Printable View
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.
The answer is always Bodacious, shame they're not made anymore.
Heritage's FL113 in the heaviest build would be the closest fuck-the-snow i'd imagine. Just a lot larger turn radius.
What an overrated boring skiQuote:
Originally Posted by SnakeMagnet
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
Only rode the bodacious for a few runs but that was 118 underfoot of rred white and black get out of the way. Must have been a decade ago, but it was April at Alta after a big dump which makes any ski a multiple better.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakeMagnet
So the latest enforcer frees are a bit softer than the old ones? Has someone compared the 115 to the Optic 114? Wonder how long the Optic 114 will last? Two seasons?
Anyone got a Sender Squad comparison with Optic? Any love for M-Pros here?
Just put my son on some 96’s which were a step up from some Salomon QST92’s. More stable yet looser in powder. He’s only 115-lbs but they upped his confidence and capabilities.
I’ve got some raw Pivot 15s that I think are gonna end up on some Optic 104s.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Can score line blade optic 104 or Nordica enforcer 104 free for super cheap. Seems like the enforcer is burlier. But I do like a progressive mounted twin that’s mellow but can be skied super hard. Anyone with experience on both?
Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
I’ve skied the 2021 E104 extensively. Have since sold that E104.Quote:
Originally Posted by altacoup
I’ve decided I need a heavy, 104mm ski again….that is a bit burly yet pretty playful, for inbounds (to complement my 184cm Ravens) to be the ski that I take into the really sketch spots at Whistler and Blackcomb. So it need to be really easy to ski, yet solid underfoot, but with tails that release easily.
The E104 did awesome as that kind of ski.
I’ve skied my Line Optic 114 for one day.
I’m gonna go Optic 104 instead of getting another E104.
Even though I think the E104 is a really good ski for me, based on the burliness of the 114 Optic I think the 104 Optic will be really good too. The tail on the Optic is a bit less twinned than the E104. May rip harder? But the Optic tail still has lots of early rise to release. The 114 was freaking heavy and damp and fast. I think the Optic 104 is slightly less burly than the Optic 114.
Probably can’t go wrong with either E104 or Optic 104. Also could be that I just want a change from the Enforcer.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
Just a heads up, Blister says the 104 is not. Early as burly as the 114 and is a more easy going ski than the enforcer 104 (enforcer is stiffer). I haven’t skid the 104 optic but was interested in it as an easier going 104, but then just keep deciding the 104 is so easy as it is. Maybe size up on the optic 104.
The Blister review states over and over that the optic 104 is soft. Which kind of surprises me. Even though line is known more as a job company they’ve made chargers over the years. And the optic 104 is billed as their charger. This would replace a green qst 106 188 that I snapped in half last week. Really liked that ski, could charge but wasn’t punishing, did the slarve to carve thing well. Problem is used ones of those are the same price as a new 104 enforcer or optic and don’t have good pricing on the new QST 106.
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.