Printable View
Tail is stiff as fuck, 8/10+. Definitely closest to a confession in the current lineup. I'd actually want to mount if back because you get hung up on it. Expect less edge engagement but more friendly release when you stay on top of it. Quite damp on a demo model, who knows how many cycles its went through by the time I got on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylvan
Yes, great deals. Also 50% off Mantra M6, Revolt 121, Blaze 106, and Vwerks Mantra.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sylvan
Half price on nearly every past year model from other brands too, way too temptedQuote:
Originally Posted by kootenayskier
Got on last years Mantra 102 today, wasn’t love at first sight. Wasn’t the right day for them, but so many people have said they carve well I thought I’d give them a shot. I’m thinking a fresh tune and maybe messing around with the mount a little before I give up. I can see them being fun in soft snow, but they didn’t seem particularly nimble. I know they’re super popular, so I’m in the minority. But, thought some of you might appreciate a different opinion.
I wasn't a fan of them at the back mount point, slid them up to the forward line and they opened up. I felt that way in all them, Kendos, M6, m102.Quote:
Originally Posted by lowsparkco
I'm curious how the M7 will ski and the mount points. Gonna snag our demo soon and play around.
Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk
I also got last years M102 for this season. I’m really liking it for low tide off piste stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by lowsparkco
I agree about carving though. I guess you could say it’s a good carver considering how easy it is to release, and given it’s off piste performance, but if that’s what you consider a good carver, there’s a whole world your missing out on.
Carving at high speed on hard groomers they feel squirrelly AF compared to R87 Comps.
What length are you on and what mount point? I started on the OG M102 (184) mounted on the rear line and the new iteration is silly easy to carve on in comparison. Like almost as easy as carving an M6. That’s not some dig at you, but rather poking at what might be different about your pair.Quote:
Originally Posted by lowsparkco
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
I'll reiterate that either version of the m102 is -the- do-it-all ski for any aggressive skier. It just works so well in every scenario and every condition that barring some absurdly deep dump of a day or the worst shitfuck ice coast skating rinks you should always bring it to the hill, because you won't get that "shit wish I had this pair" thought. They are just heavy, you have to have the legs and go in knowing that you aren't getting effortless drift like a deep rocker or twintip, you have to make the ski pivot.
I’m on the 184’s. They have demo Jesters on them and came mounted. I haven’t checked to see which line they used and where my boot center lines up. They’re in my locker up at the hill, so I’ll go up early on Thursday and mess around with them and see what I can do. They feel like they’re mounted too far back for my taste.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
They’re a middle quiver ski for me. I have a couple pairs of frontside skis and a deep day ski, but I’ve struggled being satisfied with the “daily driver” spot. I used to spit time between older cambered versions of the Legend Po Rider and Enforcers. Tried Heritage Labs R99 50/50 last season, but it’s too long for the terrain. Haven’t given up, just not in love.
What you described is how I felt on the 191's, like I couldn't get over the fronts of the skis. I'm 200-lbs and the 184 works really well for me. If you can handle LP's and the Enforcers, it's likely not you and probably just a style/fit thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by lowsparkco
This is why I got them, and I’ve been extremely happy with them so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeMagnet
But… if you were to grade them for carving hard groomers on a scale where 1 is a reverse/reverse ski, and 10 is a full blown race ski, I’d put the M102 at around 6 or 7. R87 comp is more like a 9. Old full-camber Mantra maybe 8?
So if I know I’m going to just be skiing groomers, I’m going to grab the R87.
If I don’t know where I’ll be skiing, or who I’ll meet up with, definitely grabbing the M102.
Agreed that my M102's weak spot would be on super slick and deeper than a foot of snow.
Although they are pretty damn stable on the ice as the platform skids with stability. In pow, they can get overpowered as you ski more across the fall line. Charging a bigger open face in a foot, yeah. Snapping crispies through tight trees in a foot, less so.
I'd posit that a HL R87 comp vs. the M102 on hardpack is always inclined towards the 87.
Because, skinny.
Skiing that shovel is part of the appeal for me. Hauling ass and leaning into it makes for a lot of power savings while riding the suspension. Forefoot skiing.
Fast as hell back and forth requires only to roll back into your arch and slash as fast as you can manage. Fuck they hook up quick and can change direction in a heartbeat.
Haven't spent much time in the back seat but when you can get on the tail and pop it fore and aft, it seems pretty directable. Potential for poor steering from the couch is high if not dialed in.
I have lots of room to roam so it's the 91.
Sure, that’s part of it. But I think it’s also construction, stiffer flex, full camber, flat tail. That tail is pretty powerful and takes a deliberate effort to release, but the flip side is it stays hooked up when you want it to, and gives more rebound out of a turn.Quote:
Originally Posted by Djongo Unchained
Very different feeling skis. R87 is nowhere near as intuitive; requires much more deliberate input. But it feels really, really solid and stable on edge.
For ice, I ended up running a gummy the full length of the M102 to make them slide more consistently, but the R87 is capable of hooking up on (Tahoe) ice so those are staying full sharp. (On one set of edges anyway - the other is detuned at tip and tail to make it less grabby on more edgeable snow).
I’m 185 lbs. and it sounds like a similar experience. Some of it is that I’m used to skiing short radius, stiff, shorter skis right now. And conditions blow. It’s been a bit of a mind fuck, as a new dad I’m skiing a lot less than usual, usually 2 days a week instead of 5. I got a really lucky break that I got called off work over the holiday weekend and conditions were great. I’m absolutely head over heels with a pair of Armada Magic J’s I picked up. Had a blast everywhere on them. Jump forward a week of freezing rain and other assorted bullshit. Feel like the only way I controlled the M102’s was kinda boring slashy z turn skiing. I was hoping for more spin, stable at speed, with that cushy volkl suspension feel. Just felt planky and dead. Probably just too far back behind the sidecut.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
Growing the BMT 109 by 10cm is such a big upgrade. 186s are way more stable than the 176 without requiring more effort. Now, do I also want to mount the katana vwers I got?
Anyone have any insight in why Volkl haven't made a 191 V-Werks Mantra? :confused: (thinkin since we've a 191 Katana)
Where is the Revolt 114 hype? This ski sells really well and is super sick but I hear minimal hype about it online. In my mind it is the ultimate TGR charger, especially since it’s actually quite loose and everyone on here is old and doesn’t want an absolute tank but still wants to haul. It charges and it slashes and it’s not centre mounted. Win win win.
Is it because the Revolt branding makes people think it’s going to be a job ski like the rest? Calling it a Revolt is a fail in my books.
Where’s the love? It’s my fav ski of the year.
I’m excited about that ski and I’ve seen some favorable reviews here. I haven’t skied it or seen one on snow yet. But they seem to be sick directional soft snow chargers. I’d like a pair, but I’m not buying any skis anytime soon...Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBC
Interesting. I'm kinda old but I still haul the mail on a tank.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBC
These sound appealing.
I've seen them and torqued a couple but nothing stood out initially. I'll look closer now.
I'd say a fat charger might be a tough sell in this generally dry, bony season so far. And sadly, I think the silly topsheet graphic may be a turn off for some people. I think it's funny. It's like the hand of God tickling Eve's wrinkled starfish.
Maybe I'll drive some here, and then rent them in euro if it snows.
Victim of the overwhelming response to the Heritage Labs deep snow offerings?Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBC
I keep hearing people use words like "harsh" and "demanding". Might not be accurate. I'm a Volkl guy, but lack of info has definitely lowered my interest level.
For me it's too wide for a DD and narrower than I want in a pow ski. It sounds like it could be interesting, but not enough to mess with my quiver construction.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBC
Ha! I almost said that. I'm a Volkl guy and the Revolt 114 it's one of the few non HL skis that I have any interest in these days. I love the idea of the FL113, but I kept thinking the Revolt 114 is probably more practical. Then Marshal released the R110 which reminds me of the full rockered Volkl's I love so much...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
Agree with the other comments to about lack of snow in NA. Last season was so nice I could have used a 114 for probably 60% of my resort days. This season I'm missing my OG Kendos.
Def agree with the lack of snow comment. Ski sales are down for sure. But it is still selling ok for us.
At 114 I think it floats a lot more than hojis in the way that you can relax on long radius turns in deep pow and not submarine, and charges a lot better too. Differently skis for sure.
I’d be interested in trying them, but I hate the topsheet far to much to buy them at retail. I’ll try a pair for 50% off in the spring.
What’s cool is they have a stiff tip and softer tail, just like the HL skis hehe
Curious about the 114's.. Any idea how they compare to 2014 Billy Goats? (my only measuring stick for a ski's performance)?Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBC
I take comments like that with a grain of salt nowadays and assume that people are wrongly comparing them to a 1800g progressive noodle ski w/ a 15m sidecut.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
As a side note I think your review of the Bonafide 97, along with some others on tgr convinced me I'd like that ski, while blister and the rest of the internet made them sound like a 2"x4". I got a pair and they just remind me of the Mantra's and Kendo's I skied in the early 2010's in the best ways.
I'm a big fan of the 114, but at around that waste width I'm enjoying my sender free 110's more currently. Honestly if they made a 105 version of the 114, I'd be all over it.
I had the 2014 billygoat I think. It had RES but wasn’t assym. I’ve been comparing the Revolt 114 to them a lot lately. I find the Revolt tracks better. The Billygoat seems to get deflected a bit in chop but also I found the tips would wander in pow. I liked them but I didn’t find them stable. The Revolt destroys the billygoat on firm snow and groomers. I found the BG was barely acceptable on groomers, they got you to the bottom but they made skiing groomers feel like a waste of time. The revolts can rail.Quote:
Originally Posted by beeeom
This makes it sound like I hated the BG. Not true. I liked them but they had a weird vagueness in the tip and weren’t versatile because of the lack of hard snow performance. Perhaps it was the RES.
Having spent quite a few days on the 191 Revolt 114 and own the 22' BG 192, while I definitely agree with you on the hardback performance of the Revolt, I still prefer my BG overall. I really wanted to like the Revolt but one firm day on the backside of Louise with no vis was enough to convince me the Revolts just weren't fun in that situation whereas I can haul on the BGs just as hard in mixed conditions, find them just as damp yet more energetic, much more enjoyable in slashy spots/conditions.Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBC
I can see why you like the Revolt at KH taking Wiley Coyote back to the gondola every lap but I would still choose the BG.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenBC
Thanks for the reply. I ski whitewater and quite enjoy the goats on groomers. How quick are the 114's to throw sideways in steep tight trees?
Finally enough coverage at Red that I’m not pinging rocks and logs every run, so broke out my beloved 184cm Katana Vwerks for the first time this season. Lapping untracked ankle deep dense powder in steep trees all day, these skis are truly on another level. Just so intuitive, how they effortlessly transition between carving, drifting, and bouncing turns. I’ve been enjoying my rocked out Wailer 112s for early season, being slightly more agile at slower speeds and their clown toe tips keeping me out of the logs and shrubbery, but now that I can carry more speed the Vwerks are so much more composed. I need to always have these in my quiver.
I ski Kicking Horse so I don’t ski tight trees but they pivot very quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by beeeom
The revolt 114 got mentioned briefly in the last blister podcast if anyone is interested.
Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk
I just joined the Volkl fan club.
naedward81 sold me a pair of current year 184 Kendo 88s.
I am STOKED !
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
any feedback on m7? I assume they didn’t change much about these skis given lack of info on them.Quote:
Originally Posted by naedward81
4 side cuts!!!
I haven't skied them yet. Hopefully this weekend...Quote:
Originally Posted by MD12
I know they changed the radius and gave it 4 turning radius's, but not if construction changed much.
Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk
How do people generally consider the M6 skis compared to the M102? 2023+ versions. If it’s purely for a hardpack skis that will mainly see moguls and carving on groomers on low tide days - is M6 the move? I seem to remember the M102 possibly being a bit more of a hard charging ski? Better in crud and going fast on groomers? But more work in moguls?
I’d assume 184cm would be the right length (5’10 200lbs). I demod them both last year and liked them at that length, but I was in pretty premo skiing shape at the time. I’ve been sort of leaning back towards shorter skis these days, just nice not to have to manhandle skis 24/7 for days you’re tired or the end of a long day if the extra stability isn’t truly needed. I’m curious to try a pair of 177s, on paper they sound too short but maybe not.
Perhaps mounting the 184cm version +1cm would make them a little easier in the bumps
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
How do people generally consider the M6 skis compared to the M102? 2023+ versions. If it’s purely for a hardpack skis that will mainly see moguls and carving on groomers on low tide days - is M6 the move? I seem to remember the M102 possibly being a bit more of a hard charging ski? Better in crud and going fast on groomers? But more work in moguls?
I’d assume 184cm would be the right length (5’10 200lbs). I demod them both last year and liked them at that length, but I was in pretty premo skiing shape at the time. I’ve been sort of leaning back towards shorter skis these days, just nice not to have to manhandle skis 24/7 for days you’re tired or the end of a long day if the extra stability isn’t truly needed. I’m curious to try a pair of 177s, on paper they sound too short but maybe not.
Perhaps mounting the 184cm version +1cm would make them a little easier in the bumps
Wait and get the M7. More versatile, easier turn initiation and a bigger sweet spot without sacrificing top end stability. I would have mounted a 184 M6 +1 or so as there is a lag time between thinking "turn" and the ski responding unless you are really moving and constantly pressuring the front of your boots, I skied the 184 M7 on the line and it was perfect. (At 175 lbs most people would say I should be on the 177, but I'm old school and like bigger skis, 184 should be great for you).Quote:
Originally Posted by Muggydude