Sir francis bacon or elizabeth?

feezy

feezy

Active member
i wanna get new skis.

i want something versatile as hell.

i am 6'2" (ish?)

i weigh like 175 (ish>)

which size, kids? anyone know?

and yes, i want the waist. i love the feeling of a FAT ski.
 
sfb's they might be alightly small, but such a fun ski, thats yeah im getting the elizibeth (just a shorter sfb)
 
sick.

i am on 169 PEs right now and i am dying for more waist and length. now i just have to spend the next 8 months saving up for em.

fuck. i have to save up to move out, save up for my vacation to illinois this summer, and now my fucking skis.

if someone wants to sell me some bacons for a few hundred bones i will be forever grateful...
 
if your doing more park then all mtn -elizabeth (softer, better for buttering around, slow carved spins)

more all mtn then park- bacon (stiffer, wider, better for "real skiing")

 
thats the big dilemma right now.

my friend who i ski with mostly is a snowboarder and is way into park, but if i go by myself i love to ski everything. and i rarely get to ski real powder, which is why i have been considering the elizabeth.

how soft is it?
 
The bacon and lizzies are almost exactly the same flex, size etc. They have the same progressive sidecut pattern.... but he's 6'2 and 175, he would boss a lizzie around so hard it wouldn't be as fun as a ski at all
 
i kinda like the feeling of "bossing" my 169s around, but i kinda feel like i need more ski...

how tall and heavy is pollard? he uses the elizabeth for park, right?
 
pollard is like 5'9 I think, and not real heavy. He uses the lizzies for park exclusively, yea,

I really just think that the bacon is the best bet man, I am barely lighter than you, same height, and i have stiffer skis than these that are 180s, and i just feel like i stand over the tips way too much, they just get bossed around and they are way sketchy.

I would reccommend the SFB because it's pretty much the same ski, just a little longer, but because of how big you are it will make a big difference. 
 
The softness would be a major turnoff for a versitile ski in my opinion. Will be fun in pow, but suck in chop and only scare the hell out of you when going fast.
 
hey dude you should check the surface live life skis they come in a 179 and there a lil stiffer but still soft and they have a 112 under the waist check em out @ www.surfaceskis.com sick people too
 
I have both, but I'm smaller than you 5'11 and ~145lb.

For me, I don't see the bacons as a park/messing around ski.  I can't butter on them nearly as easily as the lizzies.  They just seem like a lot of ski to haul around for hardpack riding. 

The fact that the tips have early rise is probably the main reasoning.  They just don't seem kinda funky on anything hardpack because of the different tips and tails. 

Lizzies are my all-mountain, bacons are my powder day ski, so much fun in powder.  
 
it depends on what kind of skiing you do and where you live, the bacon is a little too fat to be used well in the park and anywhere except backcountry really, however, i love to rid the lizzys in the park and they do great everywhere on the mountain as well as in the backcountry. personally i think the the bacon is a little too fat for me, but i suppose thats just personal opinion. oh and i'm 6 foot 2 and wiehg about 160
 
How could it be TOO fat? I'm 2 inches smaller than you as well as weigh less... when I tried out the Bacons, I freaking adored them...

Plus they are green... SEXY.
 
I think fakieseven knows what hes talking about considering he is sponsored by line and has ridden both skis in the park and backcountry. he is also the same size as the other kid, 6'2 and 175lbs.

and as for your skis, you said you dont get to ski much powder so i guess an elizabeth woudl make more sense. 172 is pretty short tho.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top