Anybody get on the Line Blade Optic skis yet?

[SnakeMagnet]

I would be very curious to see how the 114 Optic compares to the Revolt 114..

[Shorty_J]

Anyone get on the 96?

Similar rocker profile to the 104 but narrower?

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[scumpup]

the 96 are my daily driver.

184cm they're around 2000g the 185cm 104's are about 2300g??

96 is a lighter and easier ski but still has plenty of strength in it. Each size from 96 to 114 is just "more and more ski". My other skis are the Rossi blackops 118 so I take the blade optics out for regular days and the blackops 118 when it's a send it day.

[JackSkier]

Just bought a pair of 192 Optic 114s. Hoping they will fill the elusive playful pow charger category currently unfilled in my quiver.

Anyone played around with the mount point? Thinking of bumping back a couple of cm from the line given my preference for more traditional skis.

[big kook]

Also, Line screwed up by linking these to the "Blade" line. Yes, they use similar "gas petal metal overdrive" tech, but these are a freeride ski with a healthy does of freestyle attitude. And that recipe works...but has been marketed poorly.

Yeah, for next year Line is dropping the "Blade" and just calling it the Optic. They also need to get rid of the monster energy vibe graphic and uneven topsheet.

[CHAIR_97]

Just bought a pair of 192 Optic 114s. Hoping they will fill the elusive playful pow charger category currently unfilled in my quiver.

Anyone played around with the mount point? Thinking of bumping back a couple of cm from the line given my preference for more traditional skis.

That sounds like a terrible idea...
Not a ski to go back or fwd multiple cms .
Maybe .5+/- but not multiple cms

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[JackSkier]

Well, I mounted at -1.5 cm before reading your message.

First impression is very good. Skis are more manoeuvrable than conventional chargers and don't give up a huge amount in stability. I don't find them demanding (although I have potentially been brutalised by my other skis)

[CHAIR_97]

Well, I mounted at -1.5 cm before reading your message.

First impression is very good. Skis are more manoeuvrable than conventional chargers and don't give up a huge amount in stability. I don't find them demanding (although I have potentially been brutalised by my other skis)

Enjoy

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[kc_7777]

These skis were not on my radar until today, but I started looking into then today and the thought I had after looking at the blister reviews and the rocker pics is why would you have less rocker on the 114 than the 104?

That would explain what KC is saying about the 114 being more ski... I don't think it's the weight as much as it's the rocker profile.

I want the 104 rocker on the 114.

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

Here’s some rocker pics of Optic 104 (left) and Optic 114 (right). Ski strap tightened on the rec mount.

Green painter’s tape shows where the tip and tail rocker end. There is more (deeper) tip and tail rocker on the 114. And also more tip and tail splay. Which makes more sense as the 114 is for deeper snow. Not sure what Shorty read/saw on Blister.

And last pic….the 178 114 measures like a true 180. And the 178 104 measures 1cm shorter like a 179.

Rocker pics:





Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Shorty_J]

^^^ oh yeah that's WAY different than what I saw on blister... thanks for that KC.

Edit: maybe it's that they are being decambered? Who knows.

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[Bandit Man]

^^^ oh yeah that's WAY different than what I saw on blister... thanks for that KC.

Edit: maybe it's that they are being decambered? Who knows.

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

The rocker on each model “looks” like it matches the use and conditions of each appropriately. Hope to get my 114’s out this coming week after we get 4+ feet of snow. 🤩

[Shorty_J]

Here's the blister review... looks like a lot less splay than KC's pic.

I like the look of his pics a lot better and they do look more appropriate for the width.

https://blisterreview.com/gear-revie...lade-optic-114

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[MD12]

To me, weight on skis is good when those skis don’t have massively wide tips. Taper and reasonable proportions go a long way. Give me heavy as shit all day. I’m not a bunny hopper.

[kc_7777]

+42cm in the last 12 hours at Whistler. Finally.

I decided to take out my 178cm (~180cm) Line Optic 114s (instead of my Renegades, Whitewalker 121s and 116s and Hojis)….cause I knew with the massive stupid Vail crowds it would become deep, cut-up pow by 9:30 am.

Couple of more quick Optic 114 observations….

1) These skis work awesome in deep, untracked pow. We got on Harmony just as it cracked. You can ski the Optic 114 very fast in blower, deep deep stuff as they float, slash carve. I’m used to more center mounted pow skis but these were effortless to ski fast in really deep pow.

2) Easily one of the best skis I’ve ever been on for deep, soft, cut-up chunder and soft pow mounds/bumps after the 42 cm got tracked out. This is where these skis shine. The Optic 114 allows you to ski fast by either going through piles of pow, or motoring (airing) over the piles of pow and they’re quick enough to manoeuvre around them.

3) During the day I hit a submerged stump hidden under the pow, then bashed some rocks and even fell in a creek. No damage to the edges or bases. Like none.

These are the skis for busy inbounds pow days at Whistler.

Hit this hidden gem at full speed during a pow turn:


Fell in here (it was fully covered):


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[i_like_powder]

Looks like they definitely are dropping the Blade branding and monster energy graphics for next year. I'm guessing these skis are going to get a lot more love next year.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

[Fishskisurf]

Decent, a drastic cosmetic improvement from the current iterations

[Bandit Man]

I don't have a problem with the Monster Energy graphic, but like the 2025 topsheet and moving to the "Optic" name.

[Duffman]

I dunno, the stupid name and ugly as sin graphic is probably why I got a pair for 300 shipped from Canada

[altacoup]

I actually prefer the current graphic to the picture posted above. Those remind me of the current kastle zx graphics which are horrible.

[TripleT]

I dunno, the stupid name and ugly as sin graphic is probably why I got a pair for 300 shipped from Canada

Was that from Corbetts back in the summer?

[Robik]

Was that from Corbetts back in the summer?

It's currently not much more.
On a side note, do I need both BO114 and Pescado? I guess 114 would see much more action and be more versatile than Pescado, but how much of that floating magic would I loose? I'm currently on 104 and love it as a DD for west.

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

[Duffman]

Was that from Corbetts back in the summer?

Yep.

[JackSkier]

It's currently not much more.
On a side note, do I need both BO114 and Pescado? I guess 114 would see much more action and be more versatile than Pescado, but how much of that floating magic would I loose? I'm currently on 104 and love it as a DD for west.

Sent from my Pixel 7 Pro using Tapatalk

Depends somewhat on the length you take, I think.

The 192 is not a super surfy and easy tree ski, but works OK. The Pescado would be more fun on a forest day.

[Bandit Man]

So surfy. So smeary. So fun! 🤩

[Shorty_J]

^^^ ok... I was kind of in agreement with others about not liking the monster energy drink vibe... but those look pretty sick with rasta pivots!

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk