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!

Bacon Size

profile picture
I_liketobutter
Posts: 2664 - Karma: 997
Feel like a gaper for asking, but im going to buy a pair of bacons soon. 5'10 160. I live in mn so they'll get a few heavy park laps in this year. Buying them b/c my lizzies are toast after over 200 days on them. Taking a few trips out west this year and skiing trashed and dead lizzies in pow is not an option.

I've skied a few pairs of lizzies the past 5 years as my only ski. This included years living in CO and using them for pow as well. So basically i've been on a 172 the past 5 years and loved it, but they're lizzies so its different.

Are the 184's going to feel huge lapping a 200ft hill? or will the 178 suit me better?

Where do they measure the 184 on lines? Aren't lines usually measured shorter than other companies? (184 line = 188 k2?)

Thanks
Nov 16 2011 5:54PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
My buds about the same size as you and he's rippin on 178s. I'd say 178 for rippin everything, 184s if you riding alta bombin 50' cliffs.
Nov 16 2011 5:58PM
0 0
profile picture
_Jeffrey_
Posts: 1651 - Karma: 572
if your going to ski park i would go with a 178. i have the blue and yellow blends in a 183 and i'm the same height. they are way to long and heavy for park. its your choice though
Nov 16 2011 5:59PM
0 0
profile picture
I_liketobutter
Posts: 2664 - Karma: 997
worrd

can anyone else comment on how line measures their length?

i'll also mention that im not really into doing 10 sw ups and hucking spins. more of a bounce, press, and butter around skier. still 178's?
Nov 16 2011 10:40PM
0 0
profile picture
peyton
Posts: 1475 - Karma: 1,062
your 5-10.. get 178s. i mean long skis are sick if your killing it in the park but i think the 178 will serve your needs better
Nov 17 2011 1:10AM
0 0
profile picture
BjornR
Posts: 141 - Karma: 14
I got 178s and they measured up 174cm.
Nov 17 2011 4:35AM
0 0
profile picture
Tall_Paul
Posts: 958 - Karma: 57
Im 6'1 and got the bacon this year in the 184 because the effective edge will make the ski run like a 178-180. I also plan on ripping them in the park but for me the 178 is too small., then again i have 3 inches on you so the 178 should work out.
Nov 17 2011 9:12PM
0 0
profile picture
XtRemE11
Posts: 5680 - Karma: 246
im stuck with the same choice and its really tough..

im 5'10 150-155. i already have a dedicated park ski, and a dedicated pow ski (ep's), if i like these in pow ill sell the ep's and use the bacon for all my pow/ all mountain stuff. but i still plan on doing a lot of park, thats the only reason im choosing them over the opus.

i also had the old cambered lizzies, and i used them for pow, they werent great, especially center mounted you could really tell you needed a little more tip. but these are longer, and rockered, which should basically eliminate that completely.
if it were all pow, id go for the 184, if it were all park, id go 178, just dont know which one i could comprimise with the least negative outcome.

if the guy above is right and they are 4 cm shorter, ill go with 184's and have 180's
Nov 17 2011 9:20PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
They have more effective edge than last year and a cambered 184 only has 180 effective edge......uh fucking super faceplam!
Nov 17 2011 9:59PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
And by that I mean a fully cambered ski. Im well aware of the bacons underfoot camber. Still face palm worthy. Dude the 178 bacons ski real damn close to my 178 chronics. I jus rode em and they're real close. Great for spins and jibbin at that length. Seriously feels jus like a rockered chronic.
Nov 17 2011 10:04PM
0 0
profile picture
maxwell666
Posts: 554 - Karma: 20
straight pull my 184s are 180. kinda dissapointed in my decision to go so small, its going to be my freshy day ski, would rather have it closer to 190,
Nov 17 2011 10:11PM
0 0
profile picture
XtRemE11
Posts: 5680 - Karma: 246
ummm, still not sure what you are trying to say.. are you trying to say a normal camber 184 ski, only has 180cm of effective edge? because yeah i get that, i still choose my skis more based on their actual length instead of effective edge... its the total length that im concerned about for park, cause i dont like a big ass ski thats hard to whip around and gets caught on everything. for park i typically like a 175-180. i dont usually notice the amount of effective edge as much as i notice the overall length. my ep's which are 185, seemed perfect for powder length wise. and i liked the pretty small amount of effective edge in park, it was the huge amount of rise in the tip and tail i didnt like.
Nov 17 2011 11:23PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)