Member of the Month

PartyBullshiit
March, 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!

Candide 2.0 vs Line Bacons vs Candide 4.0

profile picture
chicknfriedsteak
Posts: 984 - Karma: 4,691
So I'm new here, and I know you guys get a fuck ton of these threads, but just bare with me a moment.
I'm an intermediate skier and a beginner park rider (backflips, 360s, 270s ect.) I'm 5'8 140lbs and currently skiing on a pair of Line Chronics that I've done a pretty good job of trashing. I've been getting into more of the all mountain jibbing and powder skiing and want to pick up a new pair of skis that floats better and is maybe a bit stiffer.
My chronics are 172s but I'm planning on going to a 178, because when I tail press or nose but I don't have quite enough ski.
My questions are: how does the 2.0 perform in Powder, and how does the 4.0 perform on Hardpack. And would the Bacon be a good compromise between the other two. Any other thoughts about these skis or others is welcome.

Thanks for time y'all.
Jan 28 2015 11:42PM
4 0
profile picture
profa_212
Posts: 8633 - Karma: 32,533
Why not the 3.0? Seems that that would lessen the spread between the 2.0 and 4.0.
Jan 28 2015 11:56PM
0 0
profile picture
chicknfriedsteak
Posts: 984 - Karma: 4,691
My bad I got the 4.0 and the 3.0 mixed up.
Jan 29 2015 12:18AM
0 0
profile picture
3rik
Posts: 549 - Karma: 1,651
Get the 3.Zero, it's the same shape as the 3.0 just stiffer and with more sidecut and camber. Awesome all mountain ski that can also perform in the park.
Jan 29 2015 1:49AM
1 0
profile picture
Faction
Posts: 336 - Karma: 15,895
Hi, thanks for your interest in our gear!

The 2.0s are very versatile skis and we designed them as a all-mountain, freestyle oriented skis. They're easy and fun to play with, whether you're in the park or skiing around.
The main point to consider here is where you will mount them, which will largely affect how they will ski and their versatility.
If you mound them on recommended, they are true all mountain skis, will do well on powder (102mm underfoot, tip and tail rocker), and still playful enough to shred around the mountain.
Mount them more forward if you're looking to spend more time in the park, butter around etc.
Let us know if you have any more questions,
Cheers
Jan 29 2015 5:17AM
1 0
profile picture
chicknfriedsteak
Posts: 984 - Karma: 4,691
FactionHi, thanks for your interest in our gear!

The 2.0s are very versatile skis and we designed them as a all-mountain, freestyle oriented skis. They're easy and fun to play with, whether you're in the park or skiing around.
The main point to consider here is where you will mount them, which will largely affect how they will ski and their versatility.
If you mound them on recommended, they are true all mountain skis, will do well on powder (102mm underfoot, tip and tail rocker), and still playful enough to shred around the mountain.
Mount them more forward if you're looking to spend more time in the park, butter around etc.
Let us know if you have any more questions,
Cheers


Preferably center, I do a lot of tail pressing and buttering around, how do the 3.0s compare to the 2.0s as far as where to mount and buttering and and so on. I'm planning on using these for maybe 15-25 percent in the park at the most. More like 50 percent powder and 50 percent chewed up shitty snow.
Thanks
Jan 29 2015 10:28AM
0 0
profile picture
Faction
Posts: 336 - Karma: 15,895
rainydayinspiredPreferably center, I do a lot of tail pressing and buttering around, how do the 3.0s compare to the 2.0s as far as where to mount and buttering and and so on. I'm planning on using these for maybe 15-25 percent in the park at the most. More like 50 percent powder and 50 percent chewed up shitty snow.
Thanks


Hi,
The 3.0s are definitely a freeride oriented skis - 112mm underfoot, stiffer tail with a reduced rocker so the tail doesn't wash out and can hold you up well through all kind of (shitty) snow and while skiing fast.
It's Tim McChesney favorite when it comes to shredding around the moutain and hitting BC booters, cliffs etc.
If you have a pair dedicated to powder, I'll recommend the 2.0s for an everyday mountain slaying skis. If your new skis will be your only pair, then the 3.0s sound like the best option for you, if you don't spend a big amount of time in the park.
Hope this helps a bit!
Cheers
Jan 29 2015 10:58AM
0 0
profile picture
chicknfriedsteak
Posts: 984 - Karma: 4,691
I'll probably go with the 2.0s then since I ski switch a lot. Thanks!
Jan 29 2015 12:10PM
0 0
profile picture
Al.Capone
Posts: 661 - Karma: 2,779
Did you check out the 4frnt Devastators? I have the Turbo's in my quiver at the moment and this is the ski that replaced them in the lineup. The devastators are as pivoty as my turbo's but greasy and smooth. They can lay it down on the groomers but they do great in powder and crud. They have the reflect tech side cut going and its dimensions are 136-108-131. There's plenty of people killing it in the park and killing the big mountain with them. Check out Thayne Rich in the pow https://www.newschoolers.com/videos/watch/708389/4bi9-Goes-To-Alta and Pete Arneson in the park https://www.newschoolers.com/videos/watch/720246/SELF-EDIT-V2
Jan 29 2015 4:04PM
1 0
All times are Eastern (-4)