I haven't seen anyone post about the Line Blade Optic 96 or 104 on here yet. Anyone get to try them yet?
Printable View
I haven't seen anyone post about the Line Blade Optic 96 or 104 on here yet. Anyone get to try them yet?
Interested in the 114 too
Yes. 114 rips. Not as playful as I expected. Really excels off piste in funky snow . Expect to ski from a neutral stance but can be driven too. 2 sheets of metal. Go big or go homehttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...4fa0a615fa.jpg
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
Hand flexed them in the shop. All of them are relatively soft in the tips and tails but heavy with metal. I think the 104 seems like my fav. The 114 felt a little too soft for my personal style.
SVS how do they compare to the Reckoner 112s?
They ski totally different than the reckoners. The carbon in the reckoners make them super forgiving and easy to ski, these blade optics are not what I would call a forgiving ski. You have to bring your A game. And as far as stiffness is concerned I can assure you the 114 is not too soft for anybody. I have a hard time deciding between the 2 skis now and find myself switching run to run but if things are choppy or funky snow I'm grabbing the lines . If it's hard packed or I want to play around more I'm on the reckoners.Quote:
Originally Posted by thejongiest
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
The blister guys seem to love them. I'm probably looking at the 96 in 184. I was surprised at the lack of chatter about them on here.
Too expensive right now haha...
Forgot to mention their bases and edges are supposed to be extra thick and durable. I took a super deep chunk out of the base that surely would've been a core shot on most skis and it didn't go through.
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
Drop a pic when you get the chance? I'm interested!Quote:
Originally Posted by SirVicSmasher
They look like direct competition to the nordica unleashed with the sliders set more to loose and playful and not edgey and locked in with the more subtle rocker profiles. Except for the 114, which is heavy stiff and looks like a charger outright. Shame the local stores brought in every width -except- that one..
.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...5ad4543a67.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by scumpup
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
Evo lists the 192 114 at 2552g/ski. Looking forward to hearing more about these.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeMagnet
https://pbs.twimg.com/tweet_video_th...DRWEAQ03Im.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by SirVicSmasher
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Mine were in the 2350 rangeQuote:
Originally Posted by Sylvan
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
Come to think of it, with the report that the revolt 114 is going to be mounted further back and just as heavy, i wonder how that ski would compare..
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirVicSmasher
Wow. Not something I expected out of Line. Looks like they did a good job.
The vision 98s i tour on have the softest, thinnest bases I've ever used. Those skis are too soft and turny for acceptable lift-based use, but these seem to offer a viable alternative. I'd love to demo the 96s
I got my wife a set of 96’s in a 170cm length. Corbetts had them on sale on Black Friday so they were $460.
Two days and she seems to like them quite a bit. The main take away here is that the 96 isn’t demanding. Seems like a fun playful ski. The build quality isn’t anything like moment or On3p…. But seems ‘fine’. I’m curious about the 104 as it comes in a 190.
How serious is the 114? Ski essentials has a few videos talking about it, and they make it out to be a comp ski for hard chargers.
Any comparisons to the Nordica 104 free yet?
Have the 92 for fucking about on. Trashed the bases on early season whistler garbage. Extremely easy to ski tho.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CnChZ...d=Yzg5MTU1MDY=Quote:
Originally Posted by Velomayniac
You tell me
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
You guys are sleeping on some real chargers.
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
I'm waiting for the Corbetts sale at end of season. Looking at a 190cm Optic 104.Quote:
Originally Posted by SirVicSmasher
The charger label only applies to the 114s
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
what do they compare to? I’ve read some conflicting reviews. Some say beast, some say playful and easy goingQuote:
Originally Posted by SirVicSmasher
I bought some Declivity X thinking they would be chargers and for me they weren’t as stable as Moment Governors or Wildcats. Flex was too soft.
I like the shape of these and the weight, but how stiff are they?
:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Velomayniac
Edit: Just handled them at the shop. A bit softer than Declivity X. As you said Mr Pretzel. Nice shape though.
From Blister:
Next up was a lot of soft chop, and the Blade Optic 114 really felt in its element here. It feels like a pretty substantial ski, with enough heft to it that it does not easily get knocked off track. I had been skiing the 184 cm Moment Wildcat the day before and I would say the Blade Optic 114 feels a bit more damp and stable in soft chop. The Blade Optic 114 also feels a bit more
forgiving, offers better flotation, and feels a touch softer overall than the Wildcat.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Mounting some new Blade Optic 114s this week.
Going with STH on rec (~ -7cm).
Noting in the shop that the 178cm Optic 114 measure exact same length as Rustler 180cm.
The Optics will complement my Hoji. Really looking forward to the 114 as an inbounds pow ski at WB.
KC
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
I skied a couple runs on a friend's Optic 104s. The tips felt substantially softer and flappier than my 104 frees. They felt easier in the turn initiation and a little bit more intuitive carvers. The tails were not quite as supportive, so all in all not the type of ski I get along with. However I can see someone getting along with them who wants something that is easy to turn, is a little substantial with the metal, and can handle most conditions reasonably well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Duffman
Absolutely no stores are carrying the 114, like at all. Way too many 96 and 104 and nothing at the ends. So naturally no demos either. I want to compare the 114 to the new revolt...
The 114 is a sweet ski, I’d say similar to the rustler 11 but a bit more drifty vs carvy like the rustler. Lets you play around but also holds up to pushing it a bit.
I’m interested in this comparison, thanks in advance for sharing.
Hmmmmm. This has my interest.Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_pretzel
Perfect. I like drifty but with some charginess too. Can’t wait to get on my new Optic 114s.Quote:
Originally Posted by mr_pretzel
Here’s the length of a “178cm” Blade Optic 114 beside a 180cm Blizzard Rustler…the same.
Attachment 451124
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Nice! Picked up some 96’s for my son from Corbetts. They arrive next week. Was tempted by the 104’s and 114’s. Really looking forward to your initial impressions since we have similar tastes. [emoji6]Quote:
Originally Posted by kc_7777
Quick Blade Optic 114 ski review after 1 day:
Mounted my new 178cm 2023 Blade Optic 114s with STH 16s on the rec line (-7 cm). The 178 cm Optic measures same as a 180 cm Rustler btw. I'm ok with the 178cm, as it feels like a substantial ski in hand. For my 5’7”, 168 lbs they never felt too short at -7cm.
Day 1: Whistler in bluebird and packed pow conditions…. soft bumps, soft groomers, some ice, chalky steeps and some packed pow. And no line-ups.
First run. Damn these were kinda burly? The first three runs I was like can I handle these? They’re not soft and they are not that easygoing. I think I’ve gotten lazy skiing Ravens/Hojis so much recently. Which are effortless to ski. But by the 4th lap down Insanity (under Red Chair) the Optics were getting awesome. But you have to ski them. And you can’t be lazy. Basically if you don’t ski the Optic 114 aggressively the tails can buck you. It will ski you. But if you ski them (and don’t weight the tails too much) they reward you. You can drift the tails a bit…if you stay forward and keep the weight off the tails.
They’re heavy as fuck too. By the end of the day I was realizing you can ski really fast on these in lumpy snow and soft bumps. Cause they don’t get knocked around when mach’ing through chop. The Optic 114 feels pretty darn smooth and damp when going over rough, variable snow. Haven’t been on a ski lately that can do this. Felt so stable at speed. Found myself skiiing ahead of my regular ski buddies in some spots.... cause you just want to let these things run.
Will add more thoughts later when I have a few more days on these.
PS Just had a cold frosty IPA. Feeling sleepy? I think I'm damn tired from skiing these.
Glad to have them in the quiver. Here’s some pics from today:
Attachment 452035
Attachment 452036
Attachment 452037
Attachment 452038
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Lol
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
Sounds like line has a similar radius and profile successor to the burley motherships. My 2800 Gram motherships have the gas pedal, but they are an old american sedan (chinese actually( with a worn out suspension at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by kc_7777
Wonder how they compare to the Sender Squads for Charger that smoothes the whole mountain. What other Enforcer or M-Pro type skis are in its class for dampening the chop at speed? Could they drift like the new charger line?
It is nice to have a charger, but sometimes after several days, it is nice to take a break from a charger and get into the trees. Actually reverse that.