What to buy? 190 Q-Lab or 190 Cham 107

[J-ROCK]

Looking for some solid advice on picking up a new daily driver. I have run the 194 LPs and the 198 X-Wing Lab in the past. Heard good things about both of these. One huge factor is the ability to pick up the Cham for about half of the price of the Q Lab. Unfortunately I can't get on either for a demo. Both have the vertical sidewalls and flex I want. Tapered tail on Cham looks like it would run chopped up bumps better than the Q Lab. Thoughts and experience on both would be greatly appreciated. Any other skis I should seriously consider?

[Kied]

I haven't skied the Cham, but I got out on a pair of the Q-Labs this past weekend. After skiing them, I can understand why so many of my friends in Tahoe have jumped ship from other brands to ride the Salomons. Super solid ski. Handled variable conditions and ice really well and never felt like it was too much ski. No doubt it would be a great daily driver.

[J-ROCK]

How were the tails in the bumps! Were they super un-ruly?

[ZomblibulaX]

My choice would be Q-Lab as well. Versatile, good in crud, very manageable in the tight stuff. Its turny (20.5m) without being hooky. I own X-Wing labs as well, the nicest thing I can say about the Q-Lab is it doesn't feel like a Salomon pow ski(XW Lab, AK Rocket, etc.).

The Cham skis well and has a solid feel, but I would mount it +1. The pintail leaves a lot to be desired if you like to finish a turn ever. 1 cm forward gives you a little more balance, and that tip is pretty hard to sink anyway. $0.02

[Kied]

How were the tails in the bumps! Were they super un-ruly?

I don't necessarily gravitate to bumps/ mogul fields, but in choppy variable conditions the tails seemed fine. You'd think you would have to muscle the ski, but they're really nimble for how big they are.

[Mustonen]

Tapered tail on Cham looks like it would run chopped up bumps better than the Q Lab.

I have the q labs and spent minimal time on the Chams. Hated that silly tapered tail on hardpack, felt like it wanted to do stuff but didn't have any follow-through. I find the q labs to be much more rewarding, though maybe a (little bit) more demanding.

[MotoBeak]

As a big Dynastar fan, I would suggest the Q Lab. The I loved all the Legend and Trouble series, but I could never get comfortable on Chams with that short sidecut and weird tail. It's probably my technique. The Q Lab feels more like the traditional burly Dynastar skis. The Cham would be the choice for quicker turns or a less aggressive skier.

[gramboh]

Q Lab. Do not like the shape of the Cham 107 at all (the tail mostly, but really the entire shape) especially on hard snow.

[Beder]

One vote for the Cham. I especially like it the day after the storm. It is a heavy beast.

[smallfry506]

Shameless plug for qlabs I have for sale. 190 mounted with sth2 16's for a 307bsl. $625 shipped....

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...00#post4409000

[coskiguy]

been skiing the cham 107 190s for two seasons now at alta. if the chams have a decently sharp edge on them, they rail on groomers and hard pack - i've never felt like the pintail was keeping me from skiing anything or any shaped turn. they float and the tips never dive. they charge firm bumped up crud like superstars.

never been on the q labs but they seem legit.

anyone know how the flex patterns compare?