Lightweight InsulationLightweight Insulation

Description

Empirical evidence(see what i did there?) that skiing is the most funner-est thing evar.

Completely redesigned on a 108-millimeter underfoot, the switch-tastic Line Sir Francis Bacon Ski surfs, smears, and butters all over the place on its early-rise, early-taper tips and tails. As Mr. Pollard can attest, the Bacon is tasty on everything, so feel free to unleash Francis come park or pow and you'll thank Eric for the perfected radness that is this jib-happy pow plank.
  • Line's combination of Maple Macroblock Core and Symetrical Flex feels so good you might ask it to prom.
  • Sidewall construction is strong like bear.
  • Early-Rise tips and tails keep you from deep-sixing whilst impressing the lookers-on.
  • Early-Taper tips and tails thwart Captain Hook's attempts to keep you from flying.

Share your thoughts

Review Summary
5
1 4
0 3
0 2
0 1
0

What do you think of the

Line Sir Francis Bacon Ski

? Share a...

Write a review

No file chosen

Rather attach a photo from another website?

Rather attach a photo from your computer?

  • Product review:
  • Share a video
  • Share a photo

How familiar are you with the product?(Optional)

Only jpg, jpeg, png, gif or bmp files please.

Save

Here's what others have to say...

I am looking for some sizing advice. I am...

Posted on

I am looking for some sizing advice. I am wondering whether I should get the 172 or the 178 SFB. I am 5'6" and weigh 140lbs. I live in VT and always ski in the east. I am an advanced skier and I spend most of my time in tight trees as well as moguls. I am also looking to use this ski for sidecountry and I will be mounting marker barons on them. Thanks so much for the help.

Responded on

ski the east, 5'6 go for a 172

Responded on

Hayden,

Thanks for you response. I forgot to mention that I am 16 years old and still growing. Would you still recommend the 172?

Responded on

Hayden,

Thanks for you response. I forgot to mention that I am 16 years old and still growing. Would you still recommend the 172?

I guess you could say I'm looking for a...

Posted on

I guess you could say I'm looking for a one ski quiver but without the extremes: I have Halos for rails, urban, park days, etc. (but they sink in any pow) and New Lifes that I will bust out on super deep stuff but are terrible on the rest of the mt.

I'm an east coast skier who takes a trip or two out west each year and I realize I need a ski that would handle variable conditions. Something I could use on the east coast when I'm not in the park (for trees and groomers and such) and something to take out west for times when there isn't tons of deep stuff. But if I'm somewhere with good park and pow, I need a ski that I can take a park lap with (unlike my New Lifes). Nothing technical, that's what the Halos are for. So to summarize: a ski that excels on groomers, trees, and pretty (but not super) deep pow, along with non-tech park laps.

Other skis I'm considering: ON3P Jeffreys + Jeronimos, Kung Fujas, PB&Js

How do the Bacons stack up against these and fit my bill? Thanks a bunch!

Responded on

Jeremy, the bacon is a good option - just soft. If you're into a soft all mountain ski that can handle 20 inch days at Alta, this will fit the bill. Kung Fujas is a bit stiffer, but a similar shape. PB&J is also a soft ski and feels like a mini-bibby to me (definitely check out blister's PB&J review here: http://blistergearreview.com/gear-reviews/2011-2012-moment-pbj-188cm-2). I haven't skied the ON3P skis. The ski that I think may be missing from your considerations is the 4FRNT Turbo. To me, it is stiff enough to charge, rips groomers and pow alike, and can hold its own in the park. It is the perfect east coast pow ski and west coast everything ski.

Unanswered Question

I recentely got to try skiing the 4frnt...

Posted on

I recentely got to try skiing the 4frnt CRJ's. They were extremely buttery. And it was awesome. I was wondering how buttery they are?

Another sizing question.

5'9 155. Currently...

Posted on

Another sizing question.

5'9 155. Currently ski the 2010 K2 Apache Xplorer in 170. Trying to decide between the 172 or 178. Can't find a demo pair anywhere to know for sure.

I would normally just go with the 172 since I'm happy with the 170 xplorer but I wonder how much shorter effective edge the Bacon will ski given the early rise.

Responded on

This years SFB's have edge from the tail to the tip. NO early taper like other rockers. Check it out on LineSkisYo's youtube channel. 172's are good but its nice to have a longer ski sometimes unless you ski a lot of technical stuff

Responded on

At least the 178. Don't go shorter. I'm 5/6" 145 and I love the 178s. I demo'd the 184s and they were just barely too long so you should consider them. Unless you're a beginner you'll want the longer ski. I measured mine up against my friend's Obsethed 179s and they are significantly shorter (although they aren't nearly as rockered as the Obsethed so that's not a great comparison).

6' tall 190 lbs. What length. I have found...

Posted on

6' tall 190 lbs. What length. I have found a 178 for sale still and demoed it. It felt good, but I'm worried it will be too short. Thought??

Chris

Responded on

I am close to your height and weight and I ordered the 184s. http://lineskis.com/skis/sir-francis-bacon if you scroll to the bottom of the linked page you can see the sizing chart that Line Skis puts out. According to that chart, you should be fine with either size. I would think that you may be sacrificing a very small amount of float and stability for a slight increase in agility. I went with the longer size simply because I have been skiing on 180+ skis for the last few years and liked them better than my 175-180 skis. I don't really know how much a 10cm difference (or 6cm in this case) matters.

Unanswered Question

6' tall 190 lbs. What length. I have found...

Posted on

6' tall 190 lbs. What length. I have found a 178 for sale still and demoed it. It felt good, but I'm worried it will be too short. Thought??

Chris

Unanswered Question

I currently ski the S7, but am looking for...

Posted on

I currently ski the S7, but am looking for a ski that can really do it all and is a little more playful all around...from the sounds of it this ski might be it. I am 6'1 200 lbs advanced to expert. Would this ski at the 184 length be a good pick?

Unanswered Question

I know they've changed a few things - But...

Posted on

I know they've changed a few things - But I wonder if this ski is going to be as fantastically awesome as it was last year. I'll demo it either way. Has anyone had the chance to compare the two?

Hey, im looking for a one ski quiver for...

Posted on

Hey, im looking for a one ski quiver for out west (jackson, telluride, vail), i was considering the bacons and the jjs. Anyone have some suggestions on which would be better for all around skiing?

Responded on

Between the two I would say its pretty much preference to be honest. I shred with the bacons and love them, but a bro of mine uses the JJ's on the same exact terrain (usually at the exact same time) and he swears by them. Not much of a help I know but demo them both if you can. Pick your weapon accordingly.

Responded on

JJ in a 177cm has a 137cm effective edge, Bacon 184cm has more like a 174 cm effective edge.

Bacon in my opinion is a way better all mtn.

Unanswered Question

I am also keen to mount NTN's on these. ...

Posted on

I am also keen to mount NTN's on these. I found with the full rocker on the Gotamas, there was not much surface area on compressed skin tracks. Will these perform much better on the ascent due to the positive camber and less tail rocker? Don't want to have to replace again, but I gotta get up as well as come down.

TELE??

So I'm writing this question because...

Posted on

TELE??

So I'm writing this question because I'm seriously considering the SFB as my ski for the next couple of years. I will be mounting it tele with rotafella NTN bindings - thoughts? The other ski im considering is the Rossi S3.

Here's my deal I'm a giant: 6'3 240 lbs - would obviously go 186. I spend most of my time (80%) in New England with the rest in CO or UT spread among 3 or 4 trips. Right now I'm optimistic and would (ideally) be touring and doing BC ish as much as I am on the resort crud.

Looking for some input on the SFB taking the above info into consideration.

Best Answer Responded on

I'm going to answer my own question here: this Ski is awesome tele rigged.

I took the SFB's out for the first time the other day (mounted NTN of course) and had an absolute BLAST. The flex of the ski is perfect, it was nice and buttery for my low kneeing through some hard bumps. Turning was effortless and throwing some fast GS-esq tele turns inspired confidence.

I'll update further once I'm able to bring the SFB's in some deeper stuff. For now, I'm in love.

Responded on

I have the 184 2012 SFB mounted both alpine and tele at -2 on quiver killers and find they ski great for both disciplines. I'm going to drill another set of holes at -4 for tele pow days as my deeper stance puts a lot of forebody pressure on the back ski, causing it to dive.

Is the SFBacon a ski that an intermediate...

Posted on

Is the SFBacon a ski that an intermediate can grow and improve his skills on? Should I go with something not as wide? I really would like a ski I can ride for the next few years. So, I expect my ability to reach advanced sooner than later and don't want to waste my $ on something I'm going to quickly grow out of. HELP!!! 6'1" 185lbs intermediate. Live in Reno, Ski Tahoe....

Responded on

This is an awesome ski. This is one of the best skis you can buy. You can't waste your money on a durable, high quality ski. You will learn to really like wide skis, this skis is great for any entry level. Get the bacon you won't regret it.

Responded on

These aren't super stiff gnarly skis you should be fine. The only thing is as you advance you will want to ski faster so sizing is a little tricky. These are high quality skis so no worries. If you decide these are too wide get the k2 kung fujas.

Has anyone used the BBR and the Sir Francis...

Posted on

Has anyone used the BBR and the Sir Francis Bacon? Can you compare them for me? I had a lot of fun on the BBRs in Vail's back bowls during a demo day, but haven't been on anything else for years other than my old 1080s...

Responded on

I haven't been on both but i think I can help. The bbr has sort of mixed reviews associated with it but the bacon is consitantly thought of as an amazing ski. The bacons are certainly more powder oriented than the bbr and are a bit funner. The bacon seems like the way to go if you ski in vail. Ill be big enough for the deepest days but will be pretty awesome on hardpack for the rest of the year.

Best Answer Responded on

I own the SFB's and have skied the BBR's a few times as I work on the mountain. They are totally different beasts as you can tell by the construction. The SFB's ski like a big, rockered park ski. They're almost symmetrical. Obviously, if you ski switch at all, the SFB is your ski. For all mountain chill cruising... I really like the BBR, which I found to hold a great edge even on hardpack (more-so than the SFB). Mainly soft snow, all around fun.. from the park to pow, the SFB is good fun.

So I currently have the 09/10 Bacons with...

Posted on

So I currently have the 09/10 Bacons with no rocker and 115mm underfoot. I'm 6' 210lbs and I'm looking to replace the old bacons with the 2012 Bacons or the Mr. Pollards Opus. (I really dig EP's Pro skis)

My current quiver consists of some Volkl Park skis, the old Bacons and pair of Fatypus I-rocks which are my dedicated pow ski and 126mm underfoot. I don't want too much overlap in my quiver but the skis that replace my old Bacons will also be my touring ski. I want this to be my most versatile ski to slay pow, and everything in between.

So i guess my questions are these... Which ski is stiffer, Opus or Bacon? How well do the new slimmer rockered bacons float in comparison to the old wider Bacons. And how versatile is the the Opus in comparison to the new Bacons.

Thanks in advance.

Best Answer Responded on

The Opus is a very versatile ski. The Opus really handles different and variable snow conditions extremely well. The EP pro from the past couple of years was not a very snow versatile ski it was made for powder and powder only. This year it can ski just about anywhere. From a touring perspective i would get the bacon. This years bacon floats just as well as the last years. I mean we are only talking 7mm of middle waist lost on this years it handels the powder just fine. But with that 7mm lost it also handels the ice, hardpack and the crust snow a lot better. The Opus is more versatile than ever but not as versatile as the Bacon.

eric pollard & sir fransis bacond shred meadows

Posted on

these are and all mountain ski but they kill it in the pow

OK I have read every review I can find and...

Posted on

OK I have read every review I can find and am hoping someone with similar skiing ability and goals can help me out here and convince me the SFB are for me or not for me.

I want the SFB but am worried it's going to be too flexy. I'm mainly skiing East coast trees, side and back country. I like to be playful and have fun on natural terrain. I'm going to put touring bindings (Barons) on these.

My concerns are:

1. While I'm always after pow when touring East Coast or in resorts I will likely hit ice and other variable conditions. Are these going to be too flexible and feel squirley if I hit some ice/crud/hard pack? Will they hold up @ higher speeds and not get chattery?

2. I'm 170 lbs and about 6ft. I'm thinking the 178's. With the 108 waist are these going to be quick enough in tight tree lines? I've never skiied anything over 90 waist.

Other skis I'm thinking about are Rossi S3 and Prophet 98/90 because they are stiffer but the Bacon's are the coolest ski out there and I am torn!!!!

Responded on

Alex, you have very legitimate reasons to be torn. I personally think the Bacon will be able to handel the ice, the tight trees and about anything you can throw at this ski. But if you still have worries i think the 98 would be a great choice. The 98 is built a little stiffer and will definitely handle the ice a little bit better. I use the K2 Kung Fujas as my touring ski and it has been a great touring ski because it handles the variable snow really well. So if I were you I would go with the Bacon but if your a little uneasy about it I would also recommend the 98, K2 kung Fujas or i also think the Volkl Gotama would also be a great fit for you. With the Length i would go with something shorter but no shorter than 176 ish. Longer skis will surprise you that there turning radius isn't much different, but back east you can get away with a little shorter ski.

Responded on

Collin,

Thanks for your response and experience on this! you've helped me sway more in the direction of the Bacons!

Im Pablo Ricau again, 50 years old veteran...

Posted on

Im Pablo Ricau again, 50 years old veteran skier, 65 inches heigh ( 1,65 mts ) and 164 pounds ( 74 kgs ) of weight. After using a Black Diamond Verdict of 170 cms ( blue model very stiff ) and a Volkl Katana 2010 of 183 cms, can somebody tells me which of both sizes, 172 cms or 178 cms, is better for me ?.

Responded on

With all the info provided here and below, and given that you handled the Katana in a 183, I suspect you will be happiest on a 178. The 172 might feel too short for your ability and weight.

Bacon or salomon's shogun?? im an aggressive...

Posted on

Bacon or salomon's shogun?? im an aggressive intermediate skier thats looking to expand his skill level on skis. i love the trees and powder when i get it here in northern california. which ski do you guys think would be best.

Best Answer Responded on

I would defiantly go with the Bacon if your looking for a good ski for the powder. The Bacon is wider, has more useful rocker for powder and for other types of snow. Its the better ski out of the two for sure. I would also look at a K2 Kung Fujas its a good compromise of the two skis.

Hi, Im a veteran 50 years old skier and...

Posted on

Hi, Im a veteran 50 years old skier and in the last 4 years I have been skiing with a BD Verdict ( blue model ), very stiff, demanding sport legs every day. Can somebody tells me how stiff is the Bacon ?. These babies allow you to charge ?

Best Answer Responded on

You will defiantly find the Bacon softer than your BD's but this ski can still charge. This is a awesome very versatile ski that can honestly do it all. You will find this ski softer and easier but also able to charge what ever you want it too.

Are their any 4FRNT. skis similar to this...

Posted on

Are their any 4FRNT. skis similar to this ski ??

Responded on

The Aretha is probably the closest to the Bacons and the CRJ is pretty much like last years Sir Francis Bacon but their really isn't a ski that 4FRNT makes that is close to this years Bacon.

Responded on

In general (and in my opinion), 4FRNT skis are going to be much stiffer than the freestyle oriented Line skis. The twin rockered Line skis are purpose built for creative trickery on natural terrain and soft snow whereas the 4FRNT boys are looking for more of a hard charging type of ski experience. If you prefer slightly softer and lighter skis for buttery tricks/powder surfing then you'll probably prefer Bacons. But if you're more into rallying high speed lines and don't need softer skis for your freestyle bag-of-tricks then 4FRNT skis might be your ticket. Check the Turbo for a similar sized offering.

View all contributions... Be patient, it might take a while.