Mantra 102 - where to mount it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bandit Man

....You don’t NEED both.....I haven’t skied the M102 since I bought the K108...so that says something.

---

Like banditman I own the M102, Rustler 11, Enforcer 104 and Proto 118s. So we do agree on lots.

I do not own a K108. And don’t think I need/want one.

My M102 is my "no new snow", groomer ski. For when snow conditions are tough and you need a solid ski that will hold/bite on harder snow. Or when you don't want to find a speed limit on groomers. I really like the M102 for those conditions. You can push the speed limit on them.

But I prefer the E104 and R11 when there’s been fresh in the past few days. And Proto for pow days. They're just easier to ski.

Maybe I really don't want an K108 cause I’m damn tired after skiing the M102s for 30,000 ft in a day at Whistler? I think it's cause you ski M102s like you are being chased each run? I feel like James Bond in The Spy Who Loved Me....

This vid up until 0:37 is me on E104s/Rustlers....super chill....then in the vid after 0:37 is me on M102s....you will start to ski like there are people shooting at you. So I’m scared of what I would do to myself on a 6mm wider M102.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaEU_A405zA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kc_7777

Like banditman I own the M102, Rustler 11, Enforcer 104 and Proto 118s. So we do agree on lots.

I do not own a K108. And don’t think I need/want one.

My M102 is my "no new snow", groomer ski. For when snow conditions are tough and you need a solid ski that will hold/bite on harder snow. Or when you don't want to find a speed limit on groomers. I like the M102 for those conditions.

But I prefer the easier skiing E104 and R11 when there’s been fresh in the past few days. And Proto for pow days.

Maybe I don't want an K108 cause I’m damn tired after skiing the M102s? Cause you ski em like you’re being chased? I feel like James Bond in The Spy Who Loved Me....

This vid up til 0:37 is me on E104s/Rustlers....super chill....the vid after 0:37 is me on M102s....you will start to ski like there are people shooting at you. I’m scared of what I would do to myself on a 6mm wider M102.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaEU_A405zA

---

I have the e104 and the m102 too. Love the e104 when its softish all over or there’s 6-12 inches of fresh snow.

On the east coast, under 6 inches of fresh snow and chances of firm snow mixed in or ice/windswept sections - gimme the m102 every day.

Or split the difference and take the bonafide 97. Love that ski for mixed conditions including up to 4-5 inches of new snow with firmer sections around. And if it’s heavy new snow - oh boy the bonafide is incredible.

Fwiw- I have the e104 in 186 (mounted -1.5), bonafide in 183 and m102 in 177 (both on the line).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bandit Man

I grew up in LA and skied Mammoth all the time until I moved to the Seattle area 15-years ago. A 191 M102 would be the perfect Mammoth daily driver. I bet it kills it in the Mammoth wind blown.

---

Totally! Just got back from skiing the past four days. Also skied Pro Riders and the new Cochise 106. 191 M102 to me stands out as a perfect DD there and the most versatile and fun of the lot for sure. Always great to see all the previous gens of mantras and katanas out on the hill there too.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Thanks for the replies. I sold my e104 191s because I loved the 102 so much. I've burned through a bunch of skis trying to find the perfect mid-100s ski: enforcer 100, 104, woodsman 108, kartel 108, skinny quixote, rustler 10. The 102 is definitely the best I've skied for my style and mountain. That said, will likely end up trying the K108 just because I'm so curious and/or have self-control issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STLHD

Thanks for the replies. I sold my e104 191s because I loved the 102 so much. I've burned through a bunch of skis trying to find the perfect mid-100s ski: enforcer 100, 104, woodsman 108, kartel 108, skinny quixote, rustler 10. The 102 is definitely the best I've skied for my style and mountain. That said, will likely end up trying the K108 just because I'm so curious and/or have self-control issues.

---

What length M102 are you on?

Just got my first morning on my M102's. Damn impressive skis. For as burly as they seem, they have a big sweet spot and are surprisingly easy to ski. They have just the right combo of dampness and energy. The new sidecut design is legit. Granted, this was 3 hours on firm groomers, so haven't really put them through their paces. Initial impression is very positive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ripvw

Just got my first morning on my M102's. Damn impressive skis. For as burly as they seem, they have a big sweet spot and are surprisingly easy to ski. They have just the right combo of dampness and energy. The new sidecut design is legit. Granted, this was 3 hours on firm groomers, so haven't really put them through their paces. Initial impression is very positive.

---

Another convert...I suspect you will grow to like them even more over time based on initial impressions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaliBrit

What length M102 are you on?

---

184s (6', 185#)


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Anybody posting up what length you're on, maybe post up your weight and height if you don't mind. Your ski length is irrelevant without at least the former.

177's, 5'10", 167#

191s (6'2", 180#), 43yo

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

I skied a 184 and really loved it. 5’10” 165. Going to buy the Katana 108 184 I think unless I hate the Enforcer 94 I’m about to mount. Then I’ll just get the Mantra in 184.

184’s, 5’8”, 165, 56 yo, north Tahoe
Perfect ski for this low tide yr.

177’s 5’11” 175.

177cm, 5’7”, 165 lbs, 54 years old, ~60-70 days at Whistler/Blackcomb

This ski allowing me to avoid owning a groomer ski that is sub 100mm.

And the 177 is really a 179.5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlimFlamvanHam

Anybody posting up what length you're on, maybe post up your weight and height if you don't mind. Your ski length is irrelevant without at least the former.

177's, 5'10", 167#

---

I laugh a little at the comment. Earlier this year, my son and I bumped into an older (mid-50’s at least) gal who was like 5’ 2” and about 160-lbs and she was chatting us up about her 102’s. We looked at the tails and they were 184’s. She said she loved them and they were easy to ski.

I’d be on the 191 if I skied a bigger resort like Mammoth or Whistler on the regular. I sized down to the 184 due to the tight spaces of my resort.

BTW - Bandit Jr is 5’ 10”, 170# and rips the shit out of the 184’s. [emoji6]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaliBrit

I skied a 184 and really loved it. 5’10” 165. Going to buy the Katana 108 184 I think unless I hate the Enforcer 94 I’m about to mount. Then I’ll just get the Mantra in 184.

---

[emoji1303]

Haha. So true.

I recently posted in this thread that my 5’6”, 127 lb wife (48 yrs old) skied my 177cm M102s for two days when my knee was tweaked. She really liked them and found them “easy to ski”as well.

Not gonna lie I was a bit humbled when she said that.

5’8”, 140 #s, 177. They’re awesome. ETA: i have 183 metal katanas I adore and was worried for a minute the 177 102 would be too short, but it’s prefect.

I didn’t have a strong preference between the 177 and 184. Just found a better deal on the 177’s. I’m sure I’d be equally happy on the longer version. Even on the shorter sticks, their speed limit is faster than I’d want to go at an open ski area.

5’7” 175lbs 50years on a 184cm mounted -1cm from the rear line.

FWIW I also started skiing on a 178cm VWerks Mantra mounted on the line this year which is a great complimentary ski to the M102. The M102 stands and punches while the VWMantra dances and jabs. Damp with weight vs playful with lightness. If you ever wanted to hike/skin with your M102 but were realistic with the weight of it, the VWMantra is a great answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ripvw

I didn’t have a strong preference between the 177 and 184. Just found a better deal on the 177’s. I’m sure I’d be equally happy on the longer version. Even on the shorter sticks, their speed limit is faster than I’d want to go at an open ski area.

---

Sounds like the 177’s measure a tad long and the 184’s measure short. That would mean that the only other difference between the two would be the turn radius. Measuring really close to 180 (per KC’s observations), the 177 seems like a great choice for lots of folks.

5'11
180
Skiing 177, about 7mm forward with a bsl 315.
Incredibly versatile, but have not skied powder yet.|
Great on groomers, and at least good on anything I have done.
Short to accommodate tight trees and poking around dense woods.
Hands down, best ski I have owned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bandit Man

I laugh a little at the comment. Earlier this year, my son and I bumped into an older (mid-50’s at least) gal who was like 5’ 2” and about 160-lbs and she was chatting us up about her 102’s. We looked at the tails and they were 184’s. She said she loved them and they were easy to ski.

I’d be on the 191 if I skied a bigger resort like Mammoth or Whistler on the regular. I sized down to the 184 due to the tight spaces of my resort.

BTW - Bandit Jr is 5’ 10”, 170# and rips the shit out of the 184’s. [emoji6]

---

And thus the point of my comment.

I trust ski companies to make their "expert" skis sized to the skier, rather than based on ability. Otherwise, per TGR sizing recs, every 6'+ skier over 200lb would be fukt.

Bandit. I don't need the 184's. I know what I'm doing and I'm completely in touch with the size of my dick.

That gal is was an idiot. I'm sure she was super nice but she was an idiot none the less. Because if she could rip (I'm talking about when you are riding up the chair and look down at some shit spaced bumps in shredded terrain) and see said gal and think, "shit, that chick can ski", then she would have been better off on a Secret 102 or M102 at 170. At her weight and height the 184 is doing her absolutely no favors anywhere (straightlining deep doesn't count unless marginally more autopilot in such conditions is worth it)

I'd also bet that if you blindfolded B Jr at his size he'd not be able to tell the difference between the 177 and 184 unless in bumps/tight stuff. That is If he truly rips, as you say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HHTELE

5'11
180
Skiing 177, about 7mm forward with a bsl 315.
Incredibly versatile, but have not skied powder yet.|
Great on groomers, and at least good on anything I have done.
Short to accommodate tight trees and poking around dense woods.
Hands down, best ski I have owned.

---

I've had mine in a good amount of deep of late last week off the top in whistler and blackcomb thanks to a lot of little refreshes all week, cold temps and a ton of wind. They are great. To me. Again, if you want to ski them unthinkingly in such conditions (ie some wide floppy rocker) these are not that ski. You still need to ski them.

The are better than great on groomers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlimFlamvanHam

And thus the point of my comment.

I trust ski companies to make their "expert" skis sized to the skier, rather than based on ability. Otherwise, per TGR sizing recs, every 6'+ skier over 200lb would be fukt.

Bandit. I don't need the 184's. I know what I'm doing and I'm completely in touch with the size of my dick.

That gal is was an idiot. I'm sure she was super nice but she was an idiot none the less. Because if she could rip (I'm talking about when you are riding up the chair and look down at some shit spaced bumps in shredded terrain) and see said gal and think, "shit, that chick can ski", then she would have been better off on a Secret 102 or M102 at 170. At her weight and height the 184 is doing her absolutely no favors anywhere (straightlining deep doesn't count unless marginally more autopilot in such conditions is worth it)

I'd also bet that if you blindfolded B Jr at his size he'd not be able to tell the difference between the 177 and 184 unless in bumps/tight stuff. That is If he truly rips, as you say.

---

I guess my joke landed flat. I didn’t get to see her ski and was really surprised that she was on such a big ski for her size. Not sure that makes her an idiot.

I really don’t care what size ski anyone is on in the forums. I’ll never ski with 99.99% of the folks here. I guess you think that I’m suggesting ski size equates to how well hung you are? Well, I don’t care about that either.

Ski your skis. Have fun. Isn’t that what it is supposed to be about anyhow.

And yes, my kid would probably be fine on 177’s. But he’s just fine on the 184’s.

But why the heck does it matter?