2nd Look: Line Supernatural 100

Firm Chop / Crud

I haven’t spent a whole lot of time on the Supernatural 100 in very demanding, cruddy conditions, but so far, I’m in agreement with Brett. The Supernatural 100 prefers a quick, dynamic skiing style rather than big, rumbling GS turns in demanding conditions. If pushed too hard, the ski can start to feel pretty skittish and unstable.

If you’re more interested in big, fast turns in variable conditions than skiing moguls, then the Supernatural 108 definitely has the upper hand on the 100 (as do skis like the 184cm Volkl Mantra).

When it comes to skiing hard in nasty, variable conditions, I haven’t found the Liberty Helix to be way more stable than the Supernatural 100 (the Helix’s lighter weight does have a tradeoff), but the Helix’s traditional tail and slightly wider waist width still feel like an advantage in these conditions.

And in softer, more forgiving, choppy conditions, the Helix has been the more capable ski.

Soft, Consolidated Snow on a Firm Base

Brett mentioned that, “for a ski that is 100mm underfoot, [he] was impressed by how substantial the Supernatural 100 felt in soft chop conditions,” and that he did feel they “perform best making quick, snappy turns.”

I don’t disagree; for a ~100mm underfoot ski, the Supernatural 100’s stability in soft, choppy conditions is respectable (especially if you’re style is to make more turns rather than fewer turns). However, I believe that skis like the 187cm Blizzard Bonafide or 184cm Volkl Mantra would be more stable. And the Helix, despite feeling lighter in bumps and more entertaining on groomers than the 100, is the more predictable, stable ski when punching through soft, choppy conditions at speed. Again the Helix’s traditional tail and wider width seems to have a lot to do with this, and those factors seem to counteract the fact that it is lighter than the Supernatural 100.

Will Brown reviews the Line Supernatural 100, Blister Gear Review.
Will Brown on the Line Supernatural 100.

Fresh Pow

I haven’t skied the Supernatural in fresh conditions, but here’s some speculation:

Unsurprisingly, I think the less tracked up the conditions are, and the deeper they get, I think the Helix will again be preferable to the Supernatural 100. I wouldn’t expect the 100’s touch of tail rocker to make it a noticeably more fun, playful ski, where the Helix’s lighter weight and wider width probably would. Brett mentioned he had to shift his weight back on the Supernatural 100 in order to keep the skis’ tips up in powder, and I haven’t needed to do that on the Helix—at least in ~6” of fresh snow.

Who is it For?

In closing his review, Brett said he “would recommend the Line Supernatural 100 to athletic, advanced and expert skiers who (1) prefer to make precise, dynamic short-to-medium radius turns in a variety of conditions, (2) drive through the front of their skis with an aggressive, forward stance, and (3) want a snappy ski that provides some pop to propel them from one turn to the next.”

I understand where Brett is coming from here. I’m an aggressive, athletic skier and I can imagine that for someone who weighs 25+ lbs more than I do (like Brett), the Supernatural 100 would have a pretty snappy, poppy feel that jives well with “short-to-medium radius turns” and provide some nice stability, too. But for me personally, while I appreciate some of the ski’s snap and quickness, I can’t say its slightly heavy, stiffer feel seems to lend it much stability at higher speeds. (Again, if you’re a heavier, more powerful skier than I am, the Supernatural 100 might not feel as heavy or as stiff.)

For what it’s worth, I would think that if you were looking for a directional all-mountain ski that was no more than 100mm underfoot and stiffer / heavier than the Liberty Helix, the Blizzard Bonafide (98mm underfoot), maybe the Volkl Mantra (100mm underfoot), or perhaps the new Atomic Vantage 100 CTi will provide a more attractive set of performance characteristics than the Line Supernatural 100. But unfortunately I can’t say if I’m certain about that, as I haven’t skied any of those other skis.

Bottom Line

The Supernatural 100’s bump performance is quite good (certainly better than the Supernatural 108’s), but its weight and sidecut radius make it feel a little underwhelming compared to the wider, lighter Liberty Helix. I’ve found that the Helix is the better powder ski (in chopped and fresh conditions, I would imagine), is easier to ski in bumps, is more lively on groomers, yet is no less stable in any condition.

The Supernatural 108’s width, relatively stiff flex, and weighty feel, combined with its more playful rocker profile, give it a very fun, interesting character that has both playful / poppy and directional charger qualities—especially in shallow, choppy conditions. As an athletic, but rather light skier, I haven’t found that the set of performance characteristics provided by the narrower Supernatural 100 to be nearly as exciting. So no, for me, the Supernatural 100 is not just a slightly skinnier Supernatural 108.



14 comments on “2nd Look: Line Supernatural 100”

  1. I posted this in a previous review but i imagine I never got a response since it was quite some time after the review. Anyway, here is my revised post/question.

    The SN 100 has peaked my curiosity since I read about the SN 108. I currently ride a Cochise and Bibby Pro. I love both of them, but am looking to add, or replace my Cochise with a slightly narrower ski for Colorado hardpack days (and up to a few inches) that is still damp for charging steeps, but a bit more playful for trees, moguls, etc. I weigh 185-190lbs so I think I’d get the more playfulness from the ski than what you experienced. Overall, I think the SN 100 would be a great fit, but i also have a few others I’m considering. How does the SN 100 compare to the 13/14 Mantra, ON3P Wren 102, and PB&J for what I’m looking for in a ski?

    And great job on the site. You guys have come a long way in the short time you’ve been up. Love the reviews! Keep up the good work!

    • Hi Tim,

      IF we’re right in thinking you’ll get a bit more playfuless out of the SN 100 than I did, then it would probably suit you well given what you’re looking for next to the Cochise. I haven’t skied the 102 Wren, unfortunately, but have skied the 13/14 Mantra a little. The 13/14 Mantra is a more demanding ski than the SN 100, with a higher top and on groomers and more stability in bad, variable conditions, but it also is less forgiving and more work in bumps as a result. All in all I’m not sure it’s going to feel a lot more playful than your Cochise – if anything it might be a more demanding ski in bumps and steeps, in fact. That’s just a hunch though; it’s been a while since I’ve skied the Mantra, and so running the comparison by Jonathan in his review of the 13/14 Mantra might be a good idea.

      As for the PB&J, it’s a less directional, more “new-school” style ski than the SN 100, and certainly the Mantra. The PB&J has a more forward mount point, more tip rocker and a lot more tail rocker, so it’s going to have a looser, more playful feel and be less locked down on groomers. But with that said, it will float a little better on soft days and will the most nimble in the trees of all the skis you’ve mentioned.

      Hope this helps you!


  2. Hi Will

    Great review as usual. Have you had a chance yet to get on the Rossignol Slat ? I am wondering how that compares to the SN100 and also vs the Scimitar ? I know you did a comprehensive review on the Scimitar. I bought the Sickle based on Jason’s review and love the ski but they need replacing soon and I am looking to drop down in width a touch to around the 98-100mm mark hence my question.


    • Hi Ian,

      I’m very curious about the Slat as well. I really liked the Scimitar, and the Slat looks more to me like a slightly more aggressive Nordica Soul Rider (longer side-cut, but similar otherwise), which is a really run, poppy ski. Rossi just hasn’t been able to send us the Slat to test, though.


  3. Hi! Great review although I’ve never heard of the helix before, so comparisons to that ski gave me nothing. Anyways, did you ever consider the 179cm SN? Maybe that one would be better suited for you considering your weight? I weigh the same as you and after trying out the soul 7 and bonafide and reading a lot of reviews I was almost decided on this ski in 179cm. Now I’m a bit less sure. I’m pretty much looking for something like the bonafide but just a bit turnier and more nimble, while still being able to charge with a high angle carve on the firm (boring) days.

    • Hi Erik,

      That’s a good thought, though I haven’t been able to try out the 179 Supernatural 100. Let us know what you find if you get on them.



  4. I have the SN in 179 cm length. I really like the ski and I am at Taos right now. Very good in the West Basin Chutes and steep moguls. The one scary thing i have experienced it sticking the low profile tip into firmer crude piles and blowing the ski off. It happened in Elevator chute and Tresckow ridge trees. Scared the heck out of me. The conditions were such that I never even considered the possibility. This could also relate to the review that weight must be moved back a bit to keep tips up in Pow. Not a fan of the low profile tips. I tried the longer version but like shorter tighter turns so went with the 179cm. I am 6 feet and 170 pounds.

  5. I have been skiing the 2010 Prophet 100 in 186 and really enjoy it as a do-all ski. I’m 5′-8″, 155, have a racing background, and the 186 is a fully supportive ski for me in all conditions. It’s always been very stable busting through variable snow in long GS turns at speed, and holds a fairly strong edge when I lay it over on groomers. I demo’d the SN100 in 186 and found it to initiate turns better than the P100, but it’s stiffer, less damp, and transmits more vibration such that my legs need to be much more active in variable snow, or bumped-up groomers. Basically, it did not have the same dampness that the P100 does. With fewer days on snow lately (I had kids), I have been considering sizing down in length, in general. I’m thinking that sizing down to a 179 might help me get more flex out of the ski and enjoy it more like I do the P100. Any thoughts on sizing this ski down?

    • Hi Sam,

      I haven’t had the chance to ski the Supernatural in 179, though it’s a good thought. Robert, who posted a comment just above, is a little bigger than you (6′ – 170 lbs) and heavier than me, and he’s been on the 179. I really can’t say with any certainty if it would be what you’re looking for, but there’s a chance the 179 could work for you given Robert and Erik’s thoughts above.



  6. Any chance anyone has skied the supernatural 92 and have an opinion how it compares to blizzards lineup. I have skied the 100 and agree it is sluggish and slow edge to edge but loved it in the bumps (superisingly) and was very stable. I have had people rave about the 92 saying its a playful go anywhere, rip anywhere ski. I am looking to get a great east coast ski and the bones, brahma and 92s are all on my radar. Only unfortunate thing is i believe the Lines are made in china which goes against my personal beliefs.

  7. Hi Will.!!
    I am thinking about buying SN100 or 108 or Atomic Ritual. I have very good price on them. The lenght is 179cm on both of the SN and 182cm on the Rituals.
    Im 200 Pounds and 177cm, 49 years and rather good skier. Been skiing for all my life and mostly like to charge and ski fast. I should have them primarily for all conditions in groomers and also a little beside the slope. I value carving high when I buy skis What do you Think?. // Hasse

  8. How would the Line 100 compare with the 2014/15 Volkl Mantra….particularly in firm “east coast” conditions? I would assume the Mantra would perform better on steep icy terrain. Does the Line 100 have a core that includes one or multiple metal sheets?

  9. I asked this question on the original review but figured I would give a quick hollar on here as well in case. Did either of you ever play around with the mount location of these. Picked up a pair for an advanced female skier but mount location looks pretty “traditional”. Any thought about moving them a cm or two forward and how they might work up there?

  10. This pertains to the SN 92 (version 2020). By chance would you know the mount location of this ski in a 186cm. length? EVO has it at about -14cm rear of true center?! This can’t be true – also is the mount for the SN 100 the same as the SN 92?
    Either of these skis may become my do-it-all stick that will accompany any fatter ski in the truck if the conditions are skied out or just hard and groomed.

Leave a Comment