Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 33
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Fish
    Posts
    3,597

    Salomon Stance 102

    I picked these up on a whim. The shape looks better than I remember last winter. Flex feels pretty good hand flexing, the tips are softer than I remember so we will see.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	01356FD0-632A-4ED3-A1F6-41DBAA172A37.jpg 
Views:	316 
Size:	478.9 KB 
ID:	346460

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ADE74465-C92C-48F2-9BC4-ECE502D48559.jpg 
Views:	316 
Size:	419.2 KB 
ID:	346461

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	4DA0AD5B-D426-41EF-9E3F-D9A43851D135.jpg 
Views:	261 
Size:	507.5 KB 
ID:	346462
    a positive attitude will not solve all of your problems, but it may annoy enough people to make it worth the effort

    Formerly Rludes025

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    西 雅 圖
    Posts
    4,249
    That ski rips. Along with the K108, probably my top new pick of the 2020 spring testing sessions.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    People's Republic of MN
    Posts
    5,451
    Really interested in trying out some Stance skis as well. I liked Salomon’s Q series, but always wished I could ski 1 size shorter without over-baking the ski. These might be the ticket for harder snow!
    Gravity. It's the law.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    16
    I jumped on the stance as well this year. It was a stand out for me as well this year. Canít wait to get some more time on them this year.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    6,078
    Looks like a great shape. Dig the tail profile.
    life ain't guaranteed, love your people while you can

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    inw
    Posts
    732
    Quote Originally Posted by cjump View Post
    I jumped on the stance as well this year. It was a stand out for me as well this year. Canít wait to get some more time on them this year.
    wait, what year?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    488
    Quote Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
    Looks like a great shape. Dig the tail profile.
    Echoed.

    Also, they should've had that tail on the Q-Labs!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,937
    I wish they had a 108mm version. Hopefully next year.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by ntblanks View Post
    wait, what year?
    Last year. �� broken thoughts and a lack of proof reading can make any look dumb. I don’t need much help to be honest.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Vermont USA and France
    Posts
    425
    Made a bunch of laps on the Stance 90 and 96 last Spring. Rock-solid platform. Damp, takes lots of pressure in stride, smooth moves in and out of turns and holds a line really well on smooth or junked-out surfaces. Likes to go fast. Quiet on hard surfaces and inspires confidence. Impressive. Grippy trench-digger when asked with business-like attitude rather than playful. Salmon might have a winner with the Stance series... only lacks a bit of zip at the end of the turn, even when loaded with lots of flex. The 102 might be the daily driver for directional fans West of the Mississippi. Good change of personality for Salomon's ski lineup.
    .
    .

    Mass-Produced Skiers Use Mass-Produced Skis
    Rip it up with something different.
    Support small and independent ski builders
    http://www.ExoticSkis.com
    .
    .

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Fish
    Posts
    3,597
    Quote Originally Posted by phatty View Post
    I wish they had a 108mm version. Hopefully next year.
    Agree something around 110 with this shape would be sweet.
    a positive attitude will not solve all of your problems, but it may annoy enough people to make it worth the effort

    Formerly Rludes025

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,995
    I'll post some thoughts once I spend a few days on them, but I'm pretty excited to try these out. They seem like a great daily driver for the RFV. Lord knows you only need more float than a 102mm underfoot ski with a shitload of tip rocker can provide about twice a decade in Colorado.
    "Hakuna matata, motherfucker!"

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Vacationland
    Posts
    4,083
    Curious how they stack up to Mantra 102


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,937
    Quote Originally Posted by ticketchecker View Post
    Curious how they stack up to Mantra 102


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    That's my question, too. They definitely look cooler. I have some older 187 Bonafide which I like, but don't love. Also have older 190 QLab. If this could give the same gas pedal as the QLab in a more front side ski, it could be the perfect ski to fit the 98mm-102mm slot in my quiver.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Lapping the pow with the GSA in the PNW
    Posts
    3,722
    Quote Originally Posted by phatty View Post
    That's my question, too. They definitely look cooler. I have some older 187 Bonafide which I like, but don't love. Also have older 190 QLab. If this could give the same gas pedal as the QLab in a more front side ski, it could be the perfect ski to fit the 98mm-102mm slot in my quiver.
    Youíre looking at the wrong 102...try a Mantra M102 191. My 184 M102ís are very reminiscent of a Q-Lab...but with a little looser feel off trail. So good!


    Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
    In constant pursuit of the perfect slarve...

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,937
    Quote Originally Posted by Bandit Man View Post
    Youíre looking at the wrong 102...try a Mantra M102 191. My 184 M102ís are very reminiscent of a Q-Lab...but with a little looser feel off trail. So good!


    Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
    Yeah, but I don't get Pro Deal on Volkl.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,995
    They might be the first pair of skis I own that I put stickers on. Camo on anything (or anyone) is an abomination, IMO.

    Or they may get sanded and Krylon'd.
    "Hakuna matata, motherfucker!"

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    451
    Anybody spent time on these yet this season? Curious to hear some feedback

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    On the road
    Posts
    7,995
    I have about 8-10 days on my pair of 183's so far. They're mounted on the line with P15's. They're smooth and damp in terms of snow feel. I'm going out to ski them again today, I'll post some more detailed thoughts this evening.

    IMHO, they have too much tip rocker (both rise and length) for a ski this skinny. A 102mm underfoot ski should rail hard snow, and these do, if you drive them from a centered stance, but the shovel is so heavily rockered that you really can't ski them aggressively forward, there's just not enough contact with the snow to drive the front of the ski.

    For a mixed-conditions, everyday ski that errs more toward charging than playfulness, they're a strong contender, but not quite as frontside/hard snow oriented as I was hoping for.

    Maybe I was under the wrong impression about what people use 100mm underfoot skis for, but as someone who hasn't skied anything skinnier than 115mm underfoot for the past 4 or 5 years, I was hoping these would be some Ginsu knives for the boilerplate. Turns out they're more like a Cutco, which isn't a bad thing. An all mountain skis for sure, not a frontside/firm snow specific one.
    "Hakuna matata, motherfucker!"

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    People's Republic of MN
    Posts
    5,451
    Have a couple days on the Stance 90's, and they're everything Salomon advertises them to be. Frightening that I'm reaching for these over my Ripsticks... I usually hate skis with metal, but these are not dead-damp. They're quiet, but not like the crypt. Very happy with them.

    Also - my first set of Warden 13's on these boards, and I find ZERO flaws with them so far. They ski at least as good as the Attack 13's I have on everything else.
    Gravity. It's the law.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    802

    Salomon Stance 102

    V
    Last edited by slowroastin; 01-15-2021 at 11:38 PM.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    802
    Anybody have more time on these? Local shop has the 96ís on sale. The 102 looks good too. Im assuming its better to size up rather than down given the rocker profile.


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ne pennsylvania
    Posts
    3,758
    Picked up the 96s in a 182 and imo they do not ski short. Granted im on the E.C. but couldn't see me on the 188s. These do everything great for me, damp but lively...good tweener ski for me. Legend 106s for snow days, volkl deacon 84 for firm corduroy.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by cinnepa View Post
    Picked up the 96s in a 182 and imo they do not ski short. Granted im on the E.C. but couldn't see me on the 188s. These do everything great for me, damp but lively...good tweener ski for me. Legend 106s for snow days, volkl deacon 84 for firm corduroy.
    I have the stance 96 in 182. Little over 6 ft, 195 lbs (without gear). Skiing them this year only on the east coast.

    Great all-around skis. They pretty much do everything well, very nice suspension, enough float i powder, and I donít find the tail punishing at all. Iíd be happy taking them into tight woods, ripping icy/firm groomers, up to 4-5 inches of powder - they do everything very very well. Not the most exciting skis, but on the other hand are easier to ski than others and strong enough to push hard.

    Compared to the 183 Bonafide 97, Mantra 102 (177) and new M6 in 184 - the stance 96 is easier to ski. The others have better edge grip and a much higher top end. But theyíre also more demanding - the bonafide and M6 are a little harder in bumps, and the Mantra 102 requires a bit more attention. You can relax on the stance 96 and not pay attention and be OK. The others are more ďgame-onĒ skis.

    If I had to pick one ski out of all of them as my only ski, I might take the 184 M6. But Iíd really hate to give up the m102 because I think its just a ridiculously good ski in all conditions - it has a speed limit in that length but there is no reason I need to go more than 50, 60 mph. And I find the M102 to be super maneuverable in bumps, trees, all conditions. Then again I also love my Bonafides and would happily ski them other than in extremely tight trees.

    All great skis. The stance is more relaxed than the others while retaining a lot of the benefits, but isnít quite as exciting and doesnít have the highest gear that the VŲlkls and new Bonafide do. If precision is important and youíre a strong advanced skier, I would go Bonafide or Volkls. If you donít need the highest top end and most precise skis, then the stance would be fine.

    If youíre looking at the stance 96, also check out the dynastar m-pro. Took me a while to realize how capable these are. At 186 they float better, are easy to pivot in tight terrain, handle bumps very well and Iíd have no issue taking them through any trees.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    ne pennsylvania
    Posts
    3,758
    Liked the 96 so much I'm grabbing the 90 as well....suprise of the year for me.

Posting Permissions

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