Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 26 to 50 of 50
  1. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Squaw valley
    Posts
    2,492
    Quote Originally Posted by rangerjake View Post
    I also have the 184 v werks katana. I weigh a few lbs less than you. I have the 178 vw mantra. "stable enough" is a subjective statement. I don't know what speeds you are hoping for stability at. Likewise how stable it feels is a product of what boot you drive the ski with. I have used both TLT6s and Hawx XTD 120s with my vw mantras and vw katanas. How stable they feel changes very much depending on the boots I have on at the time.

    What I can tell you is that the 184 katana is on par with the 178 mantra. And the 191 katana would be on par with the 186 mantra. If you find your Katanas to be just right for you and want the mantra to be a good complimentary ski: quicker turns, better hard snow grip then you will def want the shorter one. I have never felt the mantra was lacking in stability, and though I have wished it was a touch longer at times- mostly for floatation in moderate powder- I solved this by mounting at -1.
    Thanks. I use the Lange freetour 130.
    I would use the mantra in the spring.
    I liked the way the katanas ski, but they are a pain skinning steep firm terrain


    Sent from my Armor_3 using Tapatalk

  2. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    $teaux
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by rod9301 View Post
    Thanks. I use the Lange freetour 130.
    I would use the mantra in the spring.
    I liked the way the katanas ski, but they are a pain skinning steep firm terrain


    Sent from my Armor_3 using Tapatalk
    Go 178. Don’t look back.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    582
    Dammit - all this talk of BMTs had me research the 90s a bit more, and I liked what I found. So yeah, I have reconsidered my take on them from earlier in the thread to a bit more favorable. I would still opt for Mantras if I were to have just the one.

    So I ordered a pair of 90s in 177 that will be my new long/multiple day touring skis, in the place of my Praxis EXPs that I've kinda lost faith in. The 90s are probably 5-6cm longer than the EXPs, but their very traditional mount point means that the tails will still be more than managable for touring. I will report back after using the Mantras and 90s back to back, though that won't be for a while yet.

    The Mantras are to be mounted with Tectons - not Vipecs as originally planned, the 90s with Vipecs (brakeless). I am def not going for super light setups here, but for performance I trust and am very familiar with at light enough weight. The ATK Raider 12 2.0s that are on the EXPS is actually a significant reason that I decided to move on from the EXPs, with the EXPs softness being the other big reason. I wanted something with camber, which is the reason I went with 90s over second hand 94s. The Mantras and 90s will be in quivers that will be like 1500km apart, so i do not really worry too much about overlap

  4. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    FR&CH
    Posts
    111
    You don't like the Raider 12 ?
    Btw, the 2020 ones got a new toe with wider mount template and will most likely 100% fit in the supposed H of the V Werks.

  5. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    582
    The Völkl H mount pattern recommendation is 100% marketing mumbo jumbo to sell more Marker bindings. People - including me - have been using other bindings mounted outside the H on Völkl skis for years without issue. There is a reason Völkl labels it as a recommendation now, and not warranty voiding like in years past.

    Don't get me wrong - the ATKs are not only fine bindings, they are prob the best in their class. I just prefer a bit elasticity up front as well as the release and power transfer of Vipecs over them after completely overthinking it. I also had a spill with the ATKs on my first day out with them (my first day on traditional tech bindings) where they didn't release like they should've imo, which kinda banged up my knee. Rather than ski tentatively until i regain my confidence in them (and the standard tech rear release design) I will just rather take the weight penalty of 200gr/ski and use what I know and trust.

    I am not very good at adjusting my skiing to the equipment I use, so light weight tech binders might not be for me. Something was off for me in the way that the EXP/ATK combo skied imo, so prefer to go back to something that I know and love. The system weight will still be more than light enough regardless - so Vipecs it is. That also means that I do not have to buy new crampons and the heel spacer for the ATKs, the BMT90s are on 43% off sale that will also score me some Tectons for the Mantras at 30% off - so it ends up being a very good deal imo. Sadly they are selling BMT109s at the same price, so now I just need to resist a double whammy

  6. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    156
    Definitely interested in your feedback on the 90's. I think that they'd be a great long distance ski and good for spring conditions, but I've held off as I wonder how well they will ski wind affected snow and powder... I feel like I'd want another 10mm underfoot for flexibility of use. I'm almost wondering if the 109 is not such a bad option. To fat for Europe? The tips and tails aren't any wider than the mantra and the straighter shape with full rocker might be more BC friendly than the Mantra. Really I want a full rocker Bmt 100! Actually I was looking at the Dynafit Beast 98 from this perspective. Anyone skied them?

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    FR&CH
    Posts
    111
    I have not skied the Beast 98 but it has camber unlike the Beast 108.

    The BMT 109 is really good for powder but is a bit too wide sometimes for variable conditions. It's not flat like the 94 / Katana, but a true full rocker à la Raven / Renegade.

    The BMT 94 actually I wish it was a bit wider when riding a bit of pow or crud, that's why I'm contemplating the Mantra VW for next year.

    Actually I wish they made a Katana VW 105mm, flat camber, that'd be great

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    582
    You can probably get good feedback on both BMT94s and BMT109s - possibly 90s as well - from the "Post your touring quiver"-thread - they are seemingly quite popular on here.

    (based on an extremely limited time on my old ones, the) BMT109s are extremely versatile and are very easy to ski well on. BMT109s are a mighty fine quiver of one touring ski in snowier locations though, and all BMTs - at least the full rocker ones - seem to do really well across alot of conditions. Blister's reviews on the various BMTs hits the nail on the head imo.

    I find that 90s, MVWs and 109s fulfill slightly different roles / needs though. 109s are a mighty fine ski as a quiver of one touring ski, but for my needs and the roles (long tourers and 50/50 low tide tourer and resort carvers) the two other makes more sense for me imo. I am running 4FRNT Ravens as my daily driver tourer, and I am thus far extremely impressed with them - they are awesome for the snow I use them in.

  9. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    $teaux
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by gritter View Post
    Definitely interested in your feedback on the 90's. I think that they'd be a great long distance ski and good for spring conditions, but I've held off as I wonder how well they will ski wind affected snow and powder... I feel like I'd want another 10mm underfoot for flexibility of use. I'm almost wondering if the 109 is not such a bad option. To fat for Europe? The tips and tails aren't any wider than the mantra and the straighter shape with full rocker might be more BC friendly than the Mantra. Really I want a full rocker Bmt 100! Actually I was looking at the Dynafit Beast 98 from this perspective. Anyone skied them?
    90s are really great tools for all sorts of variable conditions. Super predictable and manageable in difficult snow. A fantastic ski. Skis anything under 10" of fresh snow way better than it should, you just need to channel your mid-90s powder skiing style active bouncy short turns. If you are hesitant for how it'll perform in variable stuff and thinking of going with the 109 for that reason I think that is a big mistake- you'll feel that difference between 1400g and almost 1800g per ski. I think the full rocker skis are fun for variable skiing (wind crust and pow) but definitely suffer on the skintrack especially if engaging in real spring skinning conditions (refrozen stuff). I can speak from experience having used BMT 94s and V werks Katanas on this. Also I greatly prefer the rocker-camber-rocker to the full rocker for similar hard snow/frozen corn variable surface, the edge of the BMT 90 is way more confidence inspiring than both my previous full rocker Volkls (94s and VW Katanas).

    I also got the VW Mantra because I really wanted that BMT 100 style ski with the rocker-camber-rocker profile and low tide powder/hard snow performance. I have always felt that the BMT full rocker skis punch above their weight class for powder skiing. The R-C-R are for sure less powder friendly- and I do find my VW mantras less fun in deeper snow. But they just about crush any other terrain relative to their 1800ish gram weight. Still a little bit more mass than I would want for a big mission spring ski- I'd go BMT 90 all the way for that purpose.

  10. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    582
    Quality input there rangerjake. Way to make a fellow mag feel good about recent purchasing decisions

    I know this is at the other end of the spectrum, but if you can justify having such a ski in the quiver - BMT122s are stellar. They should not be going away, but rather Völkl should be making the same ski in a more study construction. Sure, they are not super light and probably sell like crap, but they are just so capable in all things fresh and deep. I went from contemplating to sell them together with my 94s and 109s to liquidate some funds, to out of my cold, dead hands status after I clicked with them. They are truly awesome. So much so that I bought a second pair for when my current ones die. And the best of all - finding them at a bargain is usually pretty easy since nobody is buying them. I probably repeat it too often, but grab a pair while you (you being generic) can eh

  11. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    $teaux
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by kid-kapow View Post
    Quality input there rangerjake. Way to make a fellow mag feel good about recent purchasing decisions

    I know this is at the other end of the spectrum, but if you can justify having such a ski in the quiver - BMT122s are stellar. They should not be going away, but rather Völkl should be making the same ski in a more study construction. Sure, they are not super light and probably sell like crap, but they are just so capable in all things fresh and deep. I went from contemplating to sell them together with my 94s and 109s to liquidate some funds, to out of my cold, dead hands status after I clicked with them. They are truly awesome. So much so that I bought a second pair for when my current ones die. And the best of all - finding them at a bargain is usually pretty easy since nobody is buying them. I probably repeat it too often, but grab a pair while you (you being generic) can eh
    Happy to help!

    And funny the subject of BMT 122s. I have an unmounted set of 186s, and the option to get a cheap pair of unmounted 176s. And I don't know which I want more, or if I want either. I have heard nothing but great things about them and obviously I love the BMT/Vwerks line. But I am also kinda done with the 1800+ gram touring class and if I am getting a dedicated powder touring ski (which will probably have to replace my VW Katanas) I want to try and keep it feathery (1600ish grams @ around 110-115mm 180-185cm). I don't even know if that ski exists.

  12. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    $teaux
    Posts
    1,076
    Well that above ski does exist (1600g/115mm/185cm): BD Helio 116. I think I'd trade my new BMT 122s for new BD Helio 116s

  13. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    582
    i dunno man. At some point things can get too light as well, especially for a ski this wide. Sure, if you only ski untracked, perfect snow a super light wide ski would be a lot fun. Yet in more variable snow they will just get deflected a lot. That being said, I am lucky that I usually can do lift assisted touring for the deep days, so BMT122s are light enough for me in the 176 version. Mine are mounted with Tectons, so as light as possible is not the game that I am trying to play here

    Funnily enough I can't quite seem to shake the urge to try BMT122s in 186, but the time for me to buy a pair is not now - my ski buying budget for this and next year is well and truly spent, and then some

  14. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    156
    The Bmt 90 would certainly be appealing from a weight perspective. 170 MVW is 1530, 177 Bmt90 is 1400, 170 Bmt90 is 1330.

    The other benefit to the bmt is that they are available whereas I can't find the 170 MVM (or at least not at a sensible price).

    Jake, would you say that the bmt90 skied similarly in length to the MVM or a bit easier? I thought that the 178 MVM was boarderline too long, but perhaps might consider the bmt in the 177 - it's certainly light enough.

    The dynafit beast 98 seems to be in the same weight class and probably splits the difference in length (177 so probably measures 175) as opposed to the volkl which seem to measure about +1.

  15. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    $teaux
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by gritter View Post
    The Bmt 90 would certainly be appealing from a weight perspective. 170 MVW is 1530, 177 Bmt90 is 1400, 170 Bmt90 is 1330.

    The other benefit to the bmt is that they are available whereas I can't find the 170 MVM (or at least not at a sensible price).

    Jake, would you say that the bmt90 skied similarly in length to the MVM or a bit easier? I thought that the 178 MVM was boarderline too long, but perhaps might consider the bmt in the 177 - it's certainly light enough.

    The dynafit beast 98 seems to be in the same weight class and probably splits the difference in length (177 so probably measures 175) as opposed to the volkl which seem to measure about +1.
    They ski similarly in length in that effective edge lengths are just about exactly the same.

    But they ski completely different due to the very different construction of BMT vs V Werks skis. BMT are 6 carbon sheets. V Werks are 11. VW Mantra supposedly has metal in it somewhere as well (couldn’t tell ya where).

    I am pretty sure my “real world” weight difference between bmt 90 and vw mantra is about 325g/ski iirc. I think bmt was like 1410 and mantra was like 1740 or something like that.

  16. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    156
    Thanks Jake, my real world weight of the 178 MWM was not quite as high as yours - I got 1680g which puts it about 280g more than the BMT90 in the 177. In 170 the weight should be around 1530g which is quite reasonable.
    If the additional weight gives the MVM a bit more composed performance in variable / wind affected and a bit more float than the BMT90 then that's probably a compromise that I'll take as I'm not doing super long tours and most of my touring to date has been on skis closer to 2kg.
    Thanks again for all the input.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    582
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4771-2000x2667.jpg 
Views:	54 
Size:	1.29 MB 
ID:	277573
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  18. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    156
    That's a pretty bad delam Kid.

  19. #44
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    582
    mount your own damned skis they said...

    The idea was to show the construction and to eliminate the "supposedly" stated above. I think it is pretty neat that they put Titanal in there to create a more controlled ride and to counter the regular bouncyness of carbon, while the carbon takes care of the torsional stiffness. Kinda like G3 does with their sidewalls, just cooler imho.

    This video shows the construction pretty well as well. There are surprisingly few good reviews on either ski imho.

  20. #45
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Colorado Front Range
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by rangerjake View Post
    Well that above ski does exist (1600g/115mm/185cm): BD Helio 116. I think I'd trade my new BMT 122s for new BD Helio 116s
    If I wanted to go lighter for my 11x width touring ski (current ski being 182 GPOs @ right about 2050g in an Enduro/Carbon layup), my current short list consists of a Down CD 104L (this, based on loving the std. CD 114s), and the Helio 116.

    Brittany's reviews of the Helio 105 and 116 (and the fact that she loves to drive a Zero G 108) tells me that the Helio 116 is plenty stable for a powder touring ski.

    I think I just talked myself into a CD 114L in this Fall's group buy - either that, or a UL GPO.

    ... Thom
    Last edited by galibier_numero_un; 04-07-2019 at 08:28 PM.
    Galibier Design
    crafting technology in service of music

  21. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Location
    FR&CH
    Posts
    111
    @rangerjake, does the Mantra VW has more float than the BMT 94, or not really ?

  22. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    $teaux
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by stuntmanbo View Post
    @rangerjake, does the Mantra VW has more float than the BMT 94, or not really ?
    So far I’d have to say that I preferred the 94 in pow. Unfair comparison since my 94 was a 186 and my vwm is a 178. But I have always thought that 94 skis pow way better than it should and probs better than any 95ish ski

  23. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un View Post
    I think I just talked myself into a CD 114L in this Fall's group buy - either that, or a UL GPO.
    ... Thom
    Having serviced all my skis this weekend It made me appreciate how nicely built my Praxis are compared to my other skis - perhaps I should shoot for a Praxis BC or Yeti in the custom sale! The BC sounds like a super versatile option albeit a step up in weight class (1.7kg for the 180).

  24. #49
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    582
    will report back after some use - I hope to get some use in over the next couple of weeks The plan is to replace my EXPs with the BMTs, and add the Mantras to the touring quiver - for a full four skis over two quivers, in two locations.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	touring2.jpg 
Views:	49 
Size:	1.05 MB 
ID:	281442
    And btw, both can be bought at a nice 50% over here in Scandiland right now - even if shipping will prob be cost preventive still

  25. #50
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    156
    Nice. I can get a pretty good deal on Bmt90 here in the UK, and I'm kind of tempted to go for them but I'd decided that 100-105 underfoot would be more versatile for winter conditions. I'm also considering something more radical like the raven. I quite liked the countdown 102, but they were just too long and stiff for me to flex at the kind of speeds that I'm happy with when touring. Actually a CD 104L in a 174/5 (iirc down measure post pressing) would be great, but I don't think that they get enough call for that sort of size (please Geo? — happy to help with prototype testing! Could you use the lowdown 90 tools for the profile?)
    Last edited by gritter; 05-06-2019 at 07:59 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •