EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › 177 Mantra long enough?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

177 Mantra long enough?

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
6'6" 190lbs and this will be my 1st relatively fat ski. I'll get 30 days on snow this year with 26 out west including Summit/Vail, Aspen area, Big Sky/Moonlight and Jackson/Targhee are all to be visited.

My everyday ski will be either a Top Fuel or a Nitrous(not sure which one I'll be trading for the Mantra).

I teeter on the Upper intermediate/Advanced line and will be attending the ESA in Aspen. Is the 177 Mantra long enough? I ski the Nordica's in a 178 and that seems to be an excellent length for that ski.
post #2 of 25
184 might be better
post #3 of 25
You are a good skier and the Mantra is an easy turner. i recommend the 184 for you. You will find them very controllable and much friendlier in soft chopped conditions in a longer size.
post #4 of 25
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the replies Brock & Cirque!

I'm not sure my local shop would be able to get the 184 in time for my 1st trip out west 16-20 Dec or if they can get them at all.

I can basically walk in the shop tomorrow and trade either of the Nordica's for the 177 they have with bindings. If it matters, I'm about 50/50 on/off piste and stay inbounds.
post #5 of 25
Good luck finding anything that long in Virginia. I'm not sure where you are, but if I had to guess, probably up around DC. Your best bet is to try to order it online. I know Al's still has some:

http://www.untracked.com/p1060-07_vo...wder_skis.html

You could buy a pair when you get out there, but that would be a roll of the dice for inventory as-well-as price. I agree 184 is the right size for you. I am looking into getting a pair of Mantra's or Gotamas for my next trip out west. I am only a shade over six foot and I won't get a 177. Hell, my G3's are that short!
post #6 of 25
Thread Starter 
Thanks Ullr and I'm in Va Beach. The problem is I get store credit for either of the Nordica's, so it will be an even trade with no more cash changing hands.

I skied Top Fuels all last season (22 days) all of which were out west. I had 4 good powder/chowder days during that time (10in or more) and the top fuels in a 178 were fine even if they didn't float great.

The blown up attached pick shows I had no problem bending them in 12-18in at Abasin and they could plow through about anything. Keep in mind that I'm not a great skier by any measure.

I may have to ask tomorrow about 184's availability at ski world.
post #7 of 25
Ask to talk to Guy (if he still works there). He may be able to order them for you. I assume you are going to the Laskin Rd store, not the one in Hampton.
post #8 of 25
I'm 5'11" and 170- all of my skis, when I finally went short- are in the 175-177 range. It just seemed right and an easy benchmark, so I have the 177s- and I like a quick, nimble ski, which this is. The Mantra is amazingly good at short turns in spite of it's width. In powder, but also on hardpack and even ice. In long turns it's stable like a GS race ski. I think this is an exceptional ski and I could easily go from the 177 to the 184. If I had an opening in the quiver, I'd use the 184 for the backside and use the 177 for Christmas crowds.
For your height and weight, the 184 seems right. As far as ability, the last thing you want is to fight your equipment. The Mantra is not a difficult ski to pilot, but it's not super easy, either, like some. The shop guys around here may have a thought on that. The 184 seems like a no-brainer.

WORD, BRO... THINK SNOW...
post #9 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgiddyup View Post
Thanks for the replies Brock & Cirque!

I'm not sure my local shop would be able to get the 184 in time for my 1st trip out west 16-20 Dec or if they can get them at all.

I can basically walk in the shop tomorrow and trade either of the Nordica's for the 177 they have with bindings. If it matters, I'm about 50/50 on/off piste and stay inbounds.

The way it looks right now, I'd leave the Mantra's at home (184's) and bring your rock skis. :

HB
post #10 of 25
Thread Starter 
Thanks to all for the replies. I'll be stopping in the shop tomorrow to see about them ordering the 184's.

And Harkin it looks like the storm's are finally coming.
post #11 of 25
Am I the one that thinks 184's might not be enough ski for him? 6'6" 190lbs makes you a BIG guy and the mantras are twin tips so they ski short. You are aprox 198cm tall I dont think that the 191 mantras would be too big if you get 26 days out west, that is more than a lot of people get all season. Also a the turning radius only increses by like 2 meters. Go with what your comfortable with but you are a pretty big dude so I'd consider a bigger ski. especially with a twin tip
post #12 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarkinBanks View Post
The way it looks right now, I'd leave the Mantra's at home (184's) and bring your rock skis. :

HB
Listen to you. I think you are just a little bit spoiled. Nothin here either but tomorrow is supposed to start the big dump!
post #13 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilT View Post
Am I the one that thinks 184's might not be enough ski for him? 6'6" 190lbs makes you a BIG guy and the mantras are twin tips so they ski short. You are aprox 198cm tall I dont think that the 191 mantras would be too big if you get 26 days out west, that is more than a lot of people get all season. Also a the turning radius only increses by like 2 meters. Go with what your comfortable with but you are a pretty big dude so I'd consider a bigger ski. especially with a twin tip
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgiddyup View Post

I teeter on the Upper intermediate/Advanced line
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgiddyup View Post

Keep in mind that I'm not a great skier by any measure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgiddyup View Post
If it matters, I'm about 50/50 on/off piste and stay inbounds.

I have both the 184 and 191 and I’m 225 lbs. I think at 190lbs the 184 is fine, particularly for 50/50 on/off piste. The 191 would definitely be a better powder ski and be better at high speed crud busting. So for a little less float and little lower speed in the crud, 184 is a much more maneuverable ski for any tree or bump runs.

Plus, if this is the 1st 90+mm waist ski for someone. The float is going to feel pretty good compared to the old skis.

So, the 191 is probably doable for 190 lbs advanced skier, but my bet is the 184 is more fun. A 190lbs mostly off piste expert, definitely the 191.
post #14 of 25
I think some one needs to clarify advanced intermediate and expert for me. I all ways thought Intermediate = Mastered Blues, Can ski blacks semi well. Advanced = Mastered blacks, can ski double blacks semi-well. Expert = mastered everything , skiing the entire mountain top to bottom smoothly in all conditions.

Am I way off?
post #15 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilT View Post
I think some one needs to clarify advanced intermediate and expert for me. I all ways thought Intermediate = Mastered Blues, Can ski blacks semi well. Advanced = Mastered blacks, can ski double blacks semi-well. Expert = mastered everything , skiing the entire mountain top to bottom smoothly in all conditions.

Am I way off?
Quote:
Originally Posted by StormDay View Post

So, the 191 is probably doable for 190 lbs advanced skier, but my bet is the 184 is more fun. A 190lbs mostly off piste expert, definitely the 191.
Probably, should have put "hard charging expert". IMO: The speed you want to ski makes a big difference in choosing between sizes in a off piste ski.

if you like short turns and at low speed, you might be happy on a 170 Mantra like my dad is. (~160lbs)


Expert definition- lots and lots of threads on this. The one you listed is dependent on the mtn. Change the mtn and the same skier’s skill level changes.
post #16 of 25
Thread Starter 
If it matters, I ski faster than most people of my ability in anything but bumps. Pitch doesn't bother me at all as long as the terrain is relatively open.

I ski pretty well on anything groomed, better than average on open off piste terrain and survive steep bumps. Just got into trees last year and ski those cautiously.
post #17 of 25
Jim, minimum 184cm, 191cm would be better -- these guys ski short because of the tips. For the ski's intended purpose, longer would be better -- it's not a groomer ski where short can buy you maneuverability without giving up much else. To take advantage of what this ski can offer in soft snow and powder, 191cm is entirely appropriate for your height and weight.
post #18 of 25
If you ski faster and get 20+ days on the sope I would go long especially if pitch doesnt bother you. As for the trees there is nothing wrong with skiing cautiously.
post #19 of 25
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the help fellows! I'll be ordering from ski world tomorrow and returning the nitrous for the mantra's.

That will leave me with the Top Fuels for most days and the Mantra for powder/chowder days and look forward to my 1st relatively fat ski. If I improve as much as I hope to, I may even venture out of bounds if I can hook up with someone who really knows what they're doing.

Skier219, I'll be hitting Snowshoe twice this season (my only eastern days this season) if you would like to hook up PM me.

Jim
post #20 of 25
I'm 5'11" and last season hovered between 180-185.

I ride the 177 and found it decent. Though I've wondered about boosting up to a 184 (like an idiot, I didn't demo the 184 when I had the chance and just bought the 177 after a day of riding on it...did the same with my Karmas).

That said, I've enjoyed the 177. I think I dig the manueverability the shorter length offers, especially when in shoots (I do not straightline).

That said, part 2, I am probably gonna buy a 185 ski of this magnitude (looking at the Rossi Sick Bird) to compliment my 177 (prolly gonna demo a 184 Mantra just to ease my mind, as well).

Pretty much, though, I've come to realize that size is really a matter of taste and skill.

Some folks seems to adhere to the TGR "Longer and burlier is better" mantra/motif, which is fine. Others gravitate toward the the "shorter = more maneuverability" motto (again, these are generalized observations).

I think it would depend entirely on where and what kind of terrain you'll be skiing.

For example, when I showed interest in the Bros, many folks were like "Dude, you NEED the 188." But when I explained that I was interested in it as an AT set-up, then the song changed to "the 179 will be better for AT, as it's lighter and shorter making it more maneuverable". The general consensus was go longer if you want to straightline and go balls to the wall, go shorter if you like to ski moderately and want some turning room in tight spaces.

The think the best solution is for you to get out on a pair of both lengths and see how you like each one.

I've pretty much decided that my comfort level in terms of size is between 175-185 depending on the ski. Currently the longest ski I own and ski regularly is a 180 No Ka Oi (pretty stiff). The shortest i Have is a 175 Titan 8 (also pretty stiff).

I do wonder what a longer Mantra would feel like, but again, I've been pretty happy with the crud busting and powder performance of my 177's.
post #21 of 25
The answer is no. At your size the 177 is too short.

I'm 5'10" 165 lbs and ski the 184 and would not want it any shorter. It's remarkable quick for a ski of its width and I wouldn't want to sacrifice any flotation or crud busting ability.
post #22 of 25
Hate to change your mind so late in the game, but might I suggest something other than the Mantra? The mantra is an all-mountain ski for advanced and expert skiers. It's a good ski for when you're hoping for some good powder, but expecting ice and crud. It's medium-stiff. At your size, you shouldn't have too much of a problem with it in a 184. I just don't agree with the idea of choosing a ski that's a bit stiffer than your ability warrants and then sizing down. I think you should be on something around 190 cm, but softer. I'm thinking some used 189 seth pistols would be perfect. I think the mantra's will open your eyes to fat skis, but something more powder-oriented will have you smiling more.
post #23 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by shmerham View Post
Hate to change your mind so late in the game, but might I suggest something other than the Mantra? The mantra is an all-mountain ski for advanced and expert skiers. It's a good ski for when you're hoping for some good powder, but expecting ice and crud. It's medium-stiff. At your size, you shouldn't have too much of a problem with it in a 184. I just don't agree with the idea of choosing a ski that's a bit stiffer than your ability warrants and then sizing down. I think you should be on something around 190 cm, but softer. I'm thinking some used 189 seth pistols would be perfect. I think the mantra's will open your eyes to fat skis, but something more powder-oriented will have you smiling more.
That would be a V-Gotama 190
A true twin tip, a little wider throughout and softer. I don't disagree with the choice, but if this is to be a dedicated soft condition ski, the Gotama would float better. IMO, the Mantra will cover all conditions except bulletproof ice.
post #24 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirquerider View Post
That would be a V-Gotama 190
A true twin tip, a little wider throughout and softer. I don't disagree with the choice, but if this is to be a dedicated soft condition ski, the Gotama would float better. IMO, the Mantra will cover all conditions except bulletproof ice.
Agreed. Also dust on crust/frozen coral conditions. The lack of damping in Mantra makes for a punshing ride when the undersurface is hard & irregular.

We don't get Tahoe-esque snows here in CO where our powder days tend to be more in the 9-14" range. However, I've done backcountry runs in the East Vail Chutes with 2-3" of fresh and 184 mantra did quite well (although I have little doubt a 190 Gotama would do even better).
post #25 of 25
Thread Starter 
Can't thank all the contributors to this thread enough and the 184 Mantra was ordered today

I now have my first "quiver" of two. 184 Mantra & 178 Top Fuel

I've never posted this on this board before for fear of the ridicule that would follow, but I believe I state my ability levels pretty close to what they really are.

Having said that, I bought the "expert" Top Fuel and skied it all last season without difficulty.

In the previous 2 seasons (my foray back into skiing regularly after the military keeping me away) I started with a a K2 escape 5500 and skied it without difficulty in Tahoe and a few days back east (broke my collarbone on a jump the last day of the season). Confidence gained I stepped up to the "advanced/expert" K2 Axis XT the next season. I didn't notice any meaningfull difference in either ski. Both ski's were 181 and the escape 5500 was my 1st shaped ski.

Moving on to last season, I went against the grain of the mags/websites and this board and hopped on the Top Fuel while retaining the Axis XT just in case the Top Fuel was too much work or I wasn't worthy.

The Top Fuel was a definate and noticeable upgrade to the K2 as it had MUCH better edge grip and was VERY controlled at (for me) high speeds.

Admittedly I have not demoed any ski's in my entire life and am sure the process is fruitful as I don't think that that many people can be wrong and what better way to make a decision than with 1st hand experience.

It's my belief that I will love the Mantra and furthermore that any solid intermediate who gets in more than 7-10 days a season CAN ski most of the non-race "expert" ski's and ski them well.

Mod's please feel free to delete or start another thread with this post after my mention of the "quiver".
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › 177 Mantra long enough?