Salomon Stance 102

[Fred Pabst]

Picked up the Stance 102 in 190cm last spring. Got about 10 days on them in spring conditions and 15 or so this year from ice to deep powder. I've been very pleased with this ski. Im not sure how different the big length is from the shorter ones but these things are freaking guns that can easily handle whatever you throw at them. Solid edge hold but still quite poppy when you get on the tails, great in bumps(if you can handle the speed required) and carve like a mofo as long as you like longer radius turns. I pulled binding from a pair of old school Legend Pros and I'm surprised how they feel like a much friendlier LP. The Stances seem to have not much sidecut underfoot and at low edge angles they like to run straight down the hill just like a LP, get up onto a higher angle and the ski starts to come around to fit the listed 25m radius. But unlike most newer skis I've tried the Stances are totally happy making enormous dh turns straight down the hill. Fantastic ski for for someone who likes to haul ass and skis no matter the conditions. Handled bottomless pow very well, fun and poppy and no nose dive, but is at home in windbuff and firm conditions. The stiff tail combined with quite a bit of tip rocker and long radius almost reminds me as well of the old moment garbones, where you have to be on point with your balance because too far forward and you loop out and too far back you get kicked, but find the sweet spot and they destroy anything in their path. Been happy to grab these every day so far this year knowing they can handle anything I might encounter up on the hill.

Nice! On my radar and I will snag a pair of Stance 102 in the 190 at some point. Ski shop at my mountain has a Stance 96 that look's really nice as well.

Anyone remember the Solomon Sentinel from a few years back? Qlab as well? Solomon can bring the beef!

[phatty]

Nice! On my radar and I will snag a pair of Stance 102 in the 190 at some point. Ski shop at my mountain has a Stance 96 that look's really nice as well.

Anyone remember the Solomon Sentinel from a few years back? Qlab as well? Solomon can bring the beef!

QLab is one of my favorite skis of all time and the review of the 190 definitely has my attention.

[rip]

Nice! On my radar and I will snag a pair of Stance 102 in the 190 at some point. Ski shop at my mountain has a Stance 96 that look's really nice as well.

Anyone remember the Solomon Sentinel from a few years back? Qlab as well? Solomon can bring the beef!

The other Salomon's in my quiver

I used to have the 198cm actually 202cm lab skis from back in the day, those things were like the skiing version of a longboard, so cruisy.

The 102s have the rocker profile of the qst 106, I don't think the 96 had tail rocker. which is what I've been after for years.. a skinny 'pow' ski with some backbone. Telluride asks alot from an all mtn ski, common in one day to be skiing stashy deep pow, high alpine high speed buff and chalk, and of course bumps of all shapes, sizes and densities.

[dub2]

Considering picking up a pair of Stance 102s for DD duty in Colorado.

Currently skiing the M-Free 108 in a 182 as my DD, and 184 Billy Goats as my pow ski (which I love).

I generally like the shape and feel of the M-Free 108 with a few caveats. I wish it had a bit more hard snow performance, as I find it lacks edge hold on firm days (Obviously this ski was not designed for really firm days, it has a soft snow bias, and I do feel like with BGs in my quiver I would be better off with something a bit more hard snow oriented on the bottom end of the quiver). I also wish it was a little stiffer when skiing through crud, as it can get deflected.

Is the Stance 102 what I am looking for? No doubt they will do better on hard snow. But the few questions I have for those that have skied them are:

1.) Are they relatively maneuverable in tight spots and bumps? Can they still be thrown sideways like the M-Free 108?
2.) How do they do in crud/chop? Is the 102 underfoot platform wide enough to deal with varying snow conditions?

Thanks for the help!

[One (+) Sentence]

I have both 183 Stance 102’s and 182 M-Free 108’s. I think the M-Free skis quite short and the tail is less usable in firm conditions. I wouldn’t want them to be my daily drivers.

I do think the M-Free might be one of the easiest skis in deep powder I’ve ever tried, especially in tighter spots. Coming from a full Salomon quiver with the Stance, QST 106 and QST 118, I think the powder performance of the M-Free is much more similar to the 118 than it is the 106. Thought the QST 106 was a more versatile ski in bad snow though when compared to the M-Free.

I love the Stance 102. It can move sideways off-trail and is very strong on prepared slopes. I’m not sure why the Stance line has not received more positive attention. I never see any out in the wild.

[altacoup]

I’ve heard from shop guys that Salomon hasn’t been able to deliver the stance 102 to shops. Supply chain/shipping issues. Everyone I’ve talked to says it skis great. Due to late delivery issues I think there’s a good chance that there’ll be some screaming deals on them.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[rip]

1.) Are they relatively maneuverable in tight spots and bumps? Can they still be thrown sideways like the M-Free 108?

2.) How do they do in crud/chop? Is the 102 underfoot platform wide enough to deal with varying snow conditions?

I haven't skied the mfree.. but here are my thoughts

The skis are maneuverable due to their rocker profile, not because the ski flexes and conforms to the terrain you are in. Precision is required and you don't need to go full old school jump turn, but an unweighting of the heels is needed in tight places. The more I ski them and get used to them the more maneuverable they feel, they have also softened up a bit but not that much. Judging on how I've seen people ski the mfree, I'd say no they don't ski the same. They ski best when you have your turns planned ahead and the more you like the fall line the more you'll like the stance.

I really like them in crud and chop, nimble and again.. precise. They dont plow thru crud like old school chargers, the tip shape and rocker promotes more of a centered stance and pop over the crud piles. But the chassis of the ski will support you up to any speed..

The skis have a pretty unique feel, they don't have much of that classic damp stuck to the ground Cadillac feel of a metal ski at all, they are quite responsive and poppy. In terms of straight up glare ice, they don't seem that great, mainly due to the amount of rocker, my head monsters chomp into that stuff way better but for their width and design they do quite well.

I still feel good grabbing them for anything I may encounter on the hill although recently due to lack of snow I've switched back to rock skis..

[altacoup]

Just picked up the stance 102 in the 190 length. They did not have as much tail rocker as I expected. The tip rocker is interesting, it is kinda low and long. I was thinking about mounting them at +2 because 190 is on the long side for me. Has anymore played with the mounting point on these?

Did you end up mounting yours at +2? How’d you like them there? I just scored a pair with binders mounted on the line for cheap. Mount looks way too far back for my taste. I remounted my qst106 188 +1.5 based of Cody’s recommendation (he skis +2, but I had hole conflicts there) and they were way better.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[troth]

Did you end up mounting yours at +2? How’d you like them there? I just scored a pair with binders mounted on the line for cheap. Mount looks way too far back for my taste. I remounted my qst106 188 +1.5 based of Cody’s recommendation (he skis +2, but I had hole conflicts there) and they were way better.



Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

I settle on +1 and am happy. The more I ski them the more I like them. The tip is soft enough that you can bend them into most turn shapes but it is still beefy so if you let them run they can truck. I really enjoyed them in the spring slop this year.

[One (+) Sentence]

I have had 183cm Stance 102’s mounted at both +1 and +2 and much prefer +1. FWIW, I like QST 106’s mounted right on the line, but I don’t consider myself “old school” as far as mount points. I seem to like skis -8 or -9 from true center (obviously depending on center of sidecut, etc) but if a ski had a midsole line at -11 or -12 I would move forward of that for sure.

[altacoup]

As of now skis came mounted for my bsl. Next year I’ll ski them a day like that, but I’m sure I’ll go forward. Thanks for the input.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[bennettc14]

Some good deals out there on these. What are people’s thoughts on sizing 183 vs 190? I’m 5’8 175 and generally like mid 180s for all mountain.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Fred Pabst]

^^Think I'd go with the 183cm at your height. I haven't skied the S102 but do have the S96, which I think are excellent and underrated. They are not a strongly rockered ski and with the camber they don't ski short. Longest length for the 96 is 188cm which is perfect for me at 6'. Definitely pull the trigger if you find a deal, on either one the 96 or 102.

[troth]

To me the 190 feels every bit of that length. It is fun to go fast and plow but not very maneuverable.

[greasyslope]

What is the recommended mount point for the 102? Intrigued by the 190.
There’s not a ton of info on these, so some more reviews and impressions also appreciated

[altacoup]

I have both 190 and 183. Ski the 190 exclusively at snowbird and 183 at Alta. Both skis can absolutely charge and have no speed limit. Good carvers on groomed. They are capable of many turn shapes. Easily to start a carve, break into a slarve and then bring it back on edge and carving. Have both mounted +1.5. Only ski them when firm, but I’m sure they’d be capable crud busters. I wouldn’t say they’re the dampest ski out there but they are stout and love speed. They would be an excellent firm condition comp ski.

Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[greasyslope]

I have both 190 and 183. Ski the 190 exclusively at snowbird and 183 at Alta. Both skis can absolutely charge and have no speed limit. Good carvers on groomed. They are capable of many turn shapes. Easily to start a carve, break into a slarve and then bring it back on edge and carving. Have both mounted +1.5. Only ski them when firm, but I’m sure they’d be capable crud busters. I wouldn’t say they’re the dampest ski out there but they are stout and love speed. They would be an excellent firm condition comp ski.

Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Great info. Can you tell me what is the actual recommended mount point? I can’t seem to find it anywhere. Thanks

[D(C)]

Blister lists the recommended for the 183 at -9.8.

[greasyslope]

Blister lists the recommended for the 183 at -9.8.

Thank you!

[rip]

After two seasons on the 190 stance 102 and probably about 60-80 days on them they feel a bit dead to me. While I liked them there were consistent problems I had with the ski mainly related to variable conditions, which has me looking for a daily driver replacement. In consistent conditions, no matter the condition, chalk, corn, pow, ice, etc, the skis rip. But in variable conditions I feel like how i have to change my balance point to compensate. One of my biggest pet peeves, and something salomon seems to like to do with ski design is when the widest point of the ski is ahead of the rocker, causing the tip to catch, plow, or hook up, in 3d snow. If the stances had a bit less tip rocker and the wide point was brought back a bit, they would be a fantastic ski in my opinion. Ive read the new stances are redesigned and maybe this got addresssed. Overall still a rad ski and like most here I'm a nitpicky skier. On to the next..

[lrn2swim]

One of my biggest pet peeves, and something salomon seems to like to do with ski design is when the widest point of the ski is ahead of the rocker, causing the tip to catch, plow, or hook up, in 3d snow.

Pretty much every ski on the market is designed like that now, not just Salomons.

If you haven't yet, try detuning an inch or two past the sidecut contact points.

[rip]

Pretty much every ski on the market is designed like that now, not just Salomons.

If you haven't yet, try detuning an inch or two past the sidecut contact points.

thanks, yeah I messed with all that last year when I got them. We had more variable snow this year.... because we actually had snow, a good problem to have. I ended the season skiing some Head Kore 111s and they have exactly the tip shape I'm looking for and f'n rip.

[tupp_]

Just checking in on mount point - went for the 190 Stance 102 that was on sale for a low tide charger. They will sit next to a 185 cochise and come out on good vis/harder snow days on Whistler.

Where are people enjoying these? I hear lots of +2s and some on the line.

[altacoup]

I have mine mounted +1.5 but be aware that the tail is pretty punishing.

[rip]

Where are people enjoying these? I hear lots of +2s and some on the line.

I mounted mine on the line, and did not have any desire to go forward or back. With p18s and a 318 bootsole, the balance point was exactly under ball of foot, which is what I prefer for my skis.