New bacon vs blend

I_liketobutter

I_liketobutter

Active member
Has anyone skied both? Looking for a longer replacement to my completely beat lizzies. The ski will be rode in MN lapping a 200ft hill by rope and a couple trips out west. 5'10 155lbs.

How does the flex differ? My gf just got bacons and they feel stiffer than i expected.

I don't want to hear, "___ is a great do it all ski" or "get ___"

Why are they great? Why should i get one over the other.

Also, 178 or 183/4? 172 bacons measure 20-25mm shorter than 172 lizzies.
 
I did get Bacons in the end (178s). The swingweight is more than Lizzies (they are about 4cm longer) and I don't love the effect of variable effective edge on jumps. That said, they are infinitely more versatile than the Lizzies. They carve amazing (better probably), have way more pop and hold up better on mixed snow. They are just as buttery too, the rocker makes a big difference, initiation is slightly harder because underfoot they are stiffer (lizzies flexed right in front of the binding) but once you get your weight right they butter more smoothly and pop you out of it to boot.

The difference to me is this. The Bacons are a great all mountain jib tool and they ski pretty good in the park. The Lizzies are a great park ski that does pretty good all mountain. I think the Bacon carves better than the Blend, skis better in pow and isn't harder to spin. I'd def go for the Bacon of the two. Blend sizing is different too, 173 Blend is the same length as 178 Bacons.

In terms of sizing I'm 5'9 and 140, I find the 178 Bacon noticeably harder to spin than the Lizzies were, I probably wont use them as my primary park ski wheras i did with Lizzies. As a result I kind of wish I had the 184s, but I wouldn't dream of using the 184 for more than the occasional park lap. Your a bit bigger but I'd still go 178 since 90% of the time you'll be on a small hill lapping park.
 
thanks man, i really value your opinion as I know how well u know lizzies. my gf has a race background as well as myself, so when i saw here carving up the groomers w the bacon, I knew they'd hold up great out of the park. im pretty tempted to get the 184's since u I never spin more than 3 or 450 off anything, but then again thats a lot of ski to move around on a little park. great to hear they're just as buttery.

i've been seeing these park edits w keiran mcveigh (on blends) lately and its basically the exact same as how i ski. so it got me wondering if a more traditional (camber/shape) would better suit me.
 
Yeh I don't spin too much either, just slow spins. Traditional camber and shape I basically agree with. What I loved about the Lizzies (in the park) was that while they were fat and noodly, they still had a traditional shape so they were predictable and fun. I don't really like rockered skis with variable effective edge length in the park though. By that I mean skis with rocker that isn't matched by taper, I find that when I'm laying right in to a cork off a jump then effect of suddenly having more edge contact can hook/catch and put me off. I know tons of people have no problem with it, i just don't like it. I imagine it is less true with no taper at all because its less sudden, but with rise and then a little bit later taper, like on the Bacon, i noticed it quite a lot.

That said I think the Bacon is simply a better ski than the blend for almost everything really, if you could demo some how it would help, the Blend feels a lot different from the Lizzie with a longer turn radius and narrower waist (not necessarily bad just different), wheras the Bacon feels similar just with a bit more balls. Also next years blend is being changed to a lighter construction next year so might be more significantly different in terms of swingweight then. Not sure if you want that but its worth knowing i guess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top