Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

To Bacon Or Not To Bacon

profile picture
Literature
Posts: 13673 - Karma: 3,085
For next year, I want a ski similar to the Bacon with a bit more stiffness for the steep and Deep and hauling ass through anything. Basically, this means a ski about 180cm long with a 110-115mm waist. Also, I need a full twin because I will jump with it too.

I will fall back on some Prophet 100s, but I would like something in with the previous waist size.
Some options I have thought up:

Ninthward Rory Silva
Karhu PFD
Maiden AK

Any help would be welcome. That would mean you have ridden the ski, not looked at the graphics on the internet.
May 25 2006 12:49AM
0 0
profile picture
SirFryanator
Posts: 11149 - Karma: 1,415
not the bacon. It's not stiff enough. Not the madens are pretty soft (DEF NOT AS SOFT), I've ridden them.
May 25 2006 12:57AM
0 0
profile picture
johanblaze
Posts: 4987 - Karma: 345
you need a on3p wombat, son.
May 25 2006 1:31AM
0 0
profile picture
SirFryanator
Posts: 11149 - Karma: 1,415
haha have you and scott and the rest of your crew started making them yet? I heard from him that he was still making the frame for the press.
May 25 2006 1:36AM
0 0
profile picture
HiTz
Posts: 1467 - Karma: 11
www.kingswoodskis.com the fats or midfats would be chillen
May 25 2006 1:53AM
0 0
profile picture
TheStamos
Posts: 9311 - Karma: 910
^ possibility of gettign a pair from skimasterflex if you want em, he has them i dont know if you is keepin them or not.
May 25 2006 3:21AM
0 0
profile picture
skimasterflex
Posts: 2064 - Karma: 16
yeah bro you NEED the KW Fats. 185cm full twin 116mm waist. Standard flex is a bit stiffer than the Maidens, especially in the tail. The bamboo cores give way more snap than anything you are gonna find. I can get you in on a 10% off group deal once I get 5 orders together, it saves a bunch on shipping from NZ too.

I had a pair I was selling but I'm pretty sure I am keeping them now.
May 25 2006 3:42AM
0 0
profile picture
LC.
Posts: 5952 - Karma: 2,423
Fuck 115mm. Get Legend Pros or XXLs if you can actually ski.
May 25 2006 6:27AM
0 0
profile picture
ski_cartel
Posts: 6598 - Karma: 18
yea thats what i was thinking of, there a solid ski and the ride like a dream
May 25 2006 10:49AM
0 0
profile picture
Literature
Posts: 13673 - Karma: 3,085
First off, thanks all.

I have ridden the Legend Pros, and I want a ski that I can spin with, and these will kick my ass.

Some of the skis mentioned would be great if not for the length. I want no longer than 180 for turning through trees, because otherwise I start hitting things.

Keep it coming.
May 25 2006 11:50PM
0 0
profile picture
Literature
Posts: 13673 - Karma: 3,085
The Kingswoods look sick,but way out of my price range.
May 25 2006 11:55PM
0 0
profile picture
wrenegade
Posts: 6631 - Karma: 41
Atomic Thugs?
May 26 2006 12:20AM
0 0
profile picture
J.D.
Posts: 21362 - Karma: 5,142
Mojo 105s, son. Please understand that the bacons are designed to ski longer than they are.
May 26 2006 12:24AM
0 0
profile picture
bdskier
Posts: 932 - Karma: 14
I hope you don't want the sidecut of the Bacons for 'hauling ass' get something straight. I'm guessing if you want them that fat you're looking for close to a pow specific ski. The KW's are a good choice, though you think they're too long. Spatulas can be had cheap, center mounting so low swing weight/ski relatively short, full twin, heck more that that they're reverse camber. reverse sidecut so you don't have to worry about hooking when you're 'hauling ass'. Look into some lotus 120's or 138's as well, more likely to land backwards than a pair of toons.

You said you want them short for trees, is this the primary spot they'll get skied? If so forget all the straight stiff nonsense from above. "hualing ass" through the trees is a whole different world. Sumos, short, soft, fat, twin and leather top sheet. 179 toons, or maidens, not quite 115 though.
May 26 2006 12:52AM
0 0
profile picture
C.J.
Posts: 5460 - Karma: 72
So how much would it cost to get a pair if we get 5 people?

And on a side not,wtf brake would fit on the super fats? 146 underfoot? shit, there are snowboards smaller then that.
May 26 2006 1:03AM
0 0
profile picture
TheStamos
Posts: 9311 - Karma: 910
who needs brakes? you just dont fall with those skis at 50 Mph brakes wont stop them. The reason s920's exist although i dont recomend them unless you are seth or one of those guys.
May 26 2006 2:13AM
0 0
profile picture
C.J.
Posts: 5460 - Karma: 72
point taken.
May 26 2006 2:21AM
0 0
profile picture
TheStamos
Posts: 9311 - Karma: 910
^^ wasnt trying to be mean , just imformative.
May 26 2006 2:33AM
0 0
profile picture
C.J.
Posts: 5460 - Karma: 72
shit bro i know.
May 26 2006 2:37AM
0 0
profile picture
Mr_Bojangles
Posts: 2585 - Karma: 16
^good suggestion
May 26 2006 5:08AM
0 0
profile picture
Matty_C
Posts: 2598 - Karma: 236
Big Daddy? dunno how fat they are but good for hauling are they not? Prophet 130 is a good freeride ski and full twinned...
May 26 2006 6:40AM
0 0
profile picture
Kevo
Posts: 2374 - Karma: 136
word
May 26 2006 2:36PM
0 0
profile picture
[lineskier]820
Posts: 923 - Karma: 11
u should buy my haggard brands skis which havent started yet
May 26 2006 5:41PM
0 0
profile picture
r.w
Posts: 3489 - Karma: 18
KARHU PFD FOR SURE!
May 26 2006 8:09PM
0 0
profile picture
Literature
Posts: 13673 - Karma: 3,085
Ok, I need to clear a thing or two up.

The hauling ass part is in open bowls, and for when I want to go really fast on open stuff. As I understand it, the bacon is very flexy and hauling through chopped up crud is not its forte.

The trees comment comes from the fact that the place I ski for the most part, Big Mtn, has some very tightly tree'd stuff, and I enjoy skiing that as well, meaning I have to be able to turn them.

Honestly, I am looking for A 1080 Gun from 05-06 (flex wise and stability wise) with a full twin and a waist around 110-115. That would be perfect.
May 26 2006 11:49PM
0 0
profile picture
Ryanvdonk
Posts: 12811 - Karma: 1,971
BACON, you will find the green cow no where else. they'll be sweet. one thing you coiuld looke for are old mothership TIs, they were sick.
May 27 2006 12:12AM
0 0
profile picture
tom_nz
Posts: 321 - Karma: 10
i lv bacon
May 27 2006 6:35AM
0 0
profile picture
off_axis
Posts: 138 - Karma: 20
get the thugs in their smaller size... 182 or something. they'd be like a stiffer bacon with 5mm more ass in the hips
Sep 11 2006 8:54PM
0 0
profile picture
Love_Wins.
Posts: 5536 - Karma: -1
The Prophet 130 sounds like a viable option for you, I dunno why people are saying the Karhu PFD, it's the exact same ski as the Elizabeth with different graphics....the big Prophet should turn well in the trees because of the sidecut, and the sheer size affords it the stability of a much stiffer ski, it can definitely punch through crud and choppy snow, and you won't find a ski that floats better, also...I've read reviews that say it has less swing weigh than the ANT, only thing is it's a little longer than what you want, but just mount at core and it should be fine. The JP vs. Julien would also be an option, though it won't turn nearly as well because it has far less sidecut.
Sep 11 2006 10:05PM
0 0
profile picture
Reed.
Posts: 4489 - Karma: 272
Ive heard lots of good things about the 9ward Silvas, havent ridden them or anything, but they look pretty sick, just throwing that out there

and the 05-06 guns were stiff as shit, if you want something that stiff...good luck, how tall/weight are you?
Sep 11 2006 10:36PM
0 0
profile picture
hemlockjibber8
Posts: 5977 - Karma: 3,543
130 are fun as hell in the trees. super fats just butter corners. they are really light as well. the shape of the ski makes it ski way smaller than a 186 as well.
Sep 11 2006 11:48PM
0 0
profile picture
Literature
Posts: 13673 - Karma: 3,085
I like how I gave this thread up and then someone resurected it. I want to get some 179 Ak Enemys (sp). They seem to be what I am looking for. The comment about the prophet 130s mounted center scares the shit out of me.
Sep 12 2006 1:13AM
0 0
profile picture
Aenigma
Posts: 11256 - Karma: 424
Haha, I barely noticed that after somebody suggested center mounting spatulas! Seriously, what are you guys smoking?
Sep 12 2006 10:41AM
0 0
profile picture
smuggs
Posts: 6561 - Karma: 1,375
ummm arent you suposed to mount your spatulas at or right near center.
Sep 12 2006 10:50AM
0 0
profile picture
Aenigma
Posts: 11256 - Karma: 424
I suppose you could if you really wanted to, but I'd mount just back from center. A center mounted ski rides way different from one that is back 2 cm.
Sep 12 2006 10:57AM
0 0
profile picture
Love_Wins.
Posts: 5536 - Karma: -1
Why? They'll ski shorter that way, and since you want such a small fucking ski for Back Country riding...I said core also, not true center, or maybe a couple cm back from core...you won't be able to dive that ski if you wanted to anyway, and for switch riding in pow, a core center, or closely mounted ski works fine....so I fail to see the issue, or part of this that 'scares the shit out of you'.
?
Sep 12 2006 11:59AM
0 0
profile picture
TheStamos
Posts: 9311 - Karma: 910
That is a HUGE TAIL and they would be squarrly as fuck. thats like 186/2 +93 cm 93 x10mm=930x 130mm underfoot.

120,900 Square millimeters is equal to about i regulaer 175cm ski, and thats behind your foot. if i did it right you have the same surface area as a regualer ski behind your binding, thats a fuck load of drag and weight, there not the lightest ski on the planet.
Sep 12 2006 12:27PM
0 0
profile picture
Love_Wins.
Posts: 5536 - Karma: -1
I have no idea what the hell you just said, but I think you're saying mounting them that far up leaves enough tail to make a whole other ski...and that might be true, but I really doubt a ski of that ski would get very squirrely at all...people have center mounted Made'n for God's sake, and they don't dive.
Sep 12 2006 12:34PM
0 0
profile picture
Aenigma
Posts: 11256 - Karma: 424
Every center mounted ski will dive if you're skiing correctly--which means with your weight forward, it's simple physics. If you lean back and drag your hands on the ground behind you they won't dive, but then you'll look like a park rat cruising around the mountain. Center mounted skis are made to perform in the park, and that's it. There is no reason to take a perfectly capable ski and ruin it in order to make it spin slightly better off a jump.
Sep 12 2006 12:38PM
0 0
profile picture
Love_Wins.
Posts: 5536 - Karma: -1
I realize that, and I would never center a ski I intended to freeride with...I might mount closer to center for the switch abilitys though, but this guy is wanting it to ski shorter, and since the 130 only comes in a 186, and people tend to buy longer skis and mount them forward to compensate, I thought I would offer it as an option... and Tanakaskier said he mounted his Made'ns at center with no dive, so that's what I'm referring too.
Sep 12 2006 12:57PM
0 0
profile picture
Tha_Grouch
Posts: 2216 - Karma: 14
how come bacons won't work? Soft skis will rip the steep and deep.. as long as you can.

If that just isn't happening, just get prophet 130s.. and quit messing around.
Sep 12 2006 3:40PM
0 0
profile picture
smuggs
Posts: 6561 - Karma: 1,375
i had the elizabehts for a little while and they were sweet. they were stable as hell as long as it wasnt really icey. so id imagine the bacons would only be better.
Sep 12 2006 3:43PM
0 0
profile picture
poofartpee
Posts: 7436 - Karma: 1,538
i know the bacons and madens will be soft
Sep 12 2006 6:15PM
0 0
profile picture
lineski900
Posts: 73 - Karma: 10
i dont think that the bacons are stiff enough for what you are lookin for
Sep 12 2006 7:13PM
0 0
profile picture
hemlockjibber8
Posts: 5977 - Karma: 3,543
the side cut on the 130s gets the widest about 10 inches before the tip of the ski. this makes them ski way shorter than they are. also the mounting point is already a little farther ahead than most skis
Sep 13 2006 12:41AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)