targas. Thanks.

[Montana St Alum]

From reviews and such, it sounds as though the PT84 is a "carver". The 176 has a 15m turn radius, so I would expect it to hook up in the turn pretty well.
It has a flatter tail paired with some early rise.
Are these new, or used? Previously mounted with alpine?
What is it about this ski that appeals to you (regarding the ski design and what you want to accomplish)?
Your boot/binding combo would be fine and depending on your goals, I think 176 would be a good length.


Where do you ski? What stage of development of the tele turn are you at?

If you're back east dealing with hard pack and if your goal is to develop a carve, it could be a good choice.

[BigJohnS]

From reviews and such, it sounds as though the PT84 is a "carver". The 176 has a 15m turn radius, so I would expect it to hook up in the turn pretty well.
It has a flatter tail paired with some early rise.
Are these new, or used? Previously mounted with alpine?
What is it about this ski that appeals to you (regarding the ski design and what you want to accomplish)?
Your boot/binding combo would be fine and depending on your goals, I think 176 would be a good length.


Where do you ski? What stage of development of the tele turn are you at?

If you're back east dealing with hard pack and if your goal is to develop a carve, it could be a good choice.

They're used and currently mounted with alpine bindings. They drew my eye because of the price but kept my attention because the waist width seemed good for what I am looking for and the early taper in the tip and tail seem like they would make it a bit easier to release from a turn than a traditionally shaped carving ski.
I would be using them mainly on trail in the east. I'm an experienced alpine skier and like to ski off trail but in the frequent scenario where there isn't enough natural snow or it is refrozen and too hard to have fun skiing I want to be able to do some tele turns on the groomers. I just started last year doing some backcountry skiing with leather boots and NNN BC bindings. I'm able to link turns and have skied a little in resorts with that setup but I want something that will make advancing my ability a bit easier and more fun on harder snow.

[Montana St Alum]

I'm not a fan of used skis for telemark inbounds. With alpine gear, the boot/binding can do a lot to mitigate the degradation in performance that I notice after about 100 days of skiing. If you're looking at powder day skis, that's a bit different, but for inbounds, hard pack east coast conditions, I'd try for something new.

IDK what your budget is, but there are some decent looking skis out there around $350 that don't require compromises in mounting position due to old mounts or skis that have lost their "mojo" due to the breakdown of the wood in the core

One example that might have some potential:

https://www.skiessentials.com/2021-ski- ... brahma-82/

At 180cm, I think they'd work and with 82 underfoot, the edge control should be good.
They have a little wider TR at 16.5m which might make it easier to vary the turn radius, compared to a tighter turning ski.
The downside is that with two metal layers, they may require some aggressive driving, as I'd guess they're stiff.
Also, Blizzard is fairly aggressive on their edge angle. I think they come with a 2 degree side bevel. I have the Rustler 9 and Rustler 10 and have both side bevelled at 3 degrees and they hold an edge amazingly well.

These are $360, but they're just an example.
https://www.skiessentials.com/products/ ... 20size=180

[wabene]

From reviews and such, it sounds as though the PT84 is a "carver". The 176 has a 15m turn radius, so I would expect it to hook up in the turn pretty well.
It has a flatter tail paired with some early rise.
Are these new, or used? Previously mounted with alpine?
What is it about this ski that appeals to you (regarding the ski design and what you want to accomplish)?
Your boot/binding combo would be fine and depending on your goals, I think 176 would be a good length.


Where do you ski? What stage of development of the tele turn are you at?

If you're back east dealing with hard pack and if your goal is to develop a carve, it could be a good choice.

They're used and currently mounted with alpine bindings. They drew my eye because of the price but kept my attention because the waist width seemed good for what I am looking for and the early taper in the tip and tail seem like they would make it a bit easier to release from a turn than a traditionally shaped carving ski.
I would be using them mainly on trail in the east. I'm an experienced alpine skier and like to ski off trail but in the frequent scenario where there isn't enough natural snow or it is refrozen and too hard to have fun skiing I want to be able to do some tele turns on the groomers. I just started last year doing some backcountry skiing with leather boots and NNN BC bindings. I'm able to link turns and have skied a little in resorts with that setup but I want something that will make advancing my ability a bit easier and more fun on harder snow.

Thanks for this, you do a good job of explaining what many of us aspiring tele skiers from powder challenged areas are looking for.

[BigJohnS]

I'm not a fan of used skis for telemark inbounds. With alpine gear, the boot/binding can do a lot to mitigate the degradation in performance that I notice after about 100 days of skiing. If you're looking at powder day skis, that's a bit different, but for inbounds, hard pack east coast conditions, I'd try for something new.

IDK what your budget is, but there are some decent looking skis out there around $350 that don't require compromises in mounting position due to old mounts or skis that have lost their "mojo" due to the breakdown of the wood in the core

One example that might have some potential:

https://www.skiessentials.com/2021-ski- ... brahma-82/

At 180cm, I think they'd work and with 82 underfoot, the edge control should be good.
They have a little wider TR at 16.5m which might make it easier to vary the turn radius, compared to a tighter turning ski.
The downside is that with two metal layers, they may require some aggressive driving, as I'd guess they're stiff.
Also, Blizzard is fairly aggressive on their edge angle. I think they come with a 2 degree side bevel. I have the Rustler 9 and Rustler 10 and have both side bevelled at 3 degrees and they hold an edge amazingly well.

These are $360, but they're just an example.
https://www.skiessentials.com/products/ ... 20size=180

Yeah, I think the brahma is a bit more ski than i want. One of the reasons i was looking at the pt84 was it is available for under $100 and i could reuse the alpine bindings in the future. I also saw a stockli stormrider light for about 240 online, new blemished. I'm thinking that might be a bit light for hardpack but im not planning on going too fast.

[Montana St Alum]

I'm 5'9" tall and 160lbs. I got a pair of 164 EXP 84's for the express purpose of learning to carve. Because I wasn't that good at it, I went short with a 12m turn radius - take THAT, Deer Valley! That was mainly because I kept going fast enough to scare myself on longer skis.

They allowed me to specifically target a skill I wanted to develop. Because we rarely have the kind of HARD-pack you get out east, the one thing about 84 underfoot that became a downside is that - now that I'm better at getting the ski on edge - I get over enough that I now "boot out" on the snow as the edge goes deeper. At this point, my Rustler 9's are my go-to carvers at about 92 underfoot. That might not be an issue on harder surfaces but I wouldn't hesitate to try oddball combos.

Anyway, for a short, soft flexing lower intermediate ski, these things dig in pretty good.

On the EXP's


These are on the R9's:

[BigJohnS]

I'm 5'9" tall and 160lbs. I got a pair of 164 EXP 84's for the express purpose of learning to carve. Because I wasn't that good at it, I went short with a 12m turn radius - take THAT, Deer Valley! That was mainly because I kept going fast enough to scare myself on longer skis.

They allowed me to specifically target a skill I wanted to develop. Because we rarely have the kind of HARD-pack you get out east, the one thing about 84 underfoot that became a downside is that - now that I'm better at getting the ski on edge - I get over enough that I now "boot out" on the snow as the edge goes deeper. At this point, my Rustler 9's are my go-to carvers at about 92 underfoot. That might not be an issue on harder surfaces but I wouldn't hesitate to try oddball combos.

Anyway, for a short, soft flexing lower intermediate ski, these things dig in pretty good.

On the EXP's


These are on the R9's:

Thanks for the advice and nice vids. Do you or anybody else know if there are still delamination issues with faction skis? I found some new dictator 1.0s on outandbackoutdoor.com. The price seems almost too good to be true but the website seems fairly legit and there is an Outdoor mag article online about them.

[BigJohnS]

Looking at some Liberty V76 now. A bit narrow but I'll be mainly using it on groomed anyway. I just wonder if it will be too stiff for targas and t2x.