Line Sir Francis Bacon Ski - 2011 BCS

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.

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).

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

bacon

Collin,

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

for more of a traditional mount go 3 cm back from the mounting line. ski skis just fine.

you don't have to mount them center. If you are planning skiing switch (backwards) a lot then it would be helpful to have them at center if not then put them further back from the center

I'll give and enthusiastic endorsement to the Bacons or the Opus. They'll change the way you ski and the way you look at ski design. I have last years Bacons which were closer to the Opus demensions and skiied them in every condition on the east coast. I can't put into words how much fun you will have in the woods on these things. If you do go with Bacon or Opus, go a little longer. they ski shorter and you'll love the extra surface area in the soft snow.

If you want a go anywhere ski the bacon is it. Its got a 108 underfoot so skiing powder is a piece of cake. It won't be as fun to ride on the ice. But it will do alright. And as for jibbing in the park. This is working on the bigger side of park friendly, but it will get the job done. After all it does jib pretty well in the backcountry.

All three of the skis you have mentioned are excellent skis. The Opus is a versatile powder ski but its wouldn't be very fun on the icy stuff or in the park. The Bacon is a great all around ski, The K2 Kung Fujas, Volkl Bridge, Atomic Access are also some skis I would consider. The 98 would handle the ice a lot better and would still be very fun all around the mountain. But I think the Bacon is probably the best out of the bunch for what you are looking to do.

This years Sir Francis Bacon will float in powder just fine. The rocker has more of glide feel to it rather than a digging rocker that last years. So 108 is plenty fat for the deep stuff.