Just saw these! Looks like a decent upgradeQuote:
Originally Posted by slashy
Printable View
Just saw these! Looks like a decent upgradeQuote:
Originally Posted by slashy
Of my 10-ski quiver, the Optic 104s are probably the skis that are the best one ski quiver inbounds at Whistler when you’re gonna ski everywhere. This used to be the Nordica Enforcer 104 Free for me.
I’ve skied them on sleeper pow days, in slush, ripped ice, fast groomers, on steeps, in sketchy entrances, in bumps and trees…..they make all terrain easy. And cause they’re so easy, you can ski hard terrain better.
They’re not the stiffest, not the dampest or the burliest skis out there but their combo of decent weight + dampness + maneuverability is pretty darn fun.
KC
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Stumbled upon this deal and found it too enticing to pass on: https://www.skiessentials.com/produc...-optic114-skis
Going to give the 192’s a try…
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
Thank goodness they’re sold out. Saves me $200. I b love the 104 and I’m sure the 114 will be sweet
Crazy Black Friday deals on all Line skis right now on their website.
Ok I broke down joined the club with some one oh fours with that Black Friday sale. I’m gonna love em?
I’m very optic curious but torn between the 96 and 104. Usually i go mid 90s for my all mountain ski (colorado) but this year i’ll be skiing at bachelor and the 104 feels like it makes more sense. Which one should i go with here?
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Id go with the [emoji637][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]]][emoji640] if it were meQuote:
Originally Posted by ezgzy;[emoji[emoji6[emoji640
Sent from my iPhone using [emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji640][emoji638][emoji638][emoji638]]TGR Forums
I’m Line Optic series curious so can only answer generally about what to ski at Bachy. I only have ever skied my 99mm underfoot skis during a dry spell of 6 weeks a few years ago. Generally I ski 10x width stuff on the daily with many days a season at 114+ width skis depending on conditions….. unless you are an old old racer dude who can’t fathom skiing anything more than 90mm underfoot for soft snow days the 104 should serve you well ….Quote:
Originally Posted by ezgzy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Curated.com has some even crazier deals on last year’s Blade Optics than Line is running. Stumbled across Optic 114’s (178 only) and 104’s (171, 185, 190) for $249 for the 2024 model. Go get some!
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
Backcountry will price match this too and curated is non returnable on clearance if that matters to anyoneQuote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
What size attack brakes do I want for the one oh fours?
Will ninety fives work or are one tens better?
Stupid app won’t let me use numbers.
95s work well up to maybe 101 or so but start rubbing after that. The 110 brakes the better option for 102mm plus I find. Will clear easily but not stick out too much on 104mm.Quote:
Originally Posted by EWG
Just bought the 96 off corbetts. $230 shipped …
My brother just did the same for his kid $230 shipped. Free shipping,Quote:
Originally Posted by Flippo
Corbetts has the 114 for under $260 shipped right now and 104 for $240
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
Crazy stuff. I already have the black and green 114 and kind of want to get the yellow version just because I like it better. That price is making it hard to resist.Quote:
Originally Posted by altacoup
[emoji12]
It's a friggin great ski for that price. Skied mine yesterday.Quote:
Originally Posted by altacoup
Skied my 104's in the 185 for the first time this past weekend. Stepped down from the 190 I had last year. Have to say that the 190, being heavier, was a bit more stable at speed and felt overall like more of a charger. It also felt a little cumbersome in tight spots. In comparison, the 185 felt more natural and automatic. I could still push the ski hard and get on the tips and drive it when I wanted to on groomers, but was more manageable and easier off trail. They felt very good in the 4-6" of new show...pushing through consolidated snow while remaining really lose and agile in the back half of the ski. I really like how I can get on the edges and drive the ski, but still have that looseness in the tail that is so beneficial off trail.
Me too. 104 185cm with green Attack 14s. If nothing else they at least look cool...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
No new snow, so just hardpack. My DD is a ON3P Woods 187 108, so 104 on a hardpack day is pretty normal. I tried out some 112 Deathwish the same day which wasn't a good fit for conditions, but switching to the Optics for the first time felt immediately excellent. Very intuitive, predictable underfoot, drivable and fast. Didn't do anything technical or tight, so that will be interesting to check out. Felt very light compared to the Woodsmans. Not sure if that's real or in my head - I'll have to check weights. But they did feel like they got bounced around a bit. Might be nice in the tighter stuff once we finally get some snow. Whenever that is.
Anyway, good start and looking forward to the test in more normal midseason terrain at some point.
Not sure the weight of the Woodsman 108, but the Blade Optic 104 is pretty beefy for its size, my 185 was 2260gm a ski when I weighed before mounting. The tip is fairly soft and light compared to the rest which is probably why the felt lighter .Quote:
Originally Posted by EWG
Mine also came w a pretty grabby tune at the tips I haven't bothered retuning yet but did detune the taper quite a bit.
I looked em up and you’re right - the Optic is actually listed as 40g heavier than the Woodsman’s. Wild.Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffman
It was only a few runs on a pretty firm hard pack. Clearly I need more time on them to see what’s up. Looking forward to that for sure. Should have lots of days to mess around over the next few weeks…
Just got my second day on the 185 104 Optic. This is the ski I’ve been looking for! I wanted a ski that can slarve and dump speed if I was going too fast in trees but I also wanted something that would bomb through crud and feel stable at speed. I hope other companies make skis like this - a playful twin tip inspired ski that can charge. It does feel a lot like the sender free 110 that I demoed but with a little easier to get on edge. It’s definitely more stable than the dynastar m-free 99 that I also owned (sold to a friend after picking up the optic) and plows through cut up snow more confidently. Not as lively as the elan playmaker 101 but a much faster ski. Reminiscent also of my prodigy 4 that I really like but a touch more directional and holds a line better. Mine weighed 2200 and 2300 grams which was a shock but really can’t notice the difference while skiing. I tend to like lighter skis because I do a lot of sidestepping, traversing, and hiking in the resort but as far as sidestepping goes, the torsional rigidity almost makes it easier to hike than a ski without the “gas pedal metal.” Speaking of which, I really thought the GPM was a stupid gimmicky marketing term but after straight lining one of my favorite runs in less than ideal conditions I decided to admit that Gas pedal metal is a real thing and that I like it. Anyway, if you were thinking of getting this ski then my vote is go for it! Happy skiing!
Since Jan was pretty low tide a lot of places, anyone use their 104 Blade Optic on true hardpack or icy groomers? Curious how it holds up in these conditions
Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
I have. They are okay but not great. The “gas pedal metal” helps to quiet the ski and is capable of holding an edge, it’s just not any better than “acceptable or mediocre”. Since you ski the one-o-four in a more progressive stance, it feels like you’ll never quite get the confidence inspiring edge hold of a more directional ski with metal. They really excel in anything soft and that’s where I tend to use mine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffman
I find the edge grip fine on firm snow. But the shape isn’t really from railing high edge angle carves. Despite the listed turn radius they ski much straighter. So they do fine laying down super G turns on firm but if you want to get tighter it’s more of a skid.
I don’t really disagree with anything those guys said but I’ve found them to work pretty well in bulletproof stuff. I can set em and hold it with force. But I’ll admit I angle my ankles pretty hard in those conditions so I’m getting pretty good edge bite. I’m also driving a little bit as Bandit sort’ve alluded too - not so upright on hard pack / ice.
Also this is Rocky Mountain ice. Not see through East coast ice.
The blade optic 96 absolutely shreds firm groomers. Gs and slalom turns for this guy with zero racing background.
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
Thanks for posting this update. I demod the 185 (2025 Optic 104) for one full day on the weekend with a really wide mix of snow conditions as the refreeze thawed out into pretty good skiing. Get them everywere including grooms, rough alpine, and deep bumps. It might be the single easiest ski Ive ever jumped on. Mega forgiving all-round. Great beginner ski. Very damp, very planted. The tail was both supportive to stomp unbalanced landings but also steerable from the backseat. (I used to think those qualities were mutually exclusive!) I ripped these 185cms pretty fast over rough terrain and hit some questionable airs and honestly never thought I was missing something from a 190 length, which surprised me! (Context, I'm >200lbs and typically ski 189-195cm) They feel very nimble underfoot, perfect for tight irregular moguls and darty forest lines. While they never felt missing of stability, I was definitely missing some effective edge in committed turns. Carving felt pretty good, but the straight shape (low sidecut) was evident by the shovels feeling quite vague mid-turn. I wasn't expecting a lot of turn initiation or finish, but still found less effective edge than I expected. Turning radius also felt longer than 20m to me. The edge was pretty easy to find but I couldn't really bend into a tight turn with less than ideal snow. I'm positioning this likely purchase as my bump and crap-snow ski, not as my carvers or chargers, so it might be perfect. But I was wondering if you have more to say about the 185 vs 190 in terms of gaining effective edge? Also wondering if the extra length felt like more tip (soft) or more shovel (stiff)? Specifically I'm thinking about bending them into a deep mogul and if the 190 actually hangs up more or not... cheersQuote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
Finally mounted the one fourteens I bought from Corbetts for a steal. What a great ski. Excellent charger that’s super easy to throw sideways and ditch speed. Very landing jumps as the tail is very supportive without being punishing. Was able to make super g turns with no issues and they felt stable without feeling too locked in. Not great on groomers, but that’s not what they’re for. I’m very pleased that I picked them up despite not needing them at all.
Right? I have had mine for sale for a while, but I am not really trying to sell them. It is a ski that I dont need, but works well. I think my new HL AM110 will effectively replace it as my big mountain charger, but if not I may grab a newer version for next season.Quote:
Originally Posted by altacoup
If you like big, heavy, damp, long radius skis this ski is your huckleberry. Not hard to ski, but ready to take it to 11 if you are.
So day two on these and conditions were awesome. Ski is awesome. Super chargy but easy to ski at the same time. Pretty much the definition of a modern technique charger. But I compressed an edge on what I would consider to be a fairly light rock strike. Didn’t totally blow up the ski, but they’re compromised. I blew up a pair of one o fours last year but that was dropping twenty feet to rock. I really like how the optics ski but they aren’t a durable ski. Would not buy if I skied big sky or crested butte.
Anyone have time on the Optic EightyEight?
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
if anyone is looking for a 185cm optic 104, I'm selling mine in gear swap
I've been thinking about adding something a little easier-going to the quiver, but this is my fear. I've heard several other reports concerning the lack of durability.Quote:
Originally Posted by altacoup
Ok, definitely keeping the 104s in my quiver. And in fact, Im gonna cut my quiver down pretty far, I think, and these make the cut easily. I kind of want something carvier for low tide days but still around -6 mount point and semi upright. Anybody been on both the 104s and 96s and can compare them?
Do you mean ninety six? I do, really like it, good carver and easy off piste. Similar to my old rustler 9 but more stable.Quote:
Originally Posted by alpinevibes
similar question - anyone have time on the optic eighty eight - want a groomer/firm ski that's still a little fun and this could fit the bill but don't see any reviews for it anywhere
FWIW, I have the optic [emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji6[emoji640][emoji637]]][emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]] and it rips groomers, I would guess the [emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]][emoji[emoji6[emoji640][emoji638]][emoji640][emoji640]] would as well.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Well that settles it, I'm getting a pair of Optic Emoji 6s.