>>1696636I don't look at any given pair of skis as 'tree skis', 'powder skis', 'chute skis', etc. I look at a pair of skis as a good pair of skis for a given person. Partly because I like being on the same skis all the time so I can get to know them really well and not have to adjust to different skis different days, and partly because I'm going to be skiing in various different types of terrain all in the same day (even in the same run).
As for a pair of skis that would be good for someone who likes spending a lot of time in trees? Pretty much what I said in these posts
>>1694182>>1694188If it was for me personally, I'd be looking at Wildcat 116s or Jeffreys. If it was for someone else, I'd also consider the Bent Chetlers, Candides, Line Outlines, Armada JJs, Libery Origins (112 or Pro), and other similar skis.
>Are the Mantras too heavy for that sort of thing?If you want a ski that really emphasizes tree skiing performance, I would go for something a bit lighter and flexier/softer. There's a big variance in turning radius between the different lengths of Mantras; the 184s and 191s have pretty long turn radius which I personally like but others may not like in tight trees. And again, I would go wider.
Does that mean you can't ski well in trees on Mantras? No, definitely not. As long as you are comfortable on the skis, you can ski just fine in trees on them. It's just probably not going to be their strongest point.
>>1696722KEK and checked
