All Things Volkl Thread

[naedward81]

Wait and get the M7. More versatile, easier turn initiation and a bigger sweet spot without sacrificing top end stability. I would have mounted a 184 M6 +1 or so as there is a lag time between thinking "turn" and the ski responding unless you are really moving and constantly pressuring the front of your boots, I skied the 184 M7 on the line and it was perfect. (At 175 lbs most people would say I should be on the 177, but I'm old school and like bigger skis, 184 should be great for you).

I'll echo the forward mount. I'm on the forward line on both Kendo and M102. I liked the M6 on the forward line as well.





Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

[turnfarmer]

FWIW I put an all the 90ish skis that the shop I work at carries on the floor next to a kendo in the same length. The Kendo mount line was consistently aft of the other skis by 5 to 2 cm. I prefer most of my Volkls on the forward (+2cm) line. The BMTs are good on the line for me.

[phatboy64]

What is the retail going to be on the M7? I see one Australian site with them at $1499.00 AUS which comes out to be ~ $950 USD flat?

[iriponsnow]

Wicked low tide fun on the Deacon Master 72

[BC.]

Wicked low tide fun on the Deacon Master 72

This is definitely the year for these….I procrastinated and missed the boat on MDV this year.

[BC.]

^^^Definitely the year for these. I procrastinated and missed the boat on MDV.

[Muggydude]

How do people generally consider the M6 skis compared to the M102? 2023+ versions. If it’s purely for a hardpack skis that will mainly see moguls and carving on groomers on low tide days - is M6 the move? I seem to remember the M102 possibly being a bit more of a hard charging ski? Better in crud and going fast on groomers? But more work in moguls?

I’d assume 184cm would be the right length (5’10 200lbs). I demod them both last year and liked them at that length, but I was in pretty premo skiing shape at the time. I’ve been sort of leaning back towards shorter skis these days, just nice not to have to manhandle skis 24/7 for days you’re tired or the end of a long day if the extra stability isn’t truly needed. I’m curious to try a pair of 177s, on paper they sound too short but maybe not.

Perhaps mounting the 184cm version +1cm would make them a little easier in the bumps

Anyone else have time on the current versions of the M102 and M6?

[naedward81]

Anyone else have time on the current versions of the M102 and M6?

I think the current M102 isn't a super hard charger. It's my daily driver in the Midwest when it might get warm and sloppy. Plows thru junk, but don't punish if you get lazy. Harder days, I go for my Kendo just to rail turns and go easier on the knees, but I could rail on the 102 just the same.

I have to get on the M7. Might not happen til I get to Bridger in a couple weeks.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

[Djongo Unchained]

Since I have time on both, I'll try to help.

The obvious: M6 - slightly tighter natural radius; very quick footed if you ask it to; easy swing weight so fast left-right action in turny situations; excellent at high speeds; stable and easy to find the rail and track endlessly.

Unlikely to fold unless you're heavy, tall and a leaner.

For me, the best of a GS ski with the very capable turn dynamics for a quick set of soft bumps or to snap some crispies on the shavy corn.

Incredibly versatile ski and potential to be my daily driver.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

M102 - Last year we had a fat season; I mounted these in January and never looked back.
More versatile in a JH soft season as the extra width is noticeable on what I call the platform.
Super easy to plane yet narrow enough to bust crud piles firmly.

They can deflect but it takes some stiff piles and speed. But if you can ride them, they'll hold on.
The overall stability is the main attraction for me. This model is a tad purer GS to me.

They are relatively stiff but still light enough to thrash around surprisingly well.
It does seem to suffer as the snow gets deeper, as I'm sure the M6 would.

Ideal conditions, both skis are standouts. M102 leans to the softer side for lovins. The M6 likes it firmer.


Turns on each model can be a dream if you're a solid turner. They initiate easily and finish smothly with some attention.

I would say that they could be forgiving a little, but not a lot. Too long will buck you too.

Nailing the length for your usage is key.
I'm at JH with big runs and generally soft snow, mega groomers and sitch. I have the 191 in a 2023 M6 and 2 pairs of 2023 M102.
Most folks will prefer a size down or two. In a gnarly tighter spot, I'd prefer a 184 maybe, but haven't gone there yet. I can make the ski work.

naedward may know better but the local rep told our shop manager that this season's skis with the orange logo had been softened and made more viable for the masses. Yes?
Just as the original models were stiffer and less turny than my mid generation models.

[rightcoast]

I am in the midst of a potential trade with a buddy for a pair of OG 184 M102. He has them mounted , I believe, on the rearward line for a 333bsl with Griffons. I'd get them flat, fill the existing holes and mount with pivots at at least +1, probably +2 after reading through this thread. Just curious if anyone has any knowledge of hole overlap, or any feedback on mount point to make this ski feel a bit more progressive

[Bandit Man]

OG M102 ain’t going to feel progressive regardless of which line you use. Not that kind of ski.


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

[bodywhomper]

I’m continuing to love my m102’s. Im on tele, so I don’t get all 155/160# onto one edge unless I put both heels down a stand up like a man. I normally would have gotten 178’s, but a friend pointed out that at least last year’s version is known to be stable to size down without losing the top end (too much). I also found a few reviews saying this and some discussion here about it.

So I have the tiny version: 170cm. They’ve been pretty great for me. I haven’t found that top end yet, but haven’t gotten them to a place, like mammoth, to really test and find that scary edge. They feel stable at the higher speeds I’ve found at sugarbowl. Blasts through crap the way I like, feeling stable when I open them up in funky stuff. Nimble in tight spots. Turn size and shape is pretty easy to vary/change. Bumps are cake from poppy style to smooth/carvy style to hoppy turns in very steep bumps. Tail design releases well. Fun and predictable in fresh snow and cement. I don’t consider them demanding and can easily take it slow without fighting the ski.

If I were locking my heel down, 178’s would be the call for me.

[McShortyShorts]

New katanas waiting to be mounted with some zed12s for general touring use and the G3s can finally be relegated to rock ski duty

[Benneke10]

PSA: 191 2013 Katanas with Pivot 14 for $175 in SLC https://www.facebook.com/marketplace...code=undefined

Dude also has 191 M5 Mantras flat for $80 (look like 2x mounts)

[LA-73]

Hi all, just found this thread.

Q as title, have a pair of BMT 122's in 186 which I bought as used quite long ago hence I had to plug old holes. Then I mounted approx +1,5, and all though I don't have much problem skiing them I kind of always felt that it would be better with bindings on zero or maybe even behind the line?

My alpine boots are Nordicas Pro machine 130 (26,5) but have a Plum guide 12 on the BMT's and as such use my Nordica strider 130 on them. Since I sometimes also use the Strider with my alpine skis my feeling is that the Strider is a lot more forward leaning or maybe it's because it's sure all over softer. And becuase of this "more forward leaning feeling" I feel like I'm "hanging" over the tips when skiing the BMT's ...hence my idea of moving the binding back to zero. Worth mentioning is that I've no big issue with tips diving just have this uncomfortable feeling hanging over the tips.


About me: 74kg/180cm (165lbs/5'11) hard directional charge style.
Favorite skiis I use and have used,

Alpine; OG Katana 191 & 198, LPR105 192, LPR100 176 & 184, 1st G Mantra 184 & 191.
"Touring"; V-werks katana 191, Blizzard ZG95 & 108 and the BMT 122.

Always had skis mounted on zero except from the mentioned BMT's and a pair of LPR115 184 which I never liked however I mounted the binding.

Any input/thoughts about the BMT 122 186 are much appreciated.

Thought I give back a little input on my own Q for anyone else looking for the same. Cheers to @Lord Thomas & @waxoff for their input and putting me in the right direction.

Ok so I ended up shimming the toes with 4,5mm plate and moving the binding approx 10mm behind Völkl's zero line. Tested yesterday and it was more or less perfect! Found it to be a huge difference. Sadly not much pow but at least approx 10-15cm in spots so can't say how they would feel on big day but I'm pretty sure it'll be fine. It's like a new ski now :-).

[ticketchecker]

Anyone know if M7's will be available at retail in the next month or so? If not, is it worth waiting and not getting an M6 now?

[naedward81]

Anyone know if M7's will be available at retail in the next month or so? If not, is it worth waiting and not getting an M6 now?

I can find out. I don't think there is a plan to release them this year.

I grabbing a pair to bring out to MO next week to test out. I'm curious on the change to the 4 drive radius.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

[ticketchecker]

I can find out. I don't think there is a plan to release them this year.

I grabbing a pair to bring out to MO next week to test out. I'm curious on the change to the 4 drive radius.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

Thx, I remember the M6 launch happened near the end of the prior season they were inline

[gregL]

Anyone know if M7's will be available at retail in the next month or so? If not, is it worth waiting and not getting an M6 now?

I think the M7 is an improvement. It feels a little less "tip heavy" and doesn't need to be driven from the front of the boot so much, turn engagement is more progressive, and you don't really give up anything in terms of edgehold on firm snow or stability at speed. Not sure about when they will be available at retail.

[naedward81]

Thx, I remember the M6 launch happened near the end of the prior season they were inline

M7 is a fall release. They opted to release the Peregrine 80 and 82 now instead of the M7.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

[ripvw]

Been looking for a good high pressure groomer ski and came across an older pair of RTM 84’s for stupid cheap. Believe they are the 2016 version with camber under foot. Are these pretty much the precursor to the Deacon line? Anyone spend time on them?

[naedward81]

Been looking for a good high pressure groomer ski and came across an older pair of RTM 84’s for stupid cheap. Believe they are the 2016 version with camber under foot. Are these pretty much the precursor to the Deacon line? Anyone spend time on them?

Precursor yes. Full rocker I think tho. Deacons changed shape some, but was built off the rtm platform to start.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

[ripvw]

Precursor yes. Full rocker I think tho. Deacons changed shape some, but was built off the rtm platform to start.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

I could be full of shit,but I think starting in 2016 they went to tip/tail rocker and camber underfoot. Can anyone confirm?
These are the model/year I’m looking at.

[1000-oaks]

Anyone know what ski around 100mm with some camber would be damp like an M5 or M102, but with more tip and tail rocker to be looser in crappy variable and crust?

Enforcer 104 Free? Ranger 102 FR?

[naedward81]

I could be full of shit,but I think stating in 2016 they went to tip/tail rocker and camber underfoot. Can anyone confirm?
These are the model/year I’m looking at.

I may be wrong. I came on with Volkl in 2021 after I moved back north in 2020 and was out of the ski arena for a dozen years.

I know a handful of people that have that ski and they still love it.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk