Mantra 102 - where to mount it?

[GHILL28]

Not apples to apples, but I find my K108 in 191 to be a bit easier to release than M102 in the same length. Katana feels damper and a touch softer than M102 which is a bit crispier. But I haven't tried them in the same conditions though.

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

That's interesting. I would have expected a stronger and more planted-on-edge character from the K108.

[swissbro]

I still end up having a wandering eye for the K108's in a 184. Are these going to be a bear to make last-second pivots with in the trees? I end up loving the M102's there so I don't want to lose much of their quickness. I end up disagreeing with some of the reviews saying that they need to be moved around with a lot of force in those situations, so not sure how to interpret the same reviews of the K108's.

I have both of them, 184s. I find my M102s more nimble overall. They handle moguls better and are less work in tight terrain. My preferred ski for soft snow and varied, steep terrain is the Katana V-Werks 112. Easy to make any type of turn and it’s a great combination of nimble and stable.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[GHILL28]

I have both of them, 184s. I find my M102s more nimble overall. They handle moguls better and are less work in tight terrain. My preferred ski for soft snow and varied, steep terrain is the Katana V-Werks 112. Easy to make any type of turn and it’s a great combination of nimble and stable.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I've looked at those too for more storm days, but I don't really do any touring. Everything else about it sounded great (except the price and some durability concerns).

[Bandit Man]

Not apples to apples, but I find my K108 in 191 to be a bit easier to release than M102 in the same length. Katana feels damper and a touch softer than M102 which is a bit crispier. But I haven't tried them in the same conditions though.

100% in agreement with this statement. The K108 has a softer tail and more generous rocker profile. Despite being wider and heavier, it is easier to release the tail, toss it sideways, shut down speed, etc. Also, the Katana has the larger radius at the extremities, but the M102 has a larger radius directly under foot. There is a "plushness" to the K108 that is so hard to beat for PNW, coastal conditions.

I've skied both in the 184 and 191 lengths and the 191 M102 is the most serious of the bunch, IMO.

[GHILL28]

100% in agreement with this statement. The K108 has a softer tail and more generous rocker profile. Despite being wider and heavier, it is easier to release the tail, toss it sideways, shut down speed, etc. Also, the Katana has the larger radius at the extremities, but the M102 has a larger radius directly under foot. There is a "plushness" to the K108 that is so hard to beat for PNW, coastal conditions.

I've skied both in the 184 and 191 lengths and the 191 M102 is the most serious of the bunch, IMO.

What's your height/weight?

I'm 6ft/180lb and on the aggressive side of things but I don't think I would want to be managing tips that far away with the 191's. That leading edge of the 184 feels pretty "connected" as it is right now.

[Sylvan]

100% in agreement with this statement. The K108 has a softer tail and more generous rocker profile. Despite being wider and heavier, it is easier to release the tail, toss it sideways, shut down speed, etc. Also, the Katana has the larger radius at the extremities, but the M102 has a larger radius directly under foot. There is a "plushness" to the K108 that is so hard to beat for PNW, coastal conditions.

I've skied both in the 184 and 191 lengths and the 191 M102 is the most serious of the bunch, IMO.

You and Robik just described my experience as well. All of it.

[Bandit Man]

What's your height/weight?

I'm 6ft/180lb and on the aggressive side of things but I don't think I would want to be managing tips that far away with the 191's. That leading edge of the 184 feels pretty "connected" as it is right now.

5’ 8” and 200-lbs. If the 184 works, no need to go longer.

[GHILL28]

5’ 8” and 200-lbs. If the 184 works, no need to go longer.

Got it, thanks.

I'm also seeing the Confessions popping up inexpensively, which I'm almost thinking might make a better ski for Alyeska next month than the gen1 Spurs I have. Might just have to get both since skis take up relatively little room compared to my dirt bike habit...

[RadSkier_]

After reading all the posts I get that the M102 is an amazing ski but.....can anyone comment on the 184 M102 for serious mogul bashing. I want to pick up the 23 version on sale right now but I also love ripping moguls super hard as part of my daily resort routine. For reference I have had no issues in moguls with the Old 184 Ranger 102 FR (amazing mogul ski), the 186 Enforcer 104 (fun but a bit of tank), for the most part the 190 Moment wildact (the wide ski is tougher but length/flex wasn't an issue.

Also, would mounting +1CM or +2CM make it better for moguls, or just fuck up the ski in all other areas?

[MD12]

After reading all the posts I get that the M102 is an amazing ski but.....can anyone comment on the 184 M102 for serious mogul bashing. I want to pick up the 23 version on sale right now but I also love ripping moguls super hard as part of my daily resort routine. For reference I have had no issues in moguls with the Old 184 Ranger 102 FR (amazing mogul ski), the 186 Enforcer 104 (fun but a bit of tank), for the most part the 190 Moment wildact (the wide ski is tougher but length/flex wasn't an issue.

Also, would mounting +1CM or +2CM make it better for moguls, or just fuck up the ski in all other areas?

I’ve spent a lot of time on the e104 and the m102, most recently the newest version of the m102. The next paragraph talks about the e104 va the newest version of the m102

If you can mash moguls in the enforcer 104, then I think you might like the m102 more. M102 is a tiny bit stiffer in the tips and imho a little less stiff in the tail - it definitely has a less punishing tail than the e104. But m103 is also slightly softer throughout the middle of the ski so I find it easier to manage and less punishing than the e104 - when backseat or hitting the front of the mogul more of the m102 flexes rather than just the tip or tail on the e104, so the energy is dispersed over a wider area and it’s not as jarring. Still energetic though but in a more even, supporting way.

Also have the wildcat 108. Love the ski in the right conditions but one of the worst runs of my life was on rock hard tight huge moguls on one of the steepest runs on the east coast. Beat the shit out of me.

[joesnow_]

Looking at deal on a used pair of earlier model 191s as a replacement for my QST106s that have taken their final core shot this year. I'm 6'2 210, directional skier in western canada. Loved the 106s in 188 (green ones) - used for double duty and picked up a pair of Blanks this year in 194 that I have been enjoying despite the low snow year.

Getting to the point, I am looking at these as a replacement to the 106s for lower snow days/blasting groomers at norquay etc. Will be picking up a touring oriented ski to handle the other 50% of the 106s duties, but really want something that will go fast and feel quicker edge to edge than the blanks.

These sound like a perfect match but am always reluctant to buy without having some kind of feel for a ski. Wondering if anyone can give some input into differences in feel of the M102 vis a vis the QSTs (106s or blanks), also demoed the Ranger 102 FR a few years back, really enjoyed them but went the QST route instead so any similarities there would be interesting.

[GHILL28]

Just got the K108's in-hand from another member here. These are nowhere near as stiff as the reviews would have one believe. Stiff, yes. Unwieldly stiff, no. I think these are going to be quite fun.

[Bandit Man]

Once you ski them, drop some thoughts in the Katana thread.

[YoEddy]

Since there are apparently a lot of folks that have tried the K108 and M102 I'm curious as to what your thoughts on them are. I have the M6, had the M102 but sold it and bought the K108. I like all three of them and they are obviously very similar, but ... I kind of regret selling the M102 - there's just something 'magical' about that ski that the wider and narrower versions come close to but just don't have.

Anyone else feel that way? Yeah, that's right ... I'm looking for an excuse to own all three.

[Bandit Man]

Since there are apparently a lot of folks that have tried the K108 and M102 I'm curious as to what your thoughts on them are. I have the M6, had the M102 but sold it and bought the K108. I like all three of them and they are obviously very similar, but ... I kind of regret selling the M102 - there's just something 'magical' about that ski that the wider and narrower versions come close to but just don't have.

Anyone else feel that way? Yeah, that's right ... I'm looking for an excuse to own all three.

I have all three. Agree there is definitely overlap, but if you get to travel to ski or get enough diversity or terrain and conditions, there is space for all of them. My son "stole" my M102's from me so I elected to buy the K108. We had a 600" season that year, so I didn't miss the M102. The next year we had longer stints of high pressure and I found I was grabbing the M102's more often, so much so that I bought another dedicated pair for me. Getting the M6 was a bit of an impulse buy when they went on sale in the spring. Great on groomers and in spring conditions and definitely the easiest to ski of the bunch.

The thing I find about the M102 is that it is so versatile and so capable in such a wide range of conditions. It rails groomers, man-handles crud, and actually floats and smears in less than a foot of fresh. It's also the most serious ski of all three and has a top end I have yet to find. I think it is more comfortable at high-speed on firm snow than the K108, but the K108 has a little more mass and a slightly softer tail, which give it a little more forgiving feeling, IMO.

So yeah, I like the M102 so much I bought another pair (as a backup). But to make things worse, I added a Kendo 88 and now have the whole lineup.

[Robik]

Since there are apparently a lot of folks that have tried the K108 and M102 I'm curious as to what your thoughts on them are. I have the M6, had the M102 but sold it and bought the K108. I like all three of them and they are obviously very similar, but ... I kind of regret selling the M102 - there's just something 'magical' about that ski that the wider and narrower versions come close to but just don't have.

Anyone else feel that way? Yeah, that's right ... I'm looking for an excuse to own all three.

I've had all three: 184 M6, 191 M102 and 191 K108. I sold M6 since I didn't click with it. K108 would be a perfect mid winter one ski quiver for resort, but here comes M102 with the perfect blend of stiffness, carvability, floating etc and K108 goes to GS.

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[GHILL28]

I don't find myself wanting more of a carver enough to want the M6 over the M102 even for harder conditions. If I were to get something for that it would be a Kendo. Hoping there's a big enough gap between the M108 and K108 to justify having both of those (TBD).

[Bandit Man]

Skied my M102’s today (been on my K108’s more this year) and was reminded how versatile they are. Ripped groomers, skied Pow and dense crud, and pivoted so easy in the tight spots. So good!

[SnakeMagnet]

Stance 102's were demo'd yesterday..

No contest. Those things have one turn shape, are dead until you straightline, and the tail is far too locked in for how little benefit you get from edge hold on top of skiing short due to the exaggerated rocker back there. Volkl nailed the design of shaped titanal on their first try and everyone else is still trying to catch up.

[Bandit Man]

Spent my first day on the new (2023) 184 Mantra M102.

Here are my initial impressions:

Conditions: just about everything…hard-packed groomers, chalky edge-able steeps, bumps, dense spring pow, refrozen crap, soft chop, and firm variable.

Skis: 184 2023 Volkl M102 mounted on the rear line with STH2 13’s.

From the first run, these felt familiar, but a bit easier in every way. Still stable at speed, but easier to bend into a turn and quicker edge to edge. Still easy to thrown sideways and scrub speed or come to a quick stop. Tails are not “locked in” and are easy to release. The only exception here was in some heavy, dense pow, where some additional detuning would take care of things.

The original M102 feels like more ski in just about every way. It’s more stable, stiffer, and requires more input to turn. The new M102 feels like it has some M6 DNA (which it does) and reminds me quite a bit of a wider, more damp and stable M6. The 19-m sidecut under foot is noticeable and it makes the ski more agile and quicker edge to edge versus the previous version.

So, as some have said, if you nothing wrong with the first version, you might find this ski to be a bit lacking. If you didn’t click with the original and wished for something a bit more accessible, the new one is definitely worth a look. I love the original and really enjoyed these as well. I need to spend more time on them, but I have sneaking suspicion that these could replace my M6’s.






Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[MD12]

Spent my first day on the new (2023) 184 Mantra M102.

Here are my initial impressions:

Conditions: just about everything…hard-packed groomers, chalky edge-able steeps, bumps, dense spring pow, refrozen crap, soft chop, and firm variable.

Skis: 184 2023 Volkl M102 mounted on the rear line with STH2 13’s.

From the first run, these felt familiar, but a bit easier in every way. Still stable at speed, but easier to bend into a turn and quicker edge to edge. Still easy to thrown sideways and scrub speed or come to a quick stop. Tails are not “locked in” and are easy to release. The only exception here was in some heavy, dense pow, where some additional detuning would take care of things.

The original M102 feels like more ski in just about every way. It’s more stable, stiffer, and requires more input to turn. The new M102 feels like it has some M6 DNA (which it does) and reminds me quite a bit of a wider, more damp and stable M6. The 19-m sidecut under foot is noticeable and it makes the ski more agile and quicker edge to edge versus the previous version.

So, as some have said, if you nothing wrong with the first version, you might find this ski to be a bit lacking. If you didn’t click with the original and wished for something a bit more accessible, the new one is definitely worth a look. I love the original and really enjoyed these as well. I need to spend more time on them, but I have sneaking suspicion that these could replace my M6’s.






Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Agree with all this. I don’t see much of a reason to take the og out anymore. But I do feel like the old version was special and while the new version is a better ski, just not quite as special. Can’t put my finger on it and I like the current version more everywhere so far. Maybe it’s that I don’t always get that feeling that I am overpowering everything on the mountain. Sort of like the satisfaction of blowing something up with a bazooka in a video game instead of the pistol. Ones easier and both get the job done. But damn sometimes the bazooka is fun for no reason!

[Nevada29er]

For those that have skied both, which is more ski, B97 189 or M102 191? I suspect the latter.

I'm thinking the B97 is quicker, turnier, and more firm snow oriented, and M102 more stable and better in deeper or weird snow conditions.

I have demoed the B97 and liked it as a replacement for my old 187 bonafides. However, I also have the K108 191 and really fell in love with it this year, so the M102 seems interesting as a replacement for the Bones.

[Sylvan]

For those that have skied both, which is more ski, B97 189 or M102 191? I suspect the latter.

I'm thinking the B97 is quicker, turnier, and more firm snow oriented, and M102 more stable and better in deeper or weird snow conditions.

I have demoed the B97 and liked it as a replacement for my old 187 bonafides. However, I also have the K108 191 and really fell in love with it this year, so the M102 seems interesting as a replacement for the Bones.

I understand both M102s and B97s were made 'more accessible' this year, so take this with a grain of salt, but I had OG 191 M102s and have OG 189 B97s. The former were about 2350 grams/ski, the latter 2550/ski. The latter more plush and smoother longer as it trends refrozen, and admittedly a bit more turny, but not by much. I kept B97s in the firm slot as I prefer a bit of camber/more locked in feeling in this slot, where the profile of the M102 is looser, but can still rail. I also have about 60 days on 191 K108s and it is the best quiver of 1 western ski I have found for my preferences, with all the compromises that entails. M102s and K108s are obv very similar and would be (were) too much overlap for me personally, though once I have a garage again, I reserve the right to change my mind. My 2 cents.

Edit to add: 6'2, 195#, @ WB, looking hard at 188 Heritage Lab R99 Comp for this slot next as its a wee straighter than both.

http://heritagelabskis.com/products/r99

[tupp_]

Stance 102's were demo'd yesterday..

No contest. Those things have one turn shape, are dead until you straightline, and the tail is far too locked in for how little benefit you get from edge hold on top of skiing short due to the exaggerated rocker back there. Volkl nailed the design of shaped titanal on their first try and everyone else is still trying to catch up.

Can you elaborate? What length, etc.

[bry]

I agree completely here w Sylvan, both are amazing skis. I find the B97 to be a little more confidence inspiring as it is so planted and smooth, and the M102s to be a little more fun for me as it is looser, but both skis are those things.