Member of the Month

partyandBS
December, 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!

Bacons in the park!

profile picture
Tall_Paul
Posts: 958 - Karma: 57
wondering if anyone has taken their Sir Francis bacons in the park yet this year. Unfortunately no one's open on the east coast yet and I'm just dieing to know how the perform in the park.
Dec 4 2011 12:03PM
0 0
profile picture
Tall_Paul
Posts: 958 - Karma: 57
well in PA at least, not the east coast...
Dec 4 2011 12:03PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
They're good. Ya gotta prefer a wider ski for park though and it takes slightly more effort for super tech stuff but that's any wide ski. That said though if your into a wider ski than it doesn't get better than the bacons for park. I have the 178 and it rips. My buddy has the 184 and it's still really good but to me it's a touch too long for mostly park. Some will disagree but that's just my opinion. If the bacon was my only ski I'd go 184 though.
Dec 4 2011 4:44PM
0 0
profile picture
natty.
Posts: 857 - Karma: 34
the bacons are perfect for park in my opinion, but i dont do tech rail tricks. i also dont know how relevant my opinion is being that i live in colorado and wont even consider buying anything skinnier than 100mm underfoot. once you go fat you never go back.
the bacons will be more fun than the blends but you can still feel comfortable on rails and it will be a lot more versatile than the mr. pollards opus. so its basically the perfect mix between the two.
Dec 4 2011 5:41PM
0 0
profile picture
DW.
Posts: 2683 - Karma: 74
Bacons are rumored to be somewhat of an elizabeth replacement. If you're feelin the wider skis like me, (shredding the groomers on my hellbents today) i'd go for it.
Dec 4 2011 8:13PM
0 0
profile picture
Tall_Paul
Posts: 958 - Karma: 57
thanks for your opinions guys, anymore? I'm looking for opinions of how they were one boxes/rails because that's what I primarily do.
Dec 4 2011 8:20PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
They're great for boxes/rails/tree grinds. I just find that a wider ski "sticks" to grinds easier due to the increased surface area. They won't do change ups quite as easily as an 85 underfoot but you get used to it. Most peeps who are riding somethin that wide don't have a super tech style anyway. Typically big floaty airs and long 50/50s, butters, presses. You develop a more chill floaty style. Looks way smother IMO so it's not a bad thing.
Dec 4 2011 8:27PM
0 0
profile picture
Tall_Paul
Posts: 958 - Karma: 57
thanks for the input man
Dec 4 2011 9:19PM
0 0
profile picture
I_liketobutter
Posts: 2664 - Karma: 997
how tall r u? weight? im still stuck between the 178 and 184. I'm not concerned about tech stuff. It's for MN/CO shredding
Dec 4 2011 9:26PM
0 0
profile picture
mountainviper
Posts: 1931 - Karma: -3
I'm 6' and 190. What's important to understand about my decision to get 178s is that I'm using the opus as an all mountain ripper and riding the bacons as a park/all mountain jibber. For that I prefer a shorter ski so it may not be for everyone. Like I said before though, my buddy has the 184 and I've ridden it. It's good and for all mountain the 184 is perfect but to me it felt just a touch too long for spins.
Dec 4 2011 9:46PM
0 0
profile picture
I_liketobutter
Posts: 2664 - Karma: 997
worrd, i think ill prob get 178's. im 5'10 155 and i'm used to lizzies
Dec 4 2011 10:03PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)