All Things Volkl Thread

I was just thinking about it and I feel like today is somewhat confirming of something I said in one of the heritage labs threads... I think if this ski had the same camber profile (I.e almost none) of the k108 I would have adored them.

I've been feeling for a while like regardless of the conditions I don't want a ski to tell me what turn shape I want.

I think I'm over camber and I can't wait for my R110s to arrive next year. And maybe a skinny version too!

That probably is an indictment on my skiing skills but I'm ok with that.

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bandit Man

What length were you on?

I think you summed up the M6 pretty well, especially in relation to its wider siblings.

I’m on the 184 and find them much more eager to be on edge versus the M102 or K108. The M6 is also much more dynamic and quick, which makes sense due to the narrower waist and overall lighter weight. I haven’t even skied my M6’s this year since the new M102 has a similar demeanor but is just a bit more ski and bit more stable.

---

How do your M102s do in tighter spots such as moguls or drainages? Sure not first choice but curious how much better than the gen 1 M102.




Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Anyone riding on the Revolt 121 in 191 that's not super heavy. Looking for a bigger pow ski, that still has a fun flex (medium +). 5' 8" 170lb.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNW-skier78

How do your M102s do in tighter spots such as moguls or drainages? Sure not first choice but curious how much better than the gen 1 M102.




Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

I have the gen 2 in 191 and have had no problems with them in tight spots - I find provided you stay pretty active in your skiing (i.e in the front of the boots) they release without a hitch. One thing I love about them is they’re so consistent in how they behave regardless of the situation. Skiied them yesterday in a foot of fresh on top of hard moguls in trees and never a concern around being able to break them sideways and shut it down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNW-skier78

How do your M102s do in tighter spots such as moguls or drainages? Sure not first choice but curious how much better than the gen 1 M102.




Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

I have had the Gen 1 M102 and just got the Gen 2 M102 both in 191. They handle the moguls fine, drainages and trees very well. I can zipper moguls with them but if it hasn't snowed in a while and I know it will be 100% hard pack and mogul day I take my Dictator 1.0.

Luke seems to enjoy R114s.

I can't say that the review made me regret selling my pair before skiing them - BGs slay in this segment too.

curious about anyone’s take revolt 121 vs. Nocta v3 if they have skied both. Really liked the Revolt in 184 but felt like just a touch longer might be better. May have been my mount point. I don’t mind progressive mounts and was on the Team Line. I’m 6’ 173 lbs. plus gear. Been leaning towards Nocta in the 190 cuz of their weight in that length. It’s not heavy while not being uber light. Mainly a resort pow ski. Please opine.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I’ve skied the gen1 m102 in 177 and 184, the m6 in 184 and the gen2 m102 in 184.

I don’t think I found the top end of the gen1 m102 in 177. My issue with that ski was that it seemed a bit hooky and really wanted to be on edge even when running more bases flat. Almost took a couple spills just cruising around at moderate speeds when it would just catch an edge unexpectedly and want to commit to a turn or would otherwise sort of skid out to one side. Usually would happen on one of the first few runs of the day and then would go away. I’ve never experienced that with the longer lengths of the 102 or m6.

based on that experience I’ve always thought these skis are pretty sensitive to length. Sometimes longer is easier even if you don’t need more top end. On the other hand, I didn’t pay much attention to the bases on the 177 at the time so maybe it just needed a stone grind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MD12

I’ve skied the gen1 m102 in 177 and 184, the m6 in 184 and the gen2 m102 in 184.

I don’t think I found the top end of the gen1 m102 in 177. My issue with that ski was that it seemed a bit hooky and really wanted to be on edge even when running more bases flat. Almost took a couple spills just cruising around at moderate speeds when it would just catch an edge unexpectedly and want to commit to a turn or would otherwise sort of skid out to one side. Usually would happen on one of the first few runs of the day and then would go away. I’ve never experienced that with the longer lengths of the 102 or m6.

based on that experience I’ve always thought these skis are pretty sensitive to length. Sometimes longer is easier even if you don’t need more top end. On the other hand, I didn’t pay much attention to the bases on the 177 at the time so maybe it just needed a stone grind.

---

Any chance the bases weren't flat? All of the recent volkls I have owned had concave bases, although not to the extent that it bothered me a ton.

Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

Def possible. I never checked. Ended up parting with the skis as I liked the 184 better anyway for most purposes.

Reposting from tbe J Skis thread

Got on my 187 (newer version) J Skis Masterblasters for a couple more days at Squaw this weekend. Spring conditions, bit crunchy in the morning, soft in the afternoon.

Current mount is +.3cm ahead of the line with 295mm BSL. If I could do it over I’d mount right on the line, maybe up to -.5cm but no further (my first mount was -1.2cm and I didn’t like them there).

MB is Super predictable, can make fast turns, carves, and pivots from a more centered stance or pressuring the shovels hard. The harder you push them, the more they can dig in and carve.

They do a really good job of smoothing out crud and chop, especially if it’s a bit softer. Very good suspension.

Comparing to 184 Mantra 102 and M6 - the Masterblaster beats them out in soft snow, mashed potatoes, deep variable crud, and moguls. Easier to pivot and slide through moguls, and considerably bigger sweet spot.

Both Mantras definitely hold an edge on icy hardpack noticeably better. The MB isn’t bad, but you really have to lean into it to carve hard and you can feel the limits of your edge grip levels. The MB is very predictable at least, I never was surprised by washing out the tails a lot or anything like that. I skied these faster than I probably should have, and they stayed composed. If you’re backseat going Mach 1 the tips can start to bounce and chatter a tad.

Once the groomers get soft, the Masterblaster gets a lot better/easier to carve and closer to the Mantras carving.

I’d still say the M102 is a better crud buster than the MB. M6 closer to MB, but still probably better. In variable snow though the extra rocker on the MB makes it a little more predictable and easy. The slightly softer flex and heft of the skis makes smoothing and smearing out variable enjoyable.

I felt both the M6 and M102 required you to be on your game technique wise and driving the shovels, but rewarded you for it. MB more laid back, and allows you to ski more neutral and won’t kick your ass if you’re tired or get more backseat.

I’d love to compare the MB to the new Volkl M7, and I’d also like to add a more aggressive tune to the MB to see if that helps the hardpack grip a bit without hurting the maneuverability too much. I may have detuned the tips and tails too much.

TLDR - Get Masterblaster if you value maneuverability and mogul performance more, have a more neutral stance, or just want an easier ski that lets you starve and smear with ease. Buy the mantras if you value hardpack performance and icy groomer carving more, or really like pushing things fast and driving the shovels hard all the time - because they do reward it handsomely.



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Found a cheap pair of 184 Revolt 114's and need to get them out in some spring corn or hot pow for science. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bandit Man

Found a cheap pair of 184 Revolt 114's and need to get them out in some spring corn or hot pow for science. ;)

---

You need some Dukes on em. [emoji6]

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

naedward81, you get on the M7s yet?

I demoed the M6s a while back, and they were so, so damn good. Wondering how much of a change the M7 will be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotSoBright

naedward81, you get on the M7s yet?

I demoed the M6s a while back, and they were so, so damn good. Wondering how much of a change the M7 will be.

---

Yep. Brought them to Bridger and skied them two days.

I moved the demo bindings up to the middle line.

I thought they engaged really well, found zero speed limit on them. Turns release easy and spring you to the next turn. It felt like the tips were softer than the M6, which might have made turn iniation easier. Ended up ripping soft groomers one day and they were a blast. I liked them a lot better than the M6.

2nd day on them was hard pack groomers and some ungroomed bumps. Easy to pivot in tight spots, predictable. The hard groomers they gripped. Only sketchy spots were iced over wind blown non groomed snow that made me question decisions on how fast I was going.

My buddy skied the 184 one day and was in love. He's a shop manager and was ready to order a pair for next year. He said they carved better than his Rustler 10.


I will say, I skied them on absolute Midwest boiler plate ice and I wasn't comfortable with the edge hold, tails seemed to release mid turn. I switched to my Kendo, and same thing. I was watching slalom skis not leave a mark in the snow either, so bad day to judge.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by naedward81

Yep. Brought them to Bridger and skied them two days.

I moved the demo bindings up to the middle line.

I thought they engaged really well, found zero speed limit on them. Turns release easy and spring you to the next turn. It felt like the tips were softer than the M6, which might have made turn iniation easier. Ended up ripping soft groomers one day and they were a blast. I liked them a lot better than the M6.

2nd day on them was hard pack groomers and some ungroomed bumps. Easy to pivot in tight spots, predictable. The hard groomers they gripped. Only sketchy spots were iced over wind blown non groomed snow that made me question decisions on how fast I was going.

My buddy skied the 184 one day and was in love. He's a shop manager and was ready to order a pair for next year. He said they carved better than his Rustler 10.


I will say, I skied them on absolute Midwest boiler plate ice and I wasn't comfortable with the edge hold, tails seemed to release mid turn. I switched to my Kendo, and same thing. I was watching slalom skis not leave a mark in the snow either, so bad day to judge.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

---

Thanks!

Surprising that they're so much of an improvement over the M6, as the M6 was freakin' ace.

Suggestions on a mount point for a Blaze 94?

I continue to be very happy with my short (170) m102’s on the line with tele ntn clamps and tx comps. Tahoe resort conditions. I still use my groomer zoomers to mix things up for myself and my bibby’s because their a ton of fun in deeper snow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by funkendrenchman

Suggestions on a mount point for a Blaze 94?

---

I mounted my 186 B94’s at plus 1 and am happy there. Mine are tele. Plus 1 looked really good in relation to sidecut/camber/standing on them.

What bindings are you putting on?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chicken feathers

I mounted my 186 B94’s at plus 1 and am happy there. Mine are tele. Plus 1 looked really good in relation to sidecut/camber/standing on them.

What bindings are you putting on?

---

I was thinking at least a little forward. I skied next year's with the carbon in them.

I didn't mess with mount point, but would have liked them on the middle line better.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by naedward81

I was thinking at least a little forward. I skied next year's with the carbon in them.

---

how'd they compare to current layup? other than weight carbon isn't always a plus IME

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ticketchecker

how'd they compare to current layup? other than weight carbon isn't always a plus IME

---

Felt a little more stiff , while being lighter. I only skied the 106 in previous years, which is now the 102(?) with carbon like the new 94.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by naedward81

Felt a little more stiff , while being lighter. I only skied the 106 in previous years, which is now the 102(?) with carbon like the new 94.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

---

thx mang, I've got the OG 106 and it's so smoove for what it is

I’m quiver killing my oldest’s 100Eights for FT12’s and sali z12’s. With the existing z12 holes mounted on the line, I need to put the ft12’s either + or - about 1cm from the line due to hole conflict. Anybody have an opinion about which location would be better?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chicken feathers

I mounted my 186 B94’s at plus 1 and am happy there. Mine are tele. Plus 1 looked really good in relation to sidecut/camber/standing on them.

What bindings are you putting on?

---

STH13s