Mantra M5 vs Head Kore 99 vs other...need to decide

[Pdub]

Please help me pick a replacement for my ~6 year old Kastle FX94s. I'm keeping my Head Rallys, which I use most days.

About me
53 yo male, 5'6", 140 lbs, ski 40-50 days a year for 50 years. Mostly New England plus a week or two out West (Jackson/Alta/Aspen). Distant racing background and (despite age and injuries) continue to ski fairly fast and aggressive, favoring short turns. Happy on corduroy, ice, soft bumps, powder, crud, steeps, trees,... everything but ice bumps. Daily ski is the 163 cm Head Rally. Love them for their quickness, energy/rebound, edge hold and versatility. They love to turn. They are fine in 2 or 3 inches or minor slop. Wish they were slightly longer.

What I'm looking for
The FX94's I'm replacing are for most days West and powder days East. Thinking 95-100 range. They should handle the Highland Bowl or Hobacks yet still be able to rip groomers in reasonable style, preferably with a radius of 17 or less. I like turny skis. Even though they will be primarily for softer snow, they should behave as well as possible on firm snow. I.e. decent edge grip, stability at speed, and some torsional stiffness are a must. I usually prefer traditional skis with some camber, but have not experimented enough with newer shapes to be 100% sure of that. I also like skis with some energy and rebound, springy like my Rallys. I know this is less of a thing in a 90-something ski. I'm really picky so I usually lug my 70-something carvers out West, and ski them half days when I need that particular rush.

I liked the FX94s but this past year at Jackson found they were getting pushed around a bit in the really deep, heavy, wet chop. It was 35 degrees and snowed a ton (and it was crowded!) At 166 cm this is largely my fault, they're just too short, even for a guy my size. So I definitely would like to go a little longer and fatter. However I do not find that I need much width to float in really good snow... anything will work in blower pow!

Considering:
Volkl Mantra M5 170 cm (skied Mantras 10 years ago, but they have changed)
Head Kore 99 171 cm (great reviews, versatile, light, same graphene as my Rallys)
Kastle FX96 HP 172 cm (guess I can't go wrong but really expensive and want something new)
Anything else? Remember, I only weigh 140 lbs!

I won't have many opportunities to demo and I trust the deep knowledge and experience here. I figure someone has probably skied all three, maybe even someone under 150 lbs! Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks for reading!

 

[Ken_R]

I love Head skis but I really did not like the Kore 99. It is just WAY too stiff and Im 190 lbs. I though the Kore 93 was worlds better. Excellent ski.

 

[Henry]

I'm 5-11, 180, and I really like my Kore 99 180 on any soft stuff. They're silk. On hard snow they're OK but not exciting (at least compared to my Laser AX).

 

[DocGKR]

Here are a few elses: Nordica Enforcer 100, K2 Mindbender 99, Blizzard Bonafide, Salomon QST 99, Fischer Ranger 99ti, Stockli Storm 95, Renoun Endurance 98, Moment Commander 98

 

[Philpug]

Here are a few elses: Nordica Enforcer 100, K2 Mindbender 99, Blizzard Bonafide, Salomon QST 99, Fischer Ranger 99ti, Stockli Storm 95, Renoun Endurance 98, Moment Commander 98

These would be my 3 suggestions for him too.

 

[Pdub]

Thanks for the suggestions. I think my post was a little unclear (and wordy). Should have simplified it to:

"Lightweight but aggressive former racer looking for 95-100 mm ski that can handle crud and 3D snow yet retains race like carving performance. Shorter radius preferred."

After further research and based on local availability I've narrowed it down to
1. Volkl M5 Mantra @ 170 cm / radius = 17.9
2. Nordica Enforcer 100 @ 177 cm / radius = 16.5
3. Enforcer 93??

Just need to decide whether to sacrifice carving performance and get the Enforcer or soft snow performance and get the Mantra. At 140 lbs maybe the Enforcer will be enough ski to bring a smile on packed snow. I doubt I can really make this call without skiing them, so I may wait and see if I can demo. Would welcome input if anyone has been on Enforcer 100s and Mantra M5s.

 

[Ken_R]

Thanks for the suggestions. I think my post was a little unclear (and wordy). Should have simplified it to:

"Lightweight but aggressive former racer looking for 95-100 mm ski that can handle crud and 3D snow yet retains race like carving performance. Shorter radius preferred."

After further research and based on local availability I've narrowed it down to
1. Volkl M5 Mantra @ 170 cm / radius = 17.9
2. Nordica Enforcer 100 @ 177 cm / radius = 16.5
3. Enforcer 93??

Just need to decide whether to sacrifice carving performance and get the Enforcer or soft snow performance and get the Mantra. At 140 lbs maybe the Enforcer will be enough ski to bring a smile on packed snow. I doubt I can really make this call without skiing them, so I may wait and see if I can demo. Would welcome input if anyone has been on Enforcer 100s and Mantra M5s.

The Enforcer 93 is the best carver of those 3 by far. Well, I have yet to get on the Mantra M5 but the E93 is just VERY good in hard snow while still having good off trail capability. The E100 is just a bit different, more off trail oriented. In that width range (98~100mm) the Bonafide is better on hard snow.

I know Phil though the M5 was meh and he mentioned he really tried to like it. Hopefully I will demo the M5 during November.

 

[Tony S]

53 yo male, 5'6", 140 lbs, ski 40-50 days a year for 50 years. Mostly New England plus a week or two out West (Jackson/Alta/Aspen). Distant racing background and (despite age and injuries) continue to ski fairly fast and aggressive, favoring short turns. Happy on corduroy, ice, soft bumps, powder, crud, steeps, trees,... everything but ice bumps. Daily ski is the 163 cm Head Rally. Love them for their quickness, energy/rebound, edge hold and versatility. They love to turn. They are fine in 2 or 3 inches or minor slop. Wish they

We're exactly the same size, and almost the same age and experience. Watching this thread with interest.

 

[GregK]

Wondering why the different lengths for the Enforcer 100 vs M5 as they will be similar in weight at similar sizes. I own both the Enforcer 93, Enforcer 104 Free and have tried the Enforcer 100 and M5.

Honestly, they are all more similar in flex, weight and feel than most people would assume. The binding mount is more traditional on the M5 than the Enforcers but I didn’t feel the need to move it up at all(has lines at +1 and +2) when I skied it. The M5 has a similar damp, solid feel like the Enforcers have and also feel very stable at speed and through crud. Most people think the M5 would be the “on piste geared” ski of the group but as @Ken_R mentioned, that belongs to the Enforcer 93 which has the least tail rocker and the strongest edge hold of the group. The E93 would be pick if you wanted to maximize performance on piste and still be good off piste.

Moving to the E100, the tail gets a bit softer and rocker increases so it’s a bit more playful and forgiving but still can rip a groomer without issue at any speeds. A bit more forgiving at lower speeds and smaller turns than the E93 and pivots easier with the increased tail rocker.

The M5 is just a bit stiffer tip/tail than the E100(similar tail to E93) with similar rocker length to the E100. So does well on/off piste like the E100 with similar edge hold to the E100. Think the E100 will be a little more playful and easy to pivot over the M5 with the softer flex and more forward mounting point though.

Even my twin tipped E104 can rip groomers at high speeds with very good edge hold unless it’s really hard or icy and in those conditions I’d be on my E93 or narrower skis anyway.

Any one of these skis you could be happy with and a demo would be in order to see which one best suits your needs. Agree with @Philpug that the K2 Mindbender 99Ti is another solid choice in this width as well and really enjoyed it when I tried it out this Spring.

 

[Tony S]

"Lightweight but aggressive former racer looking for 95-100 mm ski that can handle crud and 3D snow yet retains race like carving performance. Shorter radius preferred."

After further research and based on local availability I've narrowed it down to
1. Volkl M5 Mantra @ 170 cm / radius = 17.9
2. Nordica Enforcer 100 @ 177 cm / radius = 16.5
3. Enforcer 93??

I'll just throw out there again that published radius does not tell the whole story on how easy it will be to make short radius turns. This is especially true for lightweights.

"How easily can I bend the ski?" probably counts for as much. For example, my 23m women's GS ski turns as readily for me as a typical 18m cheater because it has a much more compliant and even-flexing forebody.

I'd been looking to fill a quiver hole similar to the OP's. Ended up on a pair of Ripstick 96 Blacks (174), partly because I expect to be able to bend them easily. @Pdub , I can't recommend these for you because I haven't actually tried them! (Oh the shame!) However, between reviews from known sources, flexing in the store, and having demoed a skinnier pair of Elans, I'm hopeful. Will be a couple months before they're on snow, unfortunately.

 

[KingGrump]

I spent a good chuck of the past season on a pair of M5. Approx. 50 days. The E100 skis a little too loose for my taste.
The M5 has a much lighter feel than previous gens of Mantra. Much better in loose snow & crud. Great in bumps too. Big sweet spot.
My BMX-105 & Volkl One don't get to come out and play as often anymore.

 

[Ken_R]

I spent a good chuck of the past season on a pair of M5. Approx. 50 days. The E100 skis a little too loose for my taste.
The M5 has a much lighter feel than previous gens of Mantra. Much better in loose snow & crud. Great in bumps too. Big sweet spot.
My BMX-105 & Volkl One don't get to come out and play as often anymore.

What length was the M5 you skied?

 

[KingGrump]

What length was the M5 you skied?

170.

 

[Tom K.]

I'll just throw out there again that published radius does not tell the whole story on how easy it will be to make short radius turns. This is especially true for lightweights.

"How easily can I bend the ski?" probably counts for as much. For example, my 23m women's GS ski turns as readily for me as a typical 18m cheater because it has a much more compliant and even-flexing forebody.

QFT. I learned this from @Philpug and @Tony S. I didn't really believe it, but it is dead true.

I'm (a lot) heavier than the OP at 195 or 200, but I've slowed down a bit in the last few years, and find the Enforcer 100s fairly soft flex and fairly damp nature to be a match made in heaven, and not that easy to find. Most damp skis tend to be on the stiffer side (Monster 98, anybody?).

 

[Pdub]

Update:
I've consulted my trusted ski companions who know how I ski and have made similar decisions. They pointed out something I hadn't considered: why get the burliest carviest ski when you already have that in your quiver? (Head Rally plus a previously unmentioned 66 mm Volkl cheater slalom ski.) I've got those to rip groomers. Something a little more playful and soft snow oriented rounds out the quiver much better. My buddy tried to convince me to go even softer with a Blizzard Rustler 10 but I'm not going that crazy. So I settled on the Enforcer 100. The 93 seems great but does not round out the fat part of the quiver as well as the 100.

As far as lengths: Enforcer 100 at 177 cm seems just right. I've been jonesing for something to handle powder and crud better than my old 166 cm FX 94s. The extra length and width will help, not to mention the extra rocker and flex. The 177 cm Enforcer has about the same amount of edge contact as the 170 cm M5 on firm snow, due to the significant difference in rocker profiles. Also, I've heard the Enforcer skis a little short; several reviewers suggested sizing up if you have decent skills.

Next decision is bindings. Was thinking Tyrolia Attack 13 or 12; my DIN is only 8 so I don't need the burliest bindings. I've been really frustrated wth Marker Griffins as they are PITA to get in and out, and they seem kind of flat. I think I prefer some ramp angle (based on my skinnier skis) but not sure how high or angled Tyrolias are.

Thanks again for the feedback.

 

[GregK]

Get the Attack2 13 as many places still have 2019 versions for huge deals and the Attack2 12 not as common so harder to get deals on them.

Griffins are about 4mm difference and depending on boots, Attacks are about 3mm or so difference with a lower overall stack height. I definitely prefer Attacks to Griffins.

 

[KingGrump]

For softer snow, the Attack 13 is probably a better binding.
The Attack has a more surfy feel to them.
We are more a Marker Griffon/Jester family. Mamie dislikes the Attack 13 with a vengeance. I use the Attacks on my 105+ skis. Griffon & Jester for those less than 100 mm.

@Tony S , the M5 is not the ski you are looking for. not dissing you. You and I are on the polar extremes when it come to ski preference. The E100 should be a good softy snow ski for you.

 

[Pdub]

Attack 13 looks good. Will 95 mm brakes fit the 100 mm ski or do I need to get the 110s?

 

[Tony S]

Mamie dislikes the Attack 13 with a vengeance.

Mamie strolls down the sidewalk with a vengeance.

 

[GregK]

Attack 13 looks good. Will 95 mm brakes fit the 100 mm ski or do I need to get the 110s?

95 brake will fit perfect without bending.

@KingGrump comments about them being “surfy” reminds me to double check the toe height adjustment as many techs seem to not adjust the Attacks properly. Had lots of people on other forums complaining about pre-releasing and then “not feeling solid” and it’s because the toe height was not set up properly. Doesn’t seem to be as common an issue on markers although some of them not set up properly either.

When you/the tech tests the height adjustment and uses the business card height spacer to test resistance, remember to put pressure back on the rear boot cuff to try and wheelie the toe and then recheck the toe height as you’re doing that. There can be some play if you don’t test with method and can cause a loose feel and may even pre-release. My techs at one place have been good but the other, not so much. They felt sloppy and had some play till I retested and adjusted them. Test with both boots as well as there may be a difference between them.

The Attacks vs Griffins should feel very similar when both adjusted properly except the stand height is lower on the Attacks and most people find the Attacks are easy to put on and get out of.