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!

Line sfbs or ON3P jeronimos?

profile picture
410steeze
Posts: 1086 - Karma: 39
ok im not sure if i am getting new skis next year, but if i do, i am between these 2 skis. i heard that there would be custom flex patterns next year for the jmos so i would get them softer if i got those. anyways, i dont know which to get.
i am leaning towards sfb's because my shop has them and i could get a discount, but my only concern is will they be too big for me to handle in the park? i know there are people out there who use them for park but i am used to super light and narrow volkl walls. i also want to be able to carve on hardpack, ski trees, and ski bumps easily. i really wanted a fat ski but maybe bacons are too fat for what i wanna do. so which should i get?

btw i am 5'9" 145 and would get 172 bacons and 171 jeronimos.

let me know, thanks
May 18 2010 6:24PM
0 0
profile picture
Kogu
Posts: 377 - Karma: 64
I've done a TON of research on both of these skis and I personally am going for the 2011 Sir Francis Bacons. They're getting a 27.5cm x 15mm rocker next year and a capped tip for lower weight with sidewall construction under the rest of the effective edge. Like the Armada 50/50 tech.
From everyone I've talked to that's ridden them they've all said that they can rail turns on hardpack/ice like no other fat ski they've ever been on. Obviously they're gonna kill the powder with rocker and so wide underfoot. Someone did say they're getting a little stiffer core next year so they'll manage more on the grooms (seeing as the rocker will make up for the lack of flex in soft stuff).

Overall looks like a sick ski. Send wazzucrewskier a pm and ask for his full review on em. Or searchbar it.
Can't wait to get mine!
May 18 2010 6:34PM
0 0
profile picture
Balto
Posts: 25985 - Karma: 4,404
pretty diff skis size wise...
May 18 2010 9:32PM
0 0
profile picture
410steeze
Posts: 1086 - Karma: 39
i know, i wanna know if people take sfbs in the park trees and bumps even with the 115 waist. if itll be too tough ima get jmos. i want sfbs but want to be able to do everything
May 18 2010 9:34PM
0 0
profile picture
RudyGarmisch
Posts: 25443 - Karma: 13,844
Some skiers use Hellbents only in the park. Ask NS if a ski can do something and you'll get the answer yes. When it comes to whats better at doing something... go with your intuition, you'll still get people telling you that Hellbents are great carving skis.
May 18 2010 10:34PM
0 0
profile picture
Kangbang
Posts: 14211 - Karma: 423
haha, i saw this guy last year doing cork 9's with bents. and no bents arent a good carving ski because some nser's are retarded. just research them both.
May 18 2010 11:02PM
0 0
profile picture
Kogu
Posts: 377 - Karma: 64
Also I'll add that the Jmo is stiffer so... maybe not as park playful, but better on grooms
May 19 2010 12:29AM
0 0
profile picture
410steeze
Posts: 1086 - Karma: 39
i know if i got them id get softer ones like i said in OP
May 19 2010 10:07AM
0 0
profile picture
Balto
Posts: 25985 - Karma: 4,404
really if you want a ski like the SFB get caylors, both are rockered(well, next years bacons are rockered) both are close in dimensions and length. The caylors will do better in pow and in the trees, but are still fun to mess around the park with, plus they come in a longer length if you are 6' or taller.
May 19 2010 12:01PM
0 0
profile picture
Kogu
Posts: 377 - Karma: 64
My bad, Idk how soft the Jmo will be made but I also haven't gotten a chance to flex/ride the SFB.

One thing about width though, I'm jumping straight onto a pair of 172 SFB's which are 115 underfoot. My skis (the only skis I've ever ridden extensively for multiple seasons) are 161 cm, 62 underfoot, non-twin, non-rockered. So they'll be a crazy change and the only thing I've heard from anyone I've talked to about them is that they're a little slower edge to edge. Which, I mean obviously they will be. But they then go on to say that the pros of a fatter ski like that outweigh the cons of a fat ski and it handles littler than you'd think. Biggest I've been on was 95 but it didn't feel too much slower and I could spin just fine on em.

I'd make the leap or at least really try to demo em.

./2 cents
May 19 2010 1:06PM
0 0
profile picture
Balto
Posts: 25985 - Karma: 4,404
shit if you are making that big a change, get j-mos. I know a few people who only rode race skis for years, then went out, bought something in the 100+ underfoot range and hated them for a long time, just because they never had a chance to rid something in between. the j-mo is designed to get you in the trees in the morning, and then back to the park in the after noon without that car stop at lunch many of us do, so they should be a great fit for you.
May 19 2010 1:40PM
0 0
profile picture
Kogu
Posts: 377 - Karma: 64
Yeah actually you know, I looked at the Jmos way before I even heard of the Bacon. But I found a rep who I'll be meeting up with at Hood this summer who said he can get me in's on Line and K2 gear 2011. I'm super excited to try out the Bacons which will be advantageous also to the point that I will get to see IF I like them.
Idk (I haven't heard/looked much, insight?) but I haven't really seen many ops for ON3P demos. I would love to ride em both but from what I've seen the Jmos aren't as easily/often demo-able from those I've asked. Could be that they're up-and-coming or something else but... I got the chance for the 2011 Bacons for discount and a sure demo opportunity so that's my focus atm. If I could find some Jmos to ride there's no doubt in my mind I would!! Without a second thought! I just have heard/found more on some Bacon so I'm gonna try it first (crunchy).
May 19 2010 2:04PM
0 0
profile picture
Balto
Posts: 25985 - Karma: 4,404
well if you are going to hood, swing down to portland and swing by the on3p factory. i know for a fact they have a pair of 181 jmo demos, not sure on 171
May 19 2010 2:16PM
0 0
profile picture
Kogu
Posts: 377 - Karma: 64
Google Maps says..... they're literally next door.
Alright, well I'll give them a holler when we're making the commute down and see what they got. Won't be til June so maybe they'll have some new demos by the time I get there!
Thanks!
May 19 2010 2:25PM
0 0
profile picture
OMGHEDIDNT
Posts: 706 - Karma: 12
dude u are highjacking this thread imo

It's like in 12 topics that u are getting SFB's next season.
May 19 2010 2:27PM
0 0
profile picture
410steeze
Posts: 1086 - Karma: 39
never really considered caylors, but my point for choosing these to skis is that i can choose between similar builds with different widths
May 19 2010 2:29PM
0 0
profile picture
Balto
Posts: 25985 - Karma: 4,404
next years bacons are VERY similar to caylors. rockered tip/tail, close flex
May 19 2010 2:47PM
0 0
profile picture
410steeze
Posts: 1086 - Karma: 39
yeah, but ill probably just get sfbs if i go wide cuz my shops getting them for next year
May 19 2010 2:58PM
0 0
profile picture
Dustin.
Posts: 13839 - Karma: 7,704
The Jeronimo rides like a park ski for the most part, and can hold it's own outside the park. If you want something that rides park well and also can ride Big mountain, get those. If you want pow skis you can also use in the park, get SFBs.
May 19 2010 4:05PM
0 0
profile picture
410steeze
Posts: 1086 - Karma: 39
alright, so you wouldnt recommend sfbs for all mountain purposes?
May 19 2010 4:47PM
0 0
profile picture
Lemuel
Posts: 14488 - Karma: 10,641
I would go longer than 171/2 if I were you. You should be skiing something near 180.
May 19 2010 7:34PM
0 0
profile picture
410steeze
Posts: 1086 - Karma: 39
but i am coming off 161's so i feel that 182 would be way too long for my liking with the extra width
May 19 2010 7:43PM
0 0
profile picture
OMGHEDIDNT
Posts: 706 - Karma: 12
u and kogu both ride 161? teh fuck?! thats so short. Rocker mostly makes skis ski shorter. Remember that.
May 19 2010 8:06PM
0 0
profile picture
Kogu
Posts: 377 - Karma: 64
Haha in my defense: I've had those 161's since I was 14 my first day skiing ever :P
May 19 2010 8:42PM
0 0
profile picture
410steeze
Posts: 1086 - Karma: 39
haha yeah and i was 5'4 when i got them 2 years ago. and yeah i know when i skied 176 alpha 2s even that seemed a bit long for what im used to. but i only used them for 2 days so i never really fully got used to it.
May 19 2010 9:03PM
0 0
profile picture
410steeze
Posts: 1086 - Karma: 39
does anyone think i would be better off with this years sfb or lizzies?
May 19 2010 9:17PM
0 0
profile picture
strongmark
Posts: 3278 - Karma: 883
made in china by robots vs made in america by shredders

tough decision
May 19 2010 9:48PM
0 0
profile picture
410steeze
Posts: 1086 - Karma: 39
kids not robots, but thats a fair point haha, i do wanna support a small american company. but i also get a MAJOR discount from my shop
May 19 2010 9:52PM
0 0
profile picture
Kogu
Posts: 377 - Karma: 64
The more I think about it, the more I think back to when I was on my boss' Lib Tech NAS which was 95 underfoot.
Coming from a ski like yours, I jumped 30 mm in the time it took to switch em, and I jumped like 10 cm. Rockered with camber and fatter, I felt no difference. Maybe a +100 width ski will be more intense of a change but.. Here I'll send you a review
May 19 2010 11:31PM
0 0
profile picture
Killa_BeeKnees
Posts: 211 - Karma: 30
probably pretty unrelated but im 5, 9 and i was wondering which legth of jmos i should get, 171 or 181?
May 28 2010 2:24AM
0 0
profile picture
bitels
Posts: 14 - Karma: 8
181
May 28 2010 4:45AM
0 0
profile picture
Lemuel
Posts: 14488 - Karma: 10,641
^^181 definitely. What's up with all these kids wanting shorter skis? The only ski I would ever, and did buy short was the lizzie. Even if you are coming off something absurdly short, it doesn't take long to get used to a longer ski, and you will enjoy it much better once you realize that they are the right size. You guys getting skis in the 170ish range that are 5'9" and taller, you are probably still growing, and will need a new pair of skis the year after. I always tell my friends this and they never believe me. What do you know, it's the end of the season and they want longer skis. Just a suggestion...
May 28 2010 9:09AM
0 0
profile picture
aSkiingWarPig
Posts: 92 - Karma: 48
^that´s true I went from 159 straight to 178 and got used to it in less than a day.
May 28 2010 11:49AM
0 0
profile picture
Literature
Posts: 13673 - Karma: 3,085
I have no idea how people are comparing SFBs to Jmos. Totally different skis; I've owned both.

The SFB is a fun (albeit short) all-mtnish jib stick that works well if your home hill gets 300+ inches a year and you don't spend much time in the park. They carve well, shred pow, and are nice and buttery. Ice and moguls are terrifying.

As both mrst and Smail mentioned, the Jmo is a narrowish all mtn ski that does well in the park, but you can still ski other areas well. Fine in bumps, ok on ice, fine in pow. If you live at a hill without much snow but gets the occasional dump, the Jmo would probably be a great one ski quiver.

If you're looking for a one ski quiver, the Jmo's the better choice for someone who wants to ski in the park. If there's more pow, probably the SFB.
May 28 2010 3:26PM
0 0
profile picture
Killa_BeeKnees
Posts: 211 - Karma: 30
idk man i just measured it and it would be like 7 inches above my head. and i feel like thats a bit long for park.
May 28 2010 4:13PM
0 0
profile picture
Mr_pretzel
Posts: 4616 - Karma: 1,289
then your not 5,9 181 is 6 feet
May 28 2010 4:15PM
0 0
profile picture
Killa_BeeKnees
Posts: 211 - Karma: 30
oh shit i guess i converted that wrong its more like 3 inches above my head
May 28 2010 5:32PM
0 0
profile picture
Mr_pretzel
Posts: 4616 - Karma: 1,289
1 inch
May 29 2010 3:14AM
0 0
profile picture
bogers
Posts: 365 - Karma: 8
i would go with the jmos i own a pair of 181s from last season and i love them they shred in park the carve up anything you put in front of them and there actually pretty fun in pow bacons obviously would be wider for pow and prolly float a lil better but jmos do well to so if you want a ski that can do it all i would buy the 181s though especially if you are planning on riding them in the pow
May 29 2010 4:43AM
0 0
profile picture
bogers
Posts: 365 - Karma: 8
i would go with the jmos i own a pair of 181s from last season and i love them they shred in park the carve up anything you put in front of them and there actually pretty fun in pow bacons obviously would be wider for pow and prolly float a lil better but jmos do well to so if you want a ski that can do it all i would buy the 181s though especially if you are planning on riding them in the pow
May 29 2010 4:43AM
0 0
profile picture
nickyp
Posts: 5673 - Karma: 215
We'd all love to have to have skis that are hand made on the west coast. But I can in no way justify $800 for a pair of ON3Ps, shipped,and if the OP is European too, he'll have the same problem.

Before people start recommending certain brands of ski to Euro kids, remember shipping is $175+ from the US, which is why a lot of ski brands are non-existent this side of the pond.
May 29 2010 5:12PM
0 0
profile picture
Mr_pretzel
Posts: 4616 - Karma: 1,289
i love having american contacts that can bring me my skis.
May 29 2010 5:19PM
0 0
profile picture
Malczyk
Posts: 1435 - Karma: 1,895
Bacons! I skied the 10/11 model (182, claim) a lot this season and it's a rad ski for all around, a bit wide but so agile, floaty and buttery. If you're in the EU I'd say go Line for the backend support too (local reps, shops, ect). Haven't skied the ON3P, dimensions sound great though.
May 29 2010 6:59PM
0 0
profile picture
207
Posts: 8969 - Karma: 3,846
although I've never ridden both of the skis, I've done a ton of research on them.

Honestly this is the ONLY time I'd pick Line over ON3P.

Sir Francis Bacon slay pow.
May 30 2010 10:32AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)