2023 Line Blade Optic Collection Introduction and Initial Review with SkiEssentials.com

[@p.g.outdoors.]

Are you guys planning on doing a video on the new 2023 chronics? I’d love to see a video of them!

[@SkiEssentials]

We don't have any immediate plans to do a full length Chronic review. We will have it in our 2023 Ski Test, however, and we can try to work in a longer review too. It likely wouldn't come until the upcoming ski season.

[@jackcleverly3183]

I love my 104 190s way different style then my sir francis bacons but its fun also definitely benefits from a tune to get a true 1 and 2 degree

[@CrazyReviews207]

#MakeSkisHeavyAgain ! Thanks for the great shop talk boys

[@SkiEssentials]

Right! It's fun how Line is unapologetically making big, strong, heavy skis while everyone else is doing the opposite.

[@CrazyReviews207]

@@SkiEssentials reminds me of where Rossi has taken the BlackOps line recently. For my personal preference, I’m stoked! Cool to see heavier skis from different brands in different shapes. Bet these do well this year.

[@johnrobertson1633]

@SkiEssentials I'm an intermediate to advanced skier in the hills of Pennsylvania. I am upgrading from hand me down 1980s elans and will be teaching my wife and kids. At 6 ft and 210, I am trying to decide between the line optic 92 or 96 vs the head kore 93. Any suggestions?

[@michaeloneill5824]

nice to see you skiing 'the way you like to ski'. You looked good doing your thing man. really good.

[@SkiEssentials]

Thank you!

[@src248]

I really wish that they had my size when I tried the 104. I found them too short and too soft, I did not have a good time... Disappointing, as I was really excited to try them. I'm glad others are loving them, seems like Line made a killer ski that a lot of people will enjoy. I usually get along well with comp skis, so I'll definitely try the 114 if I have the opportunity

[@SkiEssentials]

I can totally understand that. I think they're all the type of ski where if anything, you want to size up. The 114 is pretty awesome if you like big, strong, fast skis.

[@jordispiessens6630]

Great review as usually, thanks.

[@SkiEssentials]

Thank you, it was a fun one to do! SE

[@n-da-bunka2650]

I have a pair of Head KORE 105's I bought for out west as I was seeking more width for powder but still want good edge hold on piste. They remind me of my Bonafides which is good but they are also VERY stiff which is NOT GOOD in tighter turns on steep moguls and trees so I am considering moving over to these blade optic 104s with the expectation that they would be softer and thus more maneuverable than the KOREs

[@SkiEssentials]

I think you'll find that the Line does offer more compliance with the softer snow. It's heavier than the Kore, so be prepared for that.

[@Bushwacked487]

*Me, slowly dying waiting for the Montero AR review that was promised in June*

[@SkiEssentials]

How about next week??

[@maksymmaletskyy6803]

Hi, how would you compare 104 to Nordica Unleashed 108, in terms of stability and playfulness

[@SkiEssentials]

I think if you focus on stability and playfulness, it's a fairly even comparison. It's more that they just feel different in how they ski and the turns they like to make. The Unleashed doesn't really have much early taper, so the tips and tails are much wider. There's a 9 mm difference in tip width between those two skis, despite just a 4 mm difference in waist width. Those narrower, straighter tips of the Blade Optic give it a relatively unique feel, while the Unleashed 108 has more of a preference for those rounded turns we were talking about. It's similar to how we described the difference between the Blade Optic and the Enforcer 104 Free. Hope that helps!

[@src248]

Complimenting the minimal taper, the Unleashed 108 doesn't have that much tip/tail rocker. It isn't a very loose/slashy feeling ski, if that's how you define playfulness. That said, it's energetic and the camber lets it quickly change direction/bounce between turns. I really loved how it carves thanks to that shape. Agreed that they're playful but in a different way compared to the more rockered and tapered Line.

[@maksymmaletskyy6803]

@@src248 Thanks!

[@keevmulqois2484]

Thanks Jeff and Bob! Bought Line Blades based on your review. Awesome ski. Random question: what ski pants (grey) are you wearing on Optic 96 video and does SE sell? Thanks!

[@SkiEssentials]

I'm sorry, I can't find the data on those pants. I think they are Flylow brand, and we are a dealer, but I think they're a few seasons old.

[@thomasherzog3114]

Hey Boys! Thanks for the conversation, Compared to Line's older metal laminate offerings ,Prophet or the Influence/ super natural, would you say these are less stiff? Less damp locked in. More playful? Does the shape and mount point bring significant change in balance point and make carve behave differently?

[@SkiEssentials]

HI Thomas! The shape and profile are a bit more modern in terms of being more playful, and then the metal laminate is just more sophisticated, putting stiffness and damping where it's needed and removing it from unnecessary zones for the shape of the ski. The new skis are a bit less stiff and damp, but more versatile and playful overall. The carving, especially on the 96, is outstanding thanks to the more directional mentality and character. SE

[@pmarquis]

If I were to make the Blade Optic 92 my dedicated park ski, should I mount it +4.5 cm from recommended line? Did anyone at Line mention where they mounted theirs for the park?

[@SkiEssentials]

We've heard no mention of specific athletes mount points. I think that since it's a bit more directional and less symmetrical than some dedicated park skis, it still functions well in both styles. I'd have to take a look at the ski, but at first glance, the +4.5 seems pretty forward.

[@Lo-cj6ski]

I would totally get a 114 with a ‘shreducational’ topsheet!! They look awesome! What are the chances?

[@SkiEssentials]

Minimal. I'd say that's a coveted, and rare, item.

[@thonik670]

Jeff, how do you feel that the Blade Optic 104 compares to the K2 Mindbender 108 and the dynastar M-Free 108?

[@SkiEssentials]

Hey Mason! I think a good way to think about it would be if you could take the construction of the Mindbender and put it into the M-Free 108... It's more playful than the Mindbender, but more powerful than the M-Free. That's over-simplifying things just a little bit, as the Blade Optic is quite unique and somewhat hard to compare to other skis, but I do think that's a good way to think about it.

[@thonik670]

@@SkiEssentials Hey Jeff! That’s awesome, I look for to skiing it. I really love both the Mfree and Mindbender for different reasons and have always thought something that blended the qualities of both would be a lot of fun.

[@alexander827]

Hi Optic 104 vs ct 102 I am trying to replace my old ct 2.0 2017 i want the same flex and form

[@SkiEssentials]

I would stick with the CT if I were you. Blade Optics have a heavier feel and stiffer flex pattern, in my experience.

[@charlieroth5255]

I skied Salomon Stance 102 last winter, great ski for carving cord and crud as well as smashing bumps. How would the 104 compare?

[@SkiEssentials]

Very similar. The Optic 104 has more dramatic rocker and splay while the Stance is lower-profile overall. This makes the Stance smoother and closer to the snow while the Line is more poppy and energetic. For more types of terrain and snow conditions, I think the 104 may have more to offer, but for corduroy and crud, I can't think of a much better ski than the Stance. I love the longer radius of the Salomon as well. Have fun! SE

[@carterfan80]

Is it similar at all to dynastar's m pro line? Tip shape and metal application seem somewhat similar....

[@SkiEssentials]

It's kind of like if you were to take the M-Pro construction and apply it to the M-Free shapes. Definitely some similarities, but the M-Pro has a much flatter, stiffer tail, which creates a pretty big difference between them. You're right, though. Tip shape and metal application are certainly similar.

[@xristostziv6765]

Hello i m 46 years old 186cm height 93 kg and an expert agressive skier! Which height of blades optic 104 or 114 should i buy????

[@SkiEssentials]

I'd go with the 185/186 in those skis. Have fun!

[@bobse155]

Don't buy them they suck, my son has ten days on them and the tops are peeling and the metal edge and bottom of the ski is coming apart@@SkiEssentials

[@whoisthe1412]

Wow another Rustler? I’m intrigued.

[@SkiEssentials]

Definitely a lot of similarities between them! I think it's great having another ultra versatile ski on the market.

[@Siris74]

Hey there, looking to trade my '23 Bent 110s to something stiffer and more confident when charging west coast terrain. Is the 104 a suitable replacement? I was directed towards the Blizzard Bonafides, but not sure it'll be as good off-piste. And what size should I be looking at? (expert, 5'10", 180lbs). Thanks guys!

[@SkiEssentials]

Yeah, the Bonafide is solid, but isn't terribly friendly off piste. I'd say the Line is a better replacement. The Nordica Enforcer 104 Free is another benchmark ski in this category for sure--great off-piste as well as being able to rock some crazy carved turns on the smoother surfaces. I'd say the mid 170's is a good place to be for sizing in these models.

[@tyfanuzzi5431]

you touched on the rustler9 vs the 96 whats your opinions on them how they perform

[@SkiEssentials]

I think those two skis will be in the same conversation a lot over the next few years, or until one of them changes their respective ski. Bob and I both agree that the Rustler has more a preference for rounder turns. It makes cleaner carves and pulls you into a turn and across the fall line more. The Blade Optic 96 is looser and feels more like a down-the-fall-line ski, rather than a turn-across-the-fall-line ski. Higher wiggle factor in the Blade Optic.

[@tyfanuzzi5431]

i think that wiggle factor for east coast is important ! im 5’8 200 lbs should i stick with my normal 177/178 or bump up to 184 for these do you think?!

[@airbag294]

@@SkiEssentials honored to have OCD gear question mentioned in the video

[@yiz177]

What do you guys compare between the Nordica unleashed 98 and blade optic 104?

[@SkiEssentials]

The profile is a pretty big difference. Unleashed has more camber and less rocker while the Line is more rockered especially in the tips and tails. This makes the Unleashed smoother and more responsive in a carved turn while the Line is more smeary and drifty in a soft snow format.

[@allMala]

Stuck between the optic 92 and atomic bent 90… is there any comparison between them or are they completely different animals? Not a park guy, just looking for a good east coast all mountain

[@SkiEssentials]

The Optic is a better choice for east coast all-mountain just because it has a bit more grip underfoot and groomer performance. The Bent is a wonderfully playful ski, and certainly excels in bumps and trees, but it's not quite as energetic or poppy as the Line. I'd lean that way. Have fun! SE

[@jmanswat2457]

Looking for a skinnier blackops118, is this gonna scratch my itch???

[@SkiEssentials]

Not the Blackops 98? The Blade Optic skis do feel more metallic and chargy versus the Blackops, so there is a difference in the ski's character as well as the width. Salomon QST 106 or Blank also make a lot of sense in this format. Hope that helps! SE

[@choski76]

Could I demo all the skis you review at your store ?

[@SkiEssentials]

We likely have at least most of them! Call 802-253-7222 for demo details.

[@michaeldvorkin8996]

how does the 92 compare to the captis black crow

[@SkiEssentials]

The Captis has more camber and longer camber, so it feels more like an all-mountain ski while the Blade Optic is more rockered and nicer for softer snow and driftier skiing. If I were to be on-trail and in the park more often than not, I'd take the Captis, but for softer snow and more floaty skiing, the Blade Optic 92 would be my choice. Have fun! SE