Anybody get on the Line Blade Optic skis yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eluder

I only spent one day on the 104 but found it boring. Definitely a preference thing, so I wouldn't say its traits are bad. They are just not what I want in this waist of ski. It's very damp and cuts through chunder as needed. I just wanted it to be more lively on the hard pack at that waist width. I felt it had no energy coming out of a turn. This all probably fits the ski well, though, with a progressive mount point it favors a more neutral skier who isn't loading the front of the ski to pop into the next turn. This isn't to say the tip couldn't handle being pressured, at least at my weight, you just aren't getting as much back compared to other skis.

---

I re-read the Blister report on the Optic 104. And the post above.

Both don’t make not want the Optic 104.

I ski centered and don’t load up my tips. Blister thinks aggressive directional skiers may want more support from the Blade Optic 104’s shovels. Sounds to me like those people should buy a M102. That’s not me. I do want a 104mm ski that has a more centered mount point (-7cm), has deep rocker lines (yup) and feels more playful (eg. compared to heavy, stiffer, -11cm mounted skis like an M102(. I know the Enforcer 104 is a good option too. We’ll see. In the interest of science I’ll prolly try the Optic 104.

KC.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I grabbed some Blade Optic 96’s for my youngest son and he digs them. Definitely a step up from his QST92’s.

Talked to a college aged kid skiing 114’s yesterday. He seemed to be getting every bit out of the “playful charger” attributes of that ski. Makes me want to snag some 186’s and see if I can feel young again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bandit Man

I grabbed some Blade Optic 96’s for my youngest son and he digs them. Definitely a step up from his QST92’s.

Talked to a college aged kid skiing 114’s yesterday. He seemed to be getting every bit out of the “playful charger” attributes of that ski. Makes me want to snag some 186’s and see if I can feel young again.

---

Bandit,

I own a pair of 114s. Which means so should you.

Corbetts has em for $509CDN.

That’s like fiddy bucks US.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

really interested in the 104 as a potential replacement for my old tracer108 as DD . reviews seem nice, flex, shape and overall build look decent as well

Anyone know the truth length of the 190 blade optic 104?


Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums

Couldn’t resist and bought a pair of 190 104s with pivots for under $550 new via Corbetts. 19m turn radius scares me, but everyone says it isn’t hooky at all and looking down the ski tells me it’s straighter than that. I really hope it’s more compliant than the mindbender 108ti I’m on right now. I find that ski to be unbalanced and wanting of a psia turn instead of slarve/carve ability. Maybe because I mounted them +2, which still looked really far back. High hopes for this design. Damp and straight, without having to ski a ski that requires me to be dialed in all the time.

Ya I couldn't resist those prices either and got some Optic 104s to go with my 114s. Have some raw Pivots for the 104s.

The Optics are kind of like heavier Rustlers? At least the 114 felt that way (I've owned 2 pairs of Rustler 11s). And I really think the Optic 104/114 are good choices when you want a pretty easy-going ski but still with good suspension and you know for sure you don't want a rear-mounted (non-playful), traditional charger (eg M102, K108, MB108Ti). Those traditional skis will rip groomers and open bowls but are way less useful in tight stuff. Exactly the reason I was fan of the Enforcer 104 Free which had good suspension while being forgiving and maneuverable, I skied those so much cause they were so damn useful everyhwere at WB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by altacoup

Couldn’t resist and bought a pair of 190 104s with pivots for under $550 new via Corbetts. 19m turn radius scares me, but everyone says it isn’t hooky at all and looking down the ski tells me it’s straighter than that. I really hope it’s more compliant than the mindbender 108ti I’m on right now. I find that ski to be unbalanced and wanting of a psia turn instead of slarve/carve ability. Maybe because I mounted them +2, which still looked really far back. High hopes for this design. Damp and straight, without having to ski a ski that requires me to be dialed in all the time.

---

I'll be curious to hear how they work out for you. I was very close to pulling the trigger on that same setup.

The listed 19m turn radius on the Optic 104 is for the 178cm length. The 185cm is 20m and the 190cm is 21m so it shouldn’t be hooky at speed at all. Amazing deals at Corbetts right now on all of them!

Anyone been on the 92? They are super cheap and could be fun for a follow the little kid around and hit jumps ski instead of going to a full park ski for this old school skier

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlh

Anyone been on the 92? They are super cheap and could be fun for a follow the little kid around and hit jumps ski instead of going to a full park ski for this old school skier

---

They sound great for that. Blister seemed to like them for spring skiing.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

I had the 92 at the start of the season. Real fun and so easy to ski everywhere, doesn’t hold an edge well on firm groomers. The only issue I had was it’s durability. Thin base and edge; I got a core shot super easy. If coverage is good, great ski and floats really well for its width. I shifted to the 96 as it’s stability way better.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Thinking about the 96 in a 184. How're you liking that model?

What length? Want to unload the 92s?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pembyguy

I had the 92 at the start of the season. Real fun and so easy to ski everywhere, doesn’t hold an edge well on firm groomers. The only issue I had was it’s durability. Thin base and edge; I got a core shot super easy. If coverage is good, great ski and floats really well for its width. I shifted to the 96 as it’s stability way better.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

All blade optics Are 30 percent off atm

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

186 Optic 114’s on their way. Probably won’t get on them until next season, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by carlh

What length? Want to unload the 92s?

---

Passed them on a few months ago


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NWFlow

Thinking about the 96 in a 184. How're you liking that model?

---

Real good ski wouldn’t want anything shorter that 184. The tails aren’t as forgiving as the 92 but still easy to ski and good float for its width
Any fresh snow I’d wanting to be on the whitedot Altum 104. It’s my go to at the min, carves extremely well as a bonus!


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Yeah I'm 6'1" 170 lbs and wonder if they're too short. Might just give em a try though. Thanks for the reply!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bandit Man

186 Optic 114’s on their way. Probably won’t get on them until next season, though.

---

Nice work.

I’m mounting my new 104’s this week.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by altacoup

Couldn’t resist and bought a pair of 190 104s with pivots for under $550 new via Corbetts. 19m turn radius scares me, but everyone says it isn’t hooky at all and looking down the ski tells me it’s straighter than that. I really hope it’s more compliant than the mindbender 108ti I’m on right now. I find that ski to be unbalanced and wanting of a psia turn instead of slarve/carve ability. Maybe because I mounted them +2, which still looked really far back. High hopes for this design. Damp and straight, without having to ski a ski that requires me to be dialed in all the time.

---

looking forward to some beta once you try them. Have you measured actual length on those?

Anyone comment or compare the 114 v blackops 118?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pembyguy

Anyone comment or compare the 114 v blackops 118?


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

---

The Blister Boys did in their Deep Dive comparison. They claim the BO118 has better suspension/high seed stability and is the better carver. They say the Optic 114 is more nimble at slow speeds and floats a bit better. The Optic 114 also comes in a 192. ;)

I won't get my 186 114's until after the lift-accessed season is done locally, so I cannot comment until next winter.

I find it hard to believe anyone could say the 114 is easy to maneuver at low speeds.
Quite the opposite is true. Ski likes to go fast and fast only.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bandit Man

The Blister Boys did in their Deep Dive comparison. They claim the BO118 has better suspension/high seed stability and is the better carver. They say the Optic 114 is more nimble at slow speeds and floats a bit better. The Optic 114 also comes in a 192. ;)

I won't get my 186 114's until after the lift-accessed season is done locally, so I cannot comment until next winter.

---

I’d say that’s true for the 186 vs BO118, however they have pretty different feels. The Blade optic feels like a looser rustler that lets you slarve the turn more versus finish the carve, the BO118 is fully in the freestyle/playful charger category and is less fussy about perfect technique and better for slarving and surfing around.

IE if you don’t like center mounted jib skis the blade optic gives you some play, but is also more traditional in the stances and styles that it accepts.