Yeah that's an interesting assessment. I don't think you're wrong, but I suppose the contrasting argument would be the softer flex gives them more playfulness and versatility. When we first saw it, we figured it would just be stuck to groomers, but it's more versatile than that. On the other hand, a stiffer flex would turn it into an absolute monster on a groomer, which is more in line with our initial expectations.
Sidecut is 13.5m @ 176cm. If you get above 25mph or so you'll easily be overskiing the sidecut. So unless you're a thicc boi there's really no need to for a stiffness capable of 40mph+.
I own some fairly stiff skis like Bonafides and Enforcer 88's, and for me, at 160 lbs, the flex of the Blade is spot on for overall versatility. I can rail clean short radius turns or open it up and hammer out 40 mph gs turns. Yesterday I was storm skiing alpine terrain that was quite variable, and the soft flex with good suspension was spot on. Then late day groomers were a little slick, but I could trust the grip. I still prefer to carve hardpack on my Enforcer 88's, but for an all mountain experience I'm liking this ski more each day. The big ass tips can trip me up if I get lazy in tight terrain.
I have the Line Blade 176cm has 15m turning radius. The Black Crow Mirus Cor 173cm has 13m radius. Rossi Exp 84 with 14m radius turns faster than Line Blade. Shaggy Carver 88 168cm 12.5m way faster for carvering
Hey guys, i have 20/21 Atomic Vantage 90 Ti . But they feel somewhat planky and not much fun for me. Not snappy as i wish on a hard snow. Do you think that Line Blade could be the skis for Europe (mainly groomers) runs with emphasis on snappy, carvy feel but not planky or too powerful for light advanced skier?
Hello! I do think that could work, yeah. In general, the Blade basically takes an all-mountain carving ski and adds a little bit of the fun-factor. The Vantage is very, very stiff, so I can understand why you find it feels a little planky. The Blade is definitely more supple in its flex pattern and I know plenty of lighter weight skiers who use it with great success.
It could certainly work, but it's a unique ski. I would just want you to be aware of its differences before pulling the trigger. It won't be the most maneuverable ski in tight east coast terrain like moguls and trees, that's probably its biggest downside for the east. You could consider a more "traditional" shape, but in the same width range, like the Line Sick Day 94. Something to think about at least.
Can I use the Blade as a on Piste Ski? In the morning for carving turns tight and a little bit wider and in the afternoon when the snow is slushy and there are moguls on the Piste? Best greetings from Germany and go ahead... Thanks
Definitely! I did a beer league slalom race on it this season and got 7th or something crazy. It doesn't look like a piste ski, but it can certainly perform like one.
I'm 5'11 200lb and mainly ski on the East Coast. I have a pair of Line Supernatural 92 at 186 length that are getting tired. I love my Supernaturals, they hold an edge in any conditions and still work well in the woods and moguls. Would these be a good replacement?
It's an interesting ski for sure--not entirely positive that it's a replacement for any ski as it's so unique. With a 95 mm waist and a short turn radius, it feels pretty darn different than a lot of skis out there. Personally, I love the Blade and how it carves so cleanly for being so wide. That said, it's not for everyone. I'd think the Line Blade Optic 96 would be a more direct replacement, but the Blade is a whole lot of fun!
Do you recommend sizing this ski down due to the minimal rocker and long side cut? I’m 5’10”, 160lbs and ride a Line Sir Francis Bacon @ 176cm, and was eyeing the Line Blades @ 169cm but I’m worried it’ll be too short and get squirrely at speed. But I also love the idea of these being super maneuverable when carving.
I think going shorter than you normally would is a good idea on these skis. I'm 6'2 225 and have skied the 176 just fine. I'd likely opt for the 181, but didn't find the 176 to be too short for this style ski. Even if you got the 181, they can feel squirrely at speed.
Eh, it could work, but would certainly have its limitations. It's 100% directional, so spinning would feel a bit weird. Same is true for sliding rails. It works, but not as balanced as a true park ski. It's also on the heavy side, which in general makes everything harder in the park. My good friend Jeff Curry skis it in the park from time to time, but he mostly is messing around, slashing turns, etc etc rather than doing big tricks, if that makes sense.
The Blade is a very unique ski. Super short turn radius, huge tips and tails. The Mindbender 90 has more of a traditional all-mountain feel. The Blade loves to carve, but its shape gives it some limitations for some snow conditions, more technical terrain, etc. It can do it, but it requires more skier input than a ski like the Mindbender. In other words, the Mindbender will allow for different turn shapes and styles more easily than the Blade, but it's not as good of a carver.
I picked up a pair, and skied them for 4 days. I keep feeling like I need to be further back on the ski. Has anyone experimented with say -3cm from the recommended line?
Similar concept, but the Blade is quite a bit narrower, so quicker edge to edge and in general performs better on firm snow. Both a ton of fun and both cross over nicely between carving and more playful stuff like slashing, smearing, etc.
Pretty good! It's a different and unique ski, so don't expect a traditional feel, and I found that it carves a lot better in softer snow. I like it a lot, but I also know it's not everyone's favorite.
![Finesse2Tymes - Pretty Ricky [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xIoP_mhYRT0/mqdefault.jpg)
I feel like the blade is hindered by it's softish flex. Could have been such a badass ski because the shape is absolutely spot on
Yeah that's an interesting assessment. I don't think you're wrong, but I suppose the contrasting argument would be the softer flex gives them more playfulness and versatility. When we first saw it, we figured it would just be stuck to groomers, but it's more versatile than that. On the other hand, a stiffer flex would turn it into an absolute monster on a groomer, which is more in line with our initial expectations.
Sidecut is 13.5m @ 176cm. If you get above 25mph or so you'll easily be overskiing the sidecut. So unless you're a thicc boi there's really no need to for a stiffness capable of 40mph+.
I own some fairly stiff skis like Bonafides and Enforcer 88's, and for me, at 160 lbs, the flex of the Blade is spot on for overall versatility. I can rail clean short radius turns or open it up and hammer out 40 mph gs turns. Yesterday I was storm skiing alpine terrain that was quite variable, and the soft flex with good suspension was spot on. Then late day groomers were a little slick, but I could trust the grip. I still prefer to carve hardpack on my Enforcer 88's, but for an all mountain experience I'm liking this ski more each day. The big ass tips can trip me up if I get lazy in tight terrain.
I have the Line Blade 176cm has 15m turning radius. The Black Crow Mirus Cor 173cm has 13m radius. Rossi Exp 84 with 14m radius turns faster than Line Blade. Shaggy Carver 88 168cm 12.5m way faster for carvering
Hey guys, i have 20/21 Atomic Vantage 90 Ti . But they feel somewhat planky and not much fun for me. Not snappy as i wish on a hard snow. Do you think that Line Blade could be the skis for Europe (mainly groomers) runs with emphasis on snappy, carvy feel but not planky or too powerful for light advanced skier?
Hello! I do think that could work, yeah. In general, the Blade basically takes an all-mountain carving ski and adds a little bit of the fun-factor. The Vantage is very, very stiff, so I can understand why you find it feels a little planky. The Blade is definitely more supple in its flex pattern and I know plenty of lighter weight skiers who use it with great success.
Does this thing feel anything like a high quality ski, like a Head or Stockli? Regardless of the design.
I'm not sure I would say it feels like a Stockli, but it certainly feels like a high-end, well-made ski!
How would this do as a 1 ski quiver for the east coast? Would I be better off going with something more narrow?
It could certainly work, but it's a unique ski. I would just want you to be aware of its differences before pulling the trigger. It won't be the most maneuverable ski in tight east coast terrain like moguls and trees, that's probably its biggest downside for the east. You could consider a more "traditional" shape, but in the same width range, like the Line Sick Day 94. Something to think about at least.
Can I use the Blade as a on Piste Ski? In the morning for carving turns tight and a little bit wider and in the afternoon when the snow is slushy and there are moguls on the Piste? Best greetings from Germany and go ahead... Thanks
Definitely! I did a beer league slalom race on it this season and got 7th or something crazy. It doesn't look like a piste ski, but it can certainly perform like one.
I'm 5'11 200lb and mainly ski on the East Coast. I have a pair of Line Supernatural 92 at 186 length that are getting tired. I love my Supernaturals, they hold an edge in any conditions and still work well in the woods and moguls. Would these be a good replacement?
It's an interesting ski for sure--not entirely positive that it's a replacement for any ski as it's so unique. With a 95 mm waist and a short turn radius, it feels pretty darn different than a lot of skis out there. Personally, I love the Blade and how it carves so cleanly for being so wide. That said, it's not for everyone. I'd think the Line Blade Optic 96 would be a more direct replacement, but the Blade is a whole lot of fun!
Do you recommend sizing this ski down due to the minimal rocker and long side cut?
I’m 5’10”, 160lbs and ride a Line Sir Francis Bacon @ 176cm, and was eyeing the Line Blades @ 169cm but I’m worried it’ll be too short and get squirrely at speed. But I also love the idea of these being super maneuverable when carving.
I think going shorter than you normally would is a good idea on these skis. I'm 6'2 225 and have skied the 176 just fine. I'd likely opt for the 181, but didn't find the 176 to be too short for this style ski. Even if you got the 181, they can feel squirrely at speed.
@@SkiEssentials so 169 wouldn't be too small for my size? For reference, I'm advanced-expert and this would be the 2nd ski in my quiver with the SFBs
Line Blade as Park ski ?? what's your opinions about that ?
Eh, it could work, but would certainly have its limitations. It's 100% directional, so spinning would feel a bit weird. Same is true for sliding rails. It works, but not as balanced as a true park ski. It's also on the heavy side, which in general makes everything harder in the park. My good friend Jeff Curry skis it in the park from time to time, but he mostly is messing around, slashing turns, etc etc rather than doing big tricks, if that makes sense.
How do you compare this with K2 Mindbender Ti?
The Blade is a very unique ski. Super short turn radius, huge tips and tails. The Mindbender 90 has more of a traditional all-mountain feel. The Blade loves to carve, but its shape gives it some limitations for some snow conditions, more technical terrain, etc. It can do it, but it requires more skier input than a ski like the Mindbender. In other words, the Mindbender will allow for different turn shapes and styles more easily than the Blade, but it's not as good of a carver.
I picked up a pair, and skied them for 4 days. I keep feeling like I need to be further back on the ski. Has anyone experimented with say -3cm from the recommended line?
We haven't, but that's an interesting concept and something we'll look into.
What is different from last years model?
Just graphics. My guess is that we'll see the Blade stay the same through the 2022/23 season as well, although I've been wrong before.
I feel torn btw the 176 and 181. I ski a 184 Bacon and 181 Sakana and am about 6 foot 3 and 160 pounds... Any thoughts?
go 181
Agree with Matthew with the 181. Have fun!
How’s this differ from the sakana
Similar concept, but the Blade is quite a bit narrower, so quicker edge to edge and in general performs better on firm snow. Both a ton of fun and both cross over nicely between carving and more playful stuff like slashing, smearing, etc.
How would this do as a one ski quiver in Utah? Intermediate to Advanced skier 5’11 155lbs
Pretty good! It's a different and unique ski, so don't expect a traditional feel, and I found that it carves a lot better in softer snow. I like it a lot, but I also know it's not everyone's favorite.