Armada or dynastar

i like them both. my first twins were dynastars, and also the next five pairs. never experienced anything negative with them. this year i switched to armada and i hope they live up to the hype they have brought to the marked.
 
dynastar ski so well, such a good ski, but they tend to break rather easily for me. I skied on the armada arv 5 demo or whatever that ski is called and it wasn't bad.. it definately didn't turn as well as the dynastars... your call.
 
armadas. dynastars put NO money into research and evelopment of their ski. The TM hasn't had ANY changes, except graphics, for the last 4 years. This is the 4th SEASON they will be the same ski. I'm not ok with that.
 
yeah thats true. but since there is a problem, minor or not, you think after 4 years they would put some find of effort out to make it better even if it isnt much
 
I've seen some Armada's get the shit kicked out of them. Same with Dynastar's, but I have to say I have seen more edgeless Dynastar's than Armada's. But, I have seen more Armada's with cracked topsheets and chipped sidewalls than I have Dynastars.

Apparently, Dynastars are the way to go if you don't hit rails a lot and like to ski park and pipe.
 
the thing is armada put effort into fixing there problems and mistakes. dynastar has sit back and watched for 4 years
 
dynastar doesnt make the perfect ski, no one really does, in my opinion changing the cosmetics of a skis every year is not cool at all
 
the only thing that seem to go wrong with the armadas is you will chip out your topsheet from your other edge but thats nothing big just looks
 
Touche r-dwag, you are right. Armada does work to correct these changes, but when you think about it, they have to. They are an upstart company (compared to Dynastar who has been in the game for years), so they have to make sure they have a good product, because the core newschool skiing niche is hard on skis and wants durable skis.

Dynastar on the other hand already has 10 times as many dealer contacts as Armada, and knows that these shops appeal to the geesers who just want to be cool, and will buy whatever the shop tells them.

So what I am trying to say is, its not as important for Dynastar to spend as much time in R&D because they already have a reputation, whereas Armada has to work hard to earn a solid one. Which, I might add, Armada is doing well right now, In my opinion.
 
thank you. thats why armada in my opinion is better. they care about the quality of their product more than dynastar does
 
dynastar makes a good ski, if they were more durable they'd easily be the best out there..but that's y i have my big troubles, won't do rails on them so i have a dope ski for BC
 
since armarda is a core "newschool" ski manufacture, they have to make durable skis since they will suffer from horrible abuse. whereas dynastar have more diversity in their their products, they have GS, pow, mogul, etc. in my opinion, if i am dynastar i would rather produce a ski that skis great so it would attract more customers to the product than to completely redesign an already well made ski. i am sure that they are working on something new to fix that edge problem, just what i think they would do. there are a lot of ppl here who owns a pair of the TM and loves it and their edges are still fine.
 
i guess it's really hard to actually conclude which is better since everyone is bias. i personally have owned 3 pairs of dynastars(not all twins), and only have demoed armarda. so of course i would side with dynastar over armarda. i have to agree though, that it's ridiculious to compare 2 companies who has are making products to different targeted market. armada only has one group of audiance, so if they fail on them, they will collapse. if dynastar fail on the "new school" scence, they will still have other things to produce funding.
 
its called 'big business'. clearly this jugernaut of a company is still making profit on the sale of the trouble maker. until this is not the case, there is really no reason to change the ski. so when u think about it, armada and such do the same thing; however, the smaller companies that provide for a much more select group have to have a product that appeals to the masses in a much greater factor than something dynastar produces. that is y smaller companies r constantly changing their products: newest technology = higher profits. im sry, its really nothing more than that, thats y companies produce products, to make money.
 
k, armada makes their skis with thicker edges, bases, and has worked on improving their sidewalls, and topsheets. They use great wood, and will hold up to abuse, i work in a shop, and i've never seen a pair of dynastars over a year old with out pressure cracks and wrecked edges, armada focuses on jib skis, dynastar still makes most of their money off racing, family oriented skis, so they really only care about the marketing aspect of freestyle, in order to attract buyers. Armada focuses on a solid rep as a jib ski, they are better for the jibber, period.
 
^ this is true, but that still only reaffirms my previous point. armada only appeals to a limited percent of the population, whereas dynastar covers the whole thing. therefore, in order to make any type of profit, armada must combat the larger companies by spending money on the development of their product. they make a good jib ski for the sole purpose of making good money.
 
so whats your point, every companyies goal is to make money, there aren't any blleding heart ski companies giving skis away. I don't understand why armada is bad for trying to make money, dynastar isn't even focused on jib skis, but they're goal is also money, so does that mena they are better, for gate skis yes, but that isn't really what this web site is about. so really what are you saying?
 
Armada no question i have a pair of the new 181 ar5's they r sick i have never riden a better ski and tm dont hold edge at all they fall out half way through the season
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top