I’m 6’2”, 225lbs. Do all of my skiing in Utah and Colorado. Skied the 102 in a 184cm on a bunch of powder and leftover days - absolute blast! Can’t recommend this ski enough for a certain kind of skier. As the reviewer noted, it’s a super smooth ski. I spend a lot time on the Mantra M6 with the same build and technology. The ride on the 102 is exactly what you’d expect. Similar to the M6 but not quite as quick. Not quite as precise. But holy smokes is the ride smooth! I noticed it immediately. So edging and schmearing and slarving etc. really do feel like you’re riding a bigger version of the M6 (which is exactly what the 102 is), but the smoothness of the 102 jumps off the page at you. In loose, soft snow, the 102 is just off the charts fun. I thought it would be too bulky, too slow to really enjoy in soft snow. Instead, I found the 102 to be very maneuverable. And blasting crud is a dream. Fun ski for groomers as well. Good carver, reasonably easy turn initiation. Not what I’d ski all day on a groomer day but very fun for a 1/2 morning when the legs are fresh :).
This is great feedback! I totally agree, that leg strength is a big thing with these skis, especially if you're on the long side. I'm your size and actually almost prefer the 177 to the 184 here in Vermont. I bet out in Utah or Colorado my tune would change.
I agree with you.. Last season when I demoed these I had a good time.. It was later in the day when I got on them and the snow was turning to slush.. I would say that they floated over the slush rather than going through.. They were extremely fast.. The thing that surprised me most was how tight of a turn I could do.. I did a couple runs in the bowls and it was washboard moguls.. I just slowly went down and did a lot of tight turns.. I wouldn't say that i really forced the skies.. When they floated over the bump then they also slid around the mogul as well..
I have 2023's at 184cm mounted with Marker Jester 16's (I'm 5'11", 190lbs). I love these skis! They have all the high speed stability and carving precision of the Mantra M6 while being a little more maneuverable and forgiving. I ski mostly in Alberta and BC and have 5 skis in my quiver. Last year I ended up on these over 50% of the time. They are hard charging crud destroyers and can plow through all of the chopped up crap the day after a fresh snow day. About the only place I don't love these is in really tight trees or bumps. They're fine in a little fresh pow, but there's always a better option for that. I love them in the steeps and big bowls and on high speed front side runs. If you like a damp, stable ski that doesn't get pushed around but doesn't beat you up by the end of the day either, you can't go wrong here!
I'm torn between the MANTRA 102 and the Nordica ENFORCER 99. These will be the 3rd pair in my quiver. Currently have Stockli SL (66mm waist) as dedicated frontside carvers on packed powder/corduroy (love them for groomers, best carvers I've ever owned), Bent Chetler 120 (191mm) for awesome pure powder skis. But only useful on soft snow. However I have a big hole in the middle I need to fill. Many days the snow is crud, scraped off powder that is in tuffs with hard pack inbetween, i.e. mixed conditions. If there is any thick snow anywhere the 66MM suck. However the 120's are like roller skates on ice in anything but soft snow. They are so rockered they dont hold an edge. Accordingly I was looking at the MANTRA as a great crud/mixed conditions ski (downside is it seems to be like a GS ski-- wants energy/holds edge but isnt playful in thicker snow/trees/moguls) The Enforcer 100 is a not quite as good in crud but a more all around ski-- has some rocker so you can slide tails in trees/moguls, better in light powder/thicker snow than the MANTRA 102. TLDR...... MANTRA : better at crud/stability/speed. Hard charging ski. Very good carver. Not playful. ENFORCER: better at trees, moguls, powder, more playful, easier to turn. Very good carver. I'll use these new ski's for mixed condition days, the end of the day after snow. Is my research above accurate? Which would you go with?
You're right on the money. For your application, I think the Enforcer 99 makes more sense as you sound like you want some type of mobility and agility to go along with excellent carving performance. That, to me, points to the 99.
@@SkiEssentials I did further reseach and just bought the LINE BLADE 95. It's radical sidecut/supershaped makes it a great carver, but is still wide so it can handle light powder, crud/mixed conditions. It supposedly cut thru crud very well. I dont need a backside ski and wanted a frontside ski for mixed conditions. What do you think?
@@LLWCorp I've always really liked the Blade for its uniqueness and creativity, but if you want higher speed carving capacity, it's tough to go against the Nordica or Volkl.
Oooh, two great choices here! As much as I love the Mantra 102, I'm not sure I'd want to own one. They're very stable and powerful but are also a handful. I think you get 95% of the performance out of the Justis but with more versatility and accessibility. To reiterate, both are amazing skis but the Justis has been one of my personal favorites for a few years now. I'd think the 183 would work for your stats and application.
Very closely. As much love as I have for the turning and carving capabilities of the Mantra 102, I have even more affinity for the Justis and how it handles a turn. Both are a handful--stiff and stable, but the Justis has more rocker that allows it to be slightly more accessible when it comes to off-piste terrain and conditions. If you're specifically looking for a strong, sturdy, and stable cruiser, the Mantra is probably a bit stronger, but not by a whole lot. Truly love them both.
I’m 6’2” and lighter than you @ 180lbs, advanced skier that skis > 100 days in Utah. I love carving and ski quite a bit of trees. This ski is at the top of my list to add to this year’s quiver, but I’m torn between the 177 or 184. Most of my skis are over 180cm, but I know this is a beast of a ski I could probably size down for more fun in the trees. However, does that give up what it’s really best at (hardcore stability and speed). Even my Firebird Competition 76’s, which I adore, are 182cm, in case that helps. Cheers!
Mentally, I would have a hard time buying a 177 over a 184, but it's tough to discount my actual experience on this ski from this past season. I had a similar experience on the 179 Nordica Enforcer 94--what a blast! I don't think the 184 is too long in this ski, but it will make the trees a bit harder.
@@SkiEssentials I have the same question on sizing a 177 vs 184. (I'm 6'1" 160#). In reading Volkl's literature there is something about the metal being adjusted in the smaller sizes to provide a similar performance. I have read a ton of reviews and one trend seems to be that people my height but heavier, around 180-200+# love and swear by the 184. However, I can't find much information to see if the flex of the 184 is accessible at lighter skier weights ( or for the 177 for that matter. ) In my mind it is speed plus technique and skier weight that creates flex. And being able to flex the M102 ski seems necessary to really engage that 3rd and smaller turn radius and bring the ski alive. Do you have thoughts and recommendations on this? Thanks!
@@Didjable It also depends on what you want to get out of the ski in various conditions and terrain. At 6/2 225, I don't see a lot of positives with the 184 here in Vermont. It's tighter and narrower in terms of terrain. The 177 actually works great for my size and ski style. The longer ski feels a lot more smooth and stable for sure, but I've got about 10 turns before the ski gets pretty tiring. I'd imagine at 160 pounds, the 184 will feel like a whole lot of ski.
Pretty similar in terms of top end performance. The Kastle is sharper, especially in the tails, so it's even more on-trail specific than the Mantra, which I'd much rather ski off-trail and in adventurous zones.
I’ll try to be brief: I asked Jeff (Bonafide 2024 video) if the Mantra 102 is as strong a crud buster as the M3. I personally think that after the Mantra M3 Volkl has made watered-down versions of that ski, the M4 being a disaster, in my opinion. I’m running out of sunlight to apply Phantom myself (have done it in my backyard for two pairs), so I would have to buy the skis from you and add the Phantom treatment. Again, do you, Bob, think the Mantra 102 has the rhinoceros on steroids feel when annihilating crud? Not even the Bonafide that I demoed in 2014 came close (it was strong, but missed the mark…then there was the shorter turning radius…).
Other than a wider ski like the Katana 108 or the Blizzard Cochise, the Mantra 102 seems about as crud-busty as they get. The amazing thing is that these skis also are agile in turns--a lot of that is attributed to the 3D Radius.
Thanks Bob. I’ll be buying a pair of 177 Mantra 102’s, with the Phantom Glide treatment, from you guys very soon. I just need to know if you can ship UPS or FedEx to Dover, New Hampshire.
The relative footprint and profile are the same, as is the build. It's really just an extra 8 mm of width throughout. On snow, this equates to more mass and therefore more stability and power. While neither of the skis are particularly awesome floaters, the 102 does have more surface area, so it will stand up to deeper and softer snow. Conversely, the M6 will have better torsional stiffness when the snow is extra firm.
