Second Thoughts About Volkl Kendo - Page 2

Snodayz..............I agree with you 100%  I, too, have noticed the "least than positive" comments about the 2012 Mantra.  "To each their own" - I guess.

 

greenlander..........Like you, I bought a pair of Kendos after demoing them at Big Sky last year.  This year, however, I am skiing on a pair of 2012 Mantras.  Although I respect Philpug's advice very much, I disagree with his thought that the Mantras are like "Going from the frying pan to the fire" statement.  The 2012 Mantras out perform the Kendos in every way.  Again, "To each their own."

 

Before you rule out the Mantras, demo a pair.  If you like the Kendos (I did,) you'll LOVE the 2012 Mantra.  I'm 6'1" 205 lbs. and ski the Mantra in a 177 (the Kendos were 177, also.)

I think peoples dislike of the mantra has to do more with the individual's weight than the actual ski. I think someone who is bigger will have a better time on the mantra and not feel as if they have to muscle them down the hill. I am 5'10" and 150 and was able to demo the 2012 mantra and kendo 170 back to back and the kendo was better for me at my weight as the extra width (same construction) made them seem stiffer and harder to bend than the kendo's. I still enjoyed the Mantra and thought it was a great ski; I just like the Kendo much better as it was more workable with my mass.

One of dawgcatching's most useful (to me) observations is that Volkls tend to be friendlier skis for heavier people. The lighter the skier, the smaller the sweet spot and the tougher to get the ski to flex longitudinally. I agree with dawg's observations on Elans vs Volkls in this respect and bought (and ski) the 888 and 1010 instead of the Mantra and Kendo because the Elans actually flex for me at speeds below 30mph. I weigh 145-150 and ski fairly fast, and still found the Volkls a handful most times. If dawg says the Kendo is a bit friendlier for lighter skiers I believe him! For every ski I've owned and skied extensively that he's reviewed, I've found his reviews on the money. Probably because I weigh nearly the same as him.

Bigger guys have bigger feet. It occurrs to me that the op may like the Mantra better as daily driver. I have size 8 feet wear 24 shell. Off the deep and softer phases back on the firm with Mantra I can feel the width detracting from the precision. The Kendo at 88 is fine. So Mantra soft & deep, Kendo soft & firm up to hard then jump to narrower ice carvers. Or if you are a one ski person riding real world conditions: big guy, big feet = Mantra, avg. to small guy, small feet = Kendo. S'il vous plaît 

There is a lot of information, personal choices and wisdom, but the skis will be dancing on your feet and once you find the ski(s) you like.  You will have "fast feet" and the confidence to ski any line. 

Have only skied east coast inverted ice rinks a few times, but have skied "ice".  Being "old school" I choose a giant slalom ski as my "all round" ski, never shorter than 207cm and I am 5'10" and 200+/-, and have skied my 184 Mantras and longer "torsion box" skis in waist to chest deep pow......... chalk it up to years of skiing or luck, but I have had many powder days of stupid-foolish-grins that cracked my ear lobs off my face with a narrow waisted ski.

If I may suggest, try the beginning of next season driving your Kendos without poles, it will help you find that sweet spot on you ski for easier and quicker feet.  Next, see if you can ski in areas on days when there is a Ski Demo taking place that you may try a number of different skis and find the pair(s) you like. And if you have not noticed, this time of year usually has the best priced skis.  Renting has its pluses, but even the top end demos are tuned to perfection and remember a demo binding changes the flex of many skis.  Please remember as you get better, the response you will want from your skis will change...

 

And please think about your days skiing, there may be those "Epic" days of powder everywhere, but you will have to spark-an-arc on groomed or through death-cookie mashed potato crud to get back to a lift.  Oh yeah, I have a 177 Kendo, still learning its quirks, good luck in finding that pair of skis to which you wished you had bought a second pair.

The volkl kendo was never intended as a specialty ski, either ice or deep snow.  It's an all mountain ski, ans as such is kind of like an all season tire - reasonabley good in all conditions, but excels in none.  I agree with others that if you already have the kendos, get a specialty ski for what you may encounter out west, and remember what you've already been told about the west skiing - you won't hit the huge powder days very often unless you ski out here every day.  Therefore, even if you are buying a ski for the west, it needs to be somewhat accomplished in hard, soft pack and crud as well as powder.  Once you get up to 112 under foot, you begin to lose some of that versatility.  Every skier out there will give you a tip on the best ski based on their experience, so you need to look into reviews on skis and see what the testers say to help you make up your mind.  To that end I'm going to offer my choice - The Line Influence 105.  It has a little early rise on the tip, is awesome in powder and crud, and holds on well on hard pack.  At 6ft 1in. and 235, there is no way the Kendo will hold you up in powder.  I think the Influence would, and not leave you wishing for more ski on harder conditions.  I ski out west, and in an area renowned for powder, but we get everything from that to ice, hard pack, wet rain soaked snow, chop, etc.  I have tried the wider (115 under foot) skis, and although fun in the fresh stuff, they just don't cut it in hard conditions unless powder 11's are your technique.  I think you would really like the ski I recommended - I certainly do because it skis everything I encounter well (I actually have the Line Prophet 100) - the Influence will be my next ski.  It will be as close to a 1 ski in the quiver ski you can get for skiing out west. I also agree with others that having 2 skis if you are an easterner who comes west as much as you do makes sense.  If your bank account says no, remember that if you buy a second ski now, you won't need any new ski for years to come, so if you average it out - cost is not prohibitive.  Also, now is the time to buy online.  If you shop around there are great deals on last year's skis.  Good luck.

May also depend on speed you ski. I've sunk like a stone on plenty of 105's in tighter terrain at moderate speeds, and I weigh 70 lbs less. 

No doubt about it - 105's WILL sink at slower speeds at any weight.  Some of that has to do with technique.  What I'm saying is that to get a ski that will turn effortlessly in powder at any speed, you would need to go up to a rockered ski at 115mm. or more under foot, but then you don't have "one ski that does it all".  I have seen a few skiers that put a wide rockered ski on edge and make it hold on hard pack, but I have seen many more who just survive getting down in harder conditions.  Anyone skiing on a reverse cambered ski just flat out can't turn in hard conditions - so they don't - and that becomes a concern for us all.

A bit of a sidetrack. What is this thing about not sinking in powder? Isn't that the idea? To ski in a three dimensional plane rather than just be on top like some kind of soft groomer. I can understand if the person lacks powder skills and needs a crutch to get down the hill but expert powder skiers who started pre-rocker, pre-wide, pre-shaped know that it's not about being on top of the snow and rather IN the snow to get that magical ethereal sensation.

If you're such an expert that is looking for the "ethereal" feel, then why do you ski a cochise?

Congratulations, you've just accessed a series of old wars on powder technique. Suggest a search. Basically, two way overstated schools on this: Surf the top of the pow (meaning you're just in it a few inches), so that it feels smooth and silky but not bottomless. Or get down in it (meaning calf or higher) and do some porpoising. Which provides a unique sensation also, very different from just smoothing out chop, but loses the surfing/banking feel. OTOH, both of these extremes bear almost no relationship to being in real snow. Where you do both and more.

 

If you're lucky enough to find a real dump, you'll be in it up to your knees or hips if you're skiing trees or anywhere tight at a moderate speed, then plane up more if you open up the throttle. Or where even a 140 mm waist will sink in northern Rockies smoke, while a 98 mm will come right up if you're maching a big bowl. It's more about the density of the snow, the flex of the ski, and the speed you're traveling than whether the ski is 105 or 115. 

 

So ethereal, definitely. But that means different things to different people. Personally, if that's what you're aiming for, I'd go buy a moderately soft 110-115 fat pure powder ski with some mild rocker in front (not sure about rear, would depend on how you ski but I have a hunch you're like a somewhat traditional tail) and then pick up an 88 something like a Kendo or Apex or Magnum 8.7 for everyday driver. Great prices right now on both genres. Because eimmortal's dead on: A Cochise is a great daily driver for big mountains, but it's in no way a dedicated-to-providing-ethereal-sensations powder ski. And if you can find two skis for nearly the price of one, why compromise?

Here! Here!