Volkl Mantra 5 vs. K2 Mindbender 99

newkid900I am in need of new skis pretty badly. Yesterday I got the chance to try out the Volkl Mantra 5 and K2 Mindbender 99. Both were really fun skis and I am now debating on the two skis. I loved how the Volkl was snappy and responsive. My only hesitance is how it will perform in softer snow on a powder day. The K2 was also fun, but didn't seem as responsive as the over.

Anybody have any thoughts on these two skis? I am riding in the PNW at places like Mission Ridge and Stevens Pass which typically don't see a ton of snow like places in Utah or Colorado. I am really looking for a ski that can perform in all conditions but will also give me the freedom to get into deeper and tougher conditions that can vary.

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!

patagonialukeIMO, the Mantra feels a bit more piste-oriented, precise, and energetic. The Mindbender feels like "more" ski — more stable at high speeds, more damp, more work in tight terrain, and more damp than energetic. The Mindbender does float a bit better than the Mantra, but isn't as good when it comes to cranking out really tight turns on piste or making quick, short turns in bumps, trees, etc. If you liked the Mantra but are looking for something that'll do better in deeper snow without compromising much in terms of firm-snow precision, it'd be worth checking out the Fischer Ranger 102 FR.

newkid900Good to know. I need to make a decision ASAP. I have to put 50% down by Sunday on one of these skis.

mystery3Why? No other options?

newkid900I really didn't get enough time on the skis. I only took one run on each.

mystery3What I meant was why do you have to put down a deposit on one of these two particular skis?

tomPietrowskiwithout going to a twin design (yet).

patagonialukeYou have my attention.

The referenced post has been removed.

newkid900Any suggestion on length? I am 5'10" and 197.

newkid900Any suggestion on length? I am 5'10" and 197.

patagonialukeWhere do you ski, what kind of terrain do you ski, and what length / models of skis have you used in the past?

newkid900My last three skis in order to newest to oldest:
K2 Pep Fujas 2010
Line Invader (worst ski ever)
Salomon 1080

All of these have been about 177 in length. I'm not a park skier. I am much more into all-mountain riding. I would love to get more into big mountain riding but it is hard to do this in the PNW without a touring setup. I'm just wondering if I need a longer ski because of the rocker.

patagonialukeI’d go 177. Neither ski has a ton of rocker and they’re both fairly stiff and heavy. I’m 5’8” 155 lbs and like the 184 Minbender 99 if I’ve got lots of room to let them run, but for tighter terrain, bumps, and trees, I definitely prefer the 177

newkid900Do you think I should go up to the 108's? Especially if I am more into all mountain riding?

mystery3Absolutely for skiing the PNW and Utah/Colorado. The 99 is really really heavy so unless you're really focused on crud busting and piste performance I'd recommend the 108.

tomPietrowskiThey really are not that heavy. There is this misconception that adding metal adds a ton of weight to a ski. It really doesn’t. The metal we use is like a tin foil. It’s super thin. It can stabilize a ski but does not add that much weight really.

The 108 does use a slightly less dense core as hard snow performance is not quite as important as in the 99 but the 99 and 108 basically weigh the same.

The 108 gets more rocker thoug and I would say have skied the all it’s Te most aggressive of the line up. The 108 totally rips but you can’t be lazy on them.

mystery3Blister has the 184cm 99 weighing 2311 & 2342 which is heavier than nearly everything in It's class. It's a heavy ski. A lot of people like heavy skis or don't pay much attention to weight at all but it's objectively heavy even compared to the 186cm 108.

Personally I like a ski on the lighter end, not a 1300g carbon touring ski, but something around 2000g in 180ish length. I'm not a big guy, don't ski with a lot of power, and have old/bad knees.

tomPietrowskiYeah it’s interesting they are,if we go off that blister weight, slightly heavier then some which is very surprising. They don’t feel heavy and they certainly don’t ski heavy. I was at sun peaks this weekend doing a mindbender demo and the most common thing people mentioned was how light they felt.

So so yeah technically they may be slightly heavier if that weight is correct but don’t worry about It worry how they ski and the ski light.

Personally I think people put too much into ski weight. I think boots are where you save the weight and then ski and binding weight is not bad so long as the swing weight is light.

newkid900Which ski were you on? The 99 or 108? I'm now trying to determine if I should be getting the 108 instead. Especially since I will be riding Stevens Pass next season.

tomPietrowskiI have ridden all of them and currently hav them all at m house haha.

Personally i I would call the 99 the all mtn carver. It’s rips Te groomers but can handle fresh snow.

The 108 is the all mtn ski I would say. I had not rocker so better in pow but it has the same ti re-enforcement so it still holds its edge really well on the groomers. It’s more work to ski but these skis really want you to be forward and skiing them hard.

If if you only want one ski for everything the 108 is more versatile.

Personally i I went for the 116. It’s softer as it’s carbon not ti and it’s also the most rockered of the bunch. I love the way I skis but it’s for sure not a charger as much as the 99 or 108

newkid900Good to know. Any idea of how they would compare against the Line Vision or Salomon QST? I rode both and really wasn't that impressed.

tomPietrowskiI have not tried out the vision unfortunatly.

Compared to the QST the mindbender is a higher level ski. The qst is a great all round intermediate ski but not a ski an advanced rider can push on. The mindbender has more to push and can be skied way faster but not out of control. They feel damper so are more planted on the snow.