Printable View
Looking to buy my wife a Volkl M102/Secret in a 170cm (really a 172cm). For days when I’m on my K108.
She’s a really good skier. She skied my 177cm (179cm) M102s last year and thought they were easy to ski (hard on my ego) but just a bit too long for her.
Corbetts has last year’s 170cm M102 and 170cm Secret for about the same price.
Same specs (140-102-123).
Just confirming it’s the same ski, different topsheet.
As far as I and my wife can tell, a Mantra 102 170 and Secret 170 are the same ski. They weigh the same and have the same dimensions.Quote:
Originally Posted by kc_7777
My wife has a pair of 170 M102 and Katana 108. She prefers the Katanas. Feels they’re easier to ski, damper, and more stable.Quote:
Originally Posted by kc_7777
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Ya I’ve thought about a K108 for her. She has 172cm Santa Ana 104’s….which could overlap with M102s.Quote:
Originally Posted by swissbro
From everything we measured, they Secret and M102 seems to be exactly the same (M102 170 21/22, Secret 170 21/22 and Secret 170 19/20).Quote:
Originally Posted by kc_7777
https://compareskis.shinyapps.io/com...=%22Compare%22
K108 has a bit of a softer tail.
First day comments on the 184s - mounted on the recommended line with Pivots - skied by mr Average himself. 190cm/84kg.
All skiing on groomers. Mix of man made and natural, but tending towards ice here and there.
- suprisingly good edge hold, even on patches of man made ice. The more effort you put into them, the better they hold on.
- this also means that you have to commit on steeper terrain. They pick up speed like crazy
- can tolerate a neutral stance on groomers, but skis better with a more forward stance
- not especially demending if you want to ski casually. Can be rolled over nicely from your ancles on mellow terrain
- very high speed limit when on their edges, but felt the pow-ski wobble if running them flat at high speed.
- A slightly shorter length (or deeper rocker?) than I usually ski knocked me a bit back on a couple of ice bumps, but that might also just be my early season legs.
- that being said: they didn't want to run away from me. Forgiving in that respect. Mount point feels spot on for me
- didn't feel very smooth, almost a bit planky - but once again: not when on their edges
Conclusion:
- the 191s must be beasts
- not sure how well this ski works out in tight norwegian trees, might not really have their place in the quiver as I have other skis for dedicated groomer skiing
- if I ever go back to Las Lenas I'll bring these as part of a two pair quiver. They must be fantastic on those chalky days, or if conditons demand that one sticks to icy groomers
I agree on your first day comments on the Mantra - got the same first day impression
I ride the 191s and they are not beasts - or at least they are well behaved beasts. Could be that my specs helps taming them (190cm, 100kg) :-)
mounted on the line - feels fine for me
After a few more days on the 184s, primarily groomers, but also some ancle deep etc:
- quite possibly the most intuitive ski I've been on, maybe except from my old 186 Billygoat.
- there is a bit of tail in tighter terrain, but as long as you unweigh/bounce a bit they come around nicely
- as good a carver (maybe better?) than 187 Brahma 82, but likes a bit more speed.
- will pop you into the next turn if given speed and a active stance
- will go from a hip dragging carve to a slarve/stop turn, and back to a clean carve easily and predictable
Your last point is what wraps up this ski. I’m amazed at how I can drag hip and then stand up and stop.Quote:
Originally Posted by sf
Pow turns in knee deep are meh. They work. They’re not a powder ski. But the tip/tail rocker and super mellow camber allow some surfy-ness in 3D snow.
I can ski them in my JP forests. But this is my non-tree/resort ski.
I would love this ski in Tahoe as a DD. Maybe the K108 would make more sense. And at that point we’re probably discussing ten different skis.
Regardless, M102 is a capable, intuitive, fast, chill, Jack-of-all-trades ski. Master of none, unless you only have one. And if I had to choose only one, this would be on the list for the resort-centric quiver-of-one. As such, it is then a great foundation to build a quiver off of.
Interesting - perhaps I should hold on to mine another season then to try them in your type of climate.Quote:
Originally Posted by sf
I really want to try them down the dh run in Bavallen at Voss and at Geilo you see, but there are other skis I prefer to be on where I usually ski.
I've already posted in gearswap, but won't hurt to ask here if anyone has and willing to sell their M102 in 191? Flat or mounted as long as it fits 315mm BSL. This ski got me intrigued.
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
You should.Quote:
Originally Posted by kid-kapow
It's not the ski I would use as daily driver on out west coast, but it would make a great spring ski for resort with more terrain above treeline. Stranda, Oppdal, Røldal, perhaps Myrkdalen, upper Stryn etc
yeah, I just need to remount them closer to the back line - the accidental +1.3 mount was perhaps not quite what the doctor ordered for me, even if they still ski well there. I have not skied em this season.Quote:
Originally Posted by sf
First day on these (177) mounted on back line, they rip. They welcome driving the tips, and are unforgiving back seat. Some weird wander running flat bases, but whatever. Looser than 2014 Mantra (as expected), but charge harder. Not quite as energetic carving as a Kastle with a flat tail, but way more juice than a 2017 180 Bonafide, at least for my 170 lbs.
Very pleased.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1000-oaks
I have the weird wander too for the first few runs when skiing the 177s. Bumped up to 184 and zero wander. Haven’t lost any maneuverability either - it’s like a more refined ski for me. I’m 185-190 lbs.
Only drawback to the 184 is that the 177 is a more fun carver on ice. But I don’t care about that.
Try the 184! Love these skis.
Where did you mount themQuote:
Originally Posted by 1000-oaks
For some reason, this ski has a reputation for being a lot is ski…which is isn’t. Not sure if it is the mellow rocker profile, Mantra lineage, or something else but I think too many people size down when they shouldn’t. The 184 is really an amazing ski. Glad you sorted out the sizing issue and are loving them.Quote:
Originally Posted by MD12
I'll be curious to hear more about next year's ski as it moves to the M6 construction and sidecut.
I thought the current mantra m6 had changed recently to be more like the 102?
Back line, I'm old school.Quote:
Originally Posted by yellofin
Had mine out today in everything from groomer to chop to untracked powder (~8 inches). Still love how they tackle it all with ease. I really like how they perform in chop. No deflection to throw me off, but still they seem quick and nimble, easy to throw sideways and dump speed. I'm skiing the 177 mounted on the line, 5'8" 165 pds.
same size^^ teaching 3 of my kids. Stupid easy ski @ 184.
the M102 is the ladybird that happens to shred. It's so mindless.
Stepped into M102s for the first time this season on Monday. First thought as I stepped into my clamps and into the lift line was man, I can just stand here and swivel these things back and forth so easy. Second thought was the hollowness of the titanal frame elicits a metallic ping that also comes through as abrasive when skiing through crunchy snow.
I put it out if my head last couple of years but Von's descriptions are spot on; it is less smooth than what two full sheets of metal would provide, or maybe another shape of the metal that wasn't a frame would provide (like a band, a y frame or that dagger [emoji2787] dynastar employs). But the frame gives it so much power on edge and really encourages you to lay them over. I have to remember they're fully capable of surfing real well too.
Also been thinking about Vons apt writeup. I like longer skis in the wide open terrain I ski, they just feel so right, but the 184 would def be a more appropriate size at a smaller hill, more technical lines and in probably in general. I am 6'2" 175lbs and at 44 when skiing inbounds usually more overgeared than I need to be, but like bigger planks and recognize a closing window of athleticism that encourages me to get while the getting is good.
I also think now that I don't really decide if a particular ski will work for me or not in a sketchy entrance, that it's more often the entrance that dictates to me if I'm in or out There were a couple situations this week where I just punted on even trying to drop in after a few laps and found the safer way to the apron and I don't think my skis would've impacted my choice. Different context than what Von described but wanted to point that out.
I also skied the 189 BMX105HP for the first time this week and thought they were damper, smoother, skied even shorter than the 191 M102, and encouraged a surfier style more designed as soft snow bias bc of the rocker/tapered shape but fully capable of slaying variable and set up harsher snow, whereas the 191 M102 feels more like a champ daily driver for the high alpine... so I agree with you guys on those fronts for sure.
3 year and 2nd pair anniversary on the 184. I don't know if there is a ski out there that can replace it in the quiver..maaaaybe the K108, and that's debatable. It is just a confidence inspiring ski. On my first run all the way back then the thought was "Welp the Kendo is never getting skied again" and i've found it pointless to have anything skinnier because it has no business being that planted yet nimble. Other skis may do better at some things, but the balance of those traits among what i've ridden, with an unflinching backbone, makes it feel like if you can trust the ski they will always do what you want them to do. A few runs in today and the ski I chose wasn't cutting it, so it was back to the car and out comes old faithful. It was as if I forget how to ski if they're not under feet. It's status as the 'break glass in case of emergency' pair was cemented.
I just wish at times they were lighter when they need to get flung around..and today I was reminded why that's a good thing. Lets hope the update keeps it intact.
I appreciate the expressive write-up! I’ve come to the same conclusion about the 184. It just works so well in so many different conditions and terrain types. I’ve also decided that I don’t needed a 191 M102. It would be more ski than I need most days.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeMagnet
Hey Bandit, any chance that you already have 102 in 191 that you don't need?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
I’m really happy to see the ‘23 pics of the new Spider-Man tips… the carbon stringers to replace the existing full-on carbon tips.
I’m not going to buy it.
But thankfully other people won’t have to listen to today’s M102 enter firm snow.
I love my M102. But I’d be lying if I didn’t admit how painfully noisy the carbon tip is on firm snow.
Headphones rule.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by bry
Never bought the 191’s. I do have some 191 K108’s that I need to ski again before deciding whether they need a new home. Amazingly stable but the swing weight really bothers my bad knee.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robik
I'm little younger than you and can definitely take care of your Katanas if you decide to let them go. You can PM me if willing to discuss.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
Haha, you nailed me with this description. I'm a couple years older and 20# heavier, but I'm holding on to the time I can ski 190cm+ skis for as long as I can! https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...a033a902c3.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by bry
Will keep that in mind. I need to ski them one more time before letting go. My aging pride needs that. [emoji6]Quote:
Originally Posted by Robik
Plus you need to let me try them first, too!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
My pair is 2021, and the end of the tails (last 4" or 5") were quite convex out of the plastic wrap, Took about ten minutes per ski to take the edges down enough to be able to wax the bases. Nobody would probably notice it when skiing though, given it's the tail rocker area.
I own and love the k108 in a 177 and I tend towards shorter skis these days... but it's a bit low tide around here so I'm toying with scaring myself with an m102 in a 184 for the day on Thursday.
Would be an interesting test given that I did NOT take good care of myself over Xmas and then got covid just before new years and don't feel anywhere near 100% yet. [emoji2957]
This is something I've noticed over the last few years with the free ride Volkls. They've always been one of the best manufacturers to have totally flat bases out of the wrapper, but it seems these new designs 'purposely' (?) have convex shapes to them at the tip and tail beyond the rocker - especially at the tip. I can't imagine this is a QC issue, and have to believe it's a design element. To that end I did not "fix" the edges and skied them as-is, and they have all (M6, M102, K108, Katana VW, Mantra VW) skied just fine with none of the typical issues you'd expect with edge-high bases.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1000-oaks
Skied on my 184 M102’s at Snowbasin today and really enjoyed them on the firm, chalky groomers. Poked around in a few technical lines and the 184 felt right for me.
Even though the snow could have required a narrower ski, the M102 was solid. Plenty of edge hold and so composed at speed.
They got moving pretty quick today (at least for me):
Attachment 401608
Blister did a flash review on the updated 184 M102 and used the words “more accessible”. Not sure how I feel about after skiing my 184’s which felt perfect.
Deleted.
They’re probably just walking back their original review which made them seem burlier than they really are, a reputation they don’t deserve in my experience. The original M102 is very intuitive… it can rip but it’s not hard to ski. Versatile is the first word I think of… which makes it a great lift served travel ski.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
My 184’s are still happily mounted -0.5cm behind the back line.