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!

Spread Your Ski Knowledge: Ski Help SFB vs Jeffrey

profile picture
shredsticks
Posts: 108 - Karma: 33
So I'm in the Market for ome new skis, and I figured why not ask the fine folk on newschoolers for some help spreading knowledge.

I'm 5'8"(173cm) about 180lb(82kg) and am looking for a solid midfat, all mtn ski for northern New England where I ski almost entirely trees, chutes, bumps and steep liftline-type terrain. This occurs mostly at Smuggs, Bush, Mad river, and Jah Peak.

My style is a bit odd where I pick my way around things and would love something nimble and quick turning that I can throw around but then go apeshit and huck my meat off anything infront of me.

I want a ski that would also be decent with the occasional jump or rail on the way down, but is definitely a 90 to 10 trees to park kind of ski.

I've had my eyes on the SIr Francis Bacon which comes highly reccomended, but also like the looks of the ON3P Jeffrey or even the Armada JJ. I've also skied the Worth George and Magic and loved both of them, but I am a poor college student so that's out of the question.

Give me some input, +k wil be awarded, any ideas are welcome.

Thanks in advance.
Mar 14 2013 11:07PM
14 4
profile picture
TRAP_CHEF
Posts: 1172 - Karma: 279
Jeffery it sounds like you want a. Stiffer ski the jeffery will provide this although the jj has the shortest turn radius it is really soft i think you will enjoy the jeffery the most maybe someone else can chirp in about how they are
Mar 14 2013 11:30PM
0 0
profile picture
SwagtasticWalrus
Posts: 1268 - Karma: 184
I stare at your icon all the time..

Op, I think the Bacons ore the jeffrey will suit you well. Both sick skis for sure. I would get the Jeffreys if I could but I can't justify another all mtn ski:/
Mar 15 2013 12:12AM
0 0
profile picture
TheWakes.
Posts: 685 - Karma: 235
if u want to pick your way around things go with a 178 bacon.
Mar 15 2013 1:59AM
0 0
profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
The Jeffrey was my primary backcountry ski and light setup this year in VT. I used them 25 days (20 touring, 5 Mad River). They were very playful and I was able to put them on any line I wanted to. Additionally, they skied the whole mountain pretty well on those lift serve days, even with Dynafits on them. I doubt many people use them as a primary touring ski (BG or Vicik take that role from what I have seen and heard), but I have Caylors as well and BG's were a little too close to those width-wise. At 110 underfoot with some mild camber and good rocker, I really like how the Jeffreys are designed and how they ski.

I can't speak for the SFB or JJ since I have not skied them, but my experience with the Jeffreys has been far above expectations.
Mar 15 2013 9:28PM
1 0
profile picture
Dirty.Harry.
Posts: 1779 - Karma: 351
Oh and for reference, I have the 186 ones and I am 5'8" 175.
Mar 15 2013 9:31PM
0 0
profile picture
[J_Gasper]
Posts: 2983 - Karma: 1,594
Id for sure rule out the JJ. IMO they suck in everything but trees and soft snow.

What it comes down to is $ for the Jeffrey vs. SFB. If your willing to toss up the money for the Jeffrey, id for sure go for it. Its gonna last longer than the SFB, its a tad fatter, and I hear it has better hard pack performance. I have never ridden the SFB, but i absolutely love my 12/13 Jeffreys.

Anything wider than the SFB/Jeffrey, you lose versitility. Anything narrower, it doesnt float as well. Thats why i think a 108-110 waist ski is perfect for EC, or a fat ski for the Midwest.
Mar 15 2013 11:03PM
1 0
profile picture
Bertrand
Posts: 423 - Karma: 457
My roommate has 184 bacons, I have 186 Jeffreys.

He is 5'9" 150, I'm 5'10" 185.

Giving you a side by side between the skis, and a basic review of the Jeffrey.

Differences between the skis. Bacons are lighter. Jeffreys have a substantial amount more rocker than the bacons, as well as more camber than the bacons. Jeffreys are very tapered, bacons are very blunt. Flex on the bacons is consistent, medium flex. Jeffreys are medium flex tip and tail early flex, then deep flex get super stiff.

I've spent over 45 days skiing on my jeffreys. They have crushed everything I have thrown at them. Pre season groomers, normal groomers, icy trees, slushy trees, slushy bumps, normal day of skiing, 5 feet of sierra cement, 24 inches of champagne. I've done a full park day on them as well. My skiing style is a mix of charging and dicking around. On open faces, I turn minimally. In trees and on groomers, side booters are my friend. This ski lets me do whatever, whenever.

I have mine mounted at -1.7 from true center. I have done 2 base repairs, not needed because they were not core shots, but just wanted them to look pretty again. Would have definitely been core shots on another ski. Edges are still intact despite hitting more rocks than snow this season.

I will only buy ON3P skis in the future. My roommate also loves his bacons, but only has 2 days on them.
Mar 16 2013 2:06AM
1 0
profile picture
shredsticks
Posts: 108 - Karma: 33
Hell Yeah thank you everyone awesome response.

Considering the SFB has the uniform flex and the jeffery is stiffer underfoot i'm going to assume the Jeffery would ride better with Guardian/Duke setup, which i plan to invest in. Correct me if I'm wrong with this assumption.

How would the additional Rocker, and subsequent additional length of the jeffery do in tight situations you find alot in the backcountry up here? (i mean i will most likely get a longer ski if it has more rocker)

Also random question but if someone in North Vt has a pair of Jeffrey's at MRG or Smuggs with Adjustable bindings, I'm dying to ski it and will pay you 20$. Nearest place to demo is in DC. Which is a bummer.
Mar 19 2013 10:30PM
1 0
profile picture
I_liketobutter
Posts: 2664 - Karma: 997
seriously?

It'll be a tough decision, both seem like great skis for you. I can't comment on the jeffreys as I have not skied them. But I do love my bacons for situations that you describe. They really are a ridiculously good all around ski. I used to race FIS, they tear groomers pretty damn well, no hesitation to let them go but at the same time you can rip slalom turns if you want. They've been great in the trees and great in the park.

Specific questions about the bacon?
Mar 20 2013 12:43AM
2 0
profile picture
JIB_WALRUS
Posts: 671 - Karma: 130
A ski that is hand made in the US is going to last longer(and ski better) than a ski made in china by k2 that is just stamped out on a large scale production line.
Mar 20 2013 1:17AM
0 2
profile picture
I_liketobutter
Posts: 2664 - Karma: 997
i have a pair of elizabeths with 400+ days on them. my previous pair had 150+. my current bacons look brand new after 50+ days like they should. mind you a lot of those days on the bacons are spinning laps on a 200' vert hill with a rope tow hitting 3-5 rails per minute. line's powder/fat skis are not anthems and are not afterbangs.

until i experience otherwise in terms of quality, im going to question blanket statements like the one above.
Mar 20 2013 1:46AM
3 0
profile picture
RudyGarmisch
Posts: 25443 - Karma: 13,844
Materials, like core, base and sidewall are more important in many respects to the a ski longevity than the location where its pressed.
Mar 20 2013 3:09AM
4 0
profile picture
JIB_WALRUS
Posts: 671 - Karma: 130
Well of course but today it seems like companies producing out of the U.S. that have any sort of legitimacy produce a better ski. Because the use better cores, bases, sidewalls, top sheets, and edges like you guys at on3p.
Mar 20 2013 7:58PM
0 2
All times are Eastern (-5)