Line Blend vs Sir Francis Bacon

D

disco2000

New member
Hi

I'm looking to pick up a new pair of skis for this winter, I was gonna go with some Sir Francis Bacons but I am wondering if the 2012 Blends would be "good enough" since I can get them for quite a bit cheaper.

I'm teaching in Hokkaido, so I ski mostly at Niseko, so quite a bit of powder riding, but I also want to ride a bit of park/groomers too of course.

I'm 6' and 140lbs, an intermediate skier. Do you think the Blend's 100mm waist is good enough, or will the SFB's be worth the extra dough?

Also, size recommendations would be appreciated too. I hear that the SFB's ride quite short, so I was thinking the 184cm, but is that the case for the Blends as well, or will 178's suffice?

 
if you want to spend the majority of your time outside the park, having more width with the bacons will be the way to go. if you like to have a ski that will feel closer to a park ski, get the blends. dont get me wrong, they ski fine, but the flex is softer than the bacons, making them a bit less sturdy at speed. still good ski tho.
 
get the blends, theyre a great quiver and you can still ride park with them, the bacons are a powder only ski
 
Thanks for the input so far.

I'll probably be riding about 50% powder, 30% groomer, 20% park, so I'm leaning towards the SFB at the moment.

Any suggestions about sizing for both skis? Would the 184 SFB be too long for my weight?
 
Definitely 184 and definitely SFB.

I'm considering swiching from Bacons to Blends but I ski 95% park, and even then I'm not sure. For 50% pow def bacon, maybe even opus.
 
Alright, so I can get a pretty good deal on 2012 Blends in 178, for my size (6', 140lbs) would that be a bit short, or would that be fine for riding powder but doing nothing too aggresive?
 
I ride 75% park, 25% all mtn with my bacons. Best park ski I ever owned, even tho they aren't marketed as park skis. Low swingweight and I love the flex. Mounted at midsole(-2cm from true center). I use them as one ski quiver. I don't even bring my park skis with me anymore, they always ended up being unused.

My 178 measures 174cm true length so they will be pretty short, 184 should suit you better.

 
Dude you are 6 foot how have you ever ridden anything shorter than 180?

I would say that if you are teaching have a ski with a more traditional side cut would help with all the FIS bullshit.

184 bacons all day long. Blends are way softer than the bacons so good for park but not so good for drops or crazy steeps or whatever.
 
You are a fucking dumb ass. You can ride Bacons where ever, they're an awesome quiver killer, the opus, not as much.
 
OP if your from Japan it be worth it to get two skis. A park/groomers/carving ski and then a Powder ski. Your in japan. It's a powder heaven. Your gonna want a super fat deep pow ski. But you might be from out of country and cant afford to bring back more than one ski. Or you just might tight on money.

If your set on one pair of skis SFB at 184 would be an awesome do every thing ski.

I would recommend picking up some type of rock skis for work. Many of days especially this last year here in CO where I wish I had a crappy pair of work ski to keep my good ski free of core shots. If you working on the mountain you could probably find something to use cheap or free.
 
Bacons are the best skis i have ever rode on , i am 5,9 and the 178's basically are the same size as my ninthward 176 park skis ............so definately go for the 184
 
I'd go Bacon's, skied them all last season and they were great in pow but still fun on the rest of the mtn / park.
 
I would go with the Blends. You will still get good flotation in pow but still be fun in the park. The price is just another bonus.
 
^This. But OP says he can only get one ski. You cant ride a Pow ski on in the park all the time.

SFB 184 OP. Get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top