Member of the Month

theabortionator
April, 2025

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!

Replacement for 2014 line bacon

profile picture
Mahii
Posts: 17 - Karma: 29
Hey ski peeps I'm looking for some help on multiple fronts. I have decided to replace my tired 2014 line Bacon 178's with a new ski. This ski will sport the new shift binding and be treated as a quiver. I am having problems

A bit about me:
-Switched from boarding to skiing 8 years ago
-38 and somewhat in shape
- 6foot 195 lbs
- ski 50-80 days a year
- own both the 2014 line bacon and the 2014 Pollard Opus (I ride the Bacon's 100% of the time now)
- I ski everything from park, to steeps, to tight trees (tight trees being my preference)
- ride switch
- I mount my skis more centered and have problems skiing the more traditional mount
-prefer ski width under foot to be 104-110
- like floaty, fast turning, jibby skis.
- have bad knees meow ( the body falls apart at this age)

Questions:
1.Are the new 2019 line Bacon's not a good choice anymore (many reviews point to them not being as good as the 2014 era)
2. My current line Bacon's are 178's mounted at Pollard's choice, do I size up to 184? This worries me on tight steep tree lines. Or would sizing up make the tree lines less sketchy
3. Do I just choose another ski?
skis contemplated:
- 2019 line bacon 178 or 184
- Faction CT 3.0 182
- Nordica Enforcer 110 (worried about mount point)
- Fischer ranger 102FR 177

So essentially what ski and size should I get? Any other skis I should add?Wow this was way too long of a post
6 years ago
2 0
profile picture
LineSkier
Posts: 243 - Karma: 446
You might like the CT 3 mounted at the "Candide line."

**This post was edited on Dec 19th 2018 at 11:00:04am
6 years ago
2 1
profile picture
TRVP_ANGEL
Posts: 12698 - Karma: 119,881
Bacons have changed a lot since 2014 era but not a terrible choice still.

might i suggest thanos dog?
6 years ago
6 1
profile picture
Mahii
Posts: 17 - Karma: 29
TRVP_ANGELBacons have changed a lot since 2014 era but not a terrible choice still.

might i suggest thanos dog?


I was thinking that they are a bit thin under foot, that being said the 106 looked like a good candidate other than the terrible top sheet.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mahii
Posts: 17 - Karma: 29
LineSkierYou might like the CT 3 mounted at the "Candide line."

**This post was edited on Dec 19th 2018 at 11:00:04am


Yah, I agree. Was just worried about the turning radius as I see them as a more point, charge, and pop kind of ski. Debating renting a pair for a day to see if they match what I need
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
LineSkier
Posts: 243 - Karma: 446
MahiiYah, I agree. Was just worried about the turning radius as I see them as a more point, charge, and pop kind of ski. Debating renting a pair for a day to see if they match what I need


I've demoed them myself. Two things to keep in mind: the demos will almost certainly be mounted at the freeride line or whatever they call it and not the more centered "Candide line"; the tails can get pretty hooky if they aren't detuned, so ask the shop or check the edges.

Otherwise I think they're a really good light playful ski with a lot of pop. They're great in the trees and on soft snow but aren't particularly damp on hard pack.

**This post was edited on Dec 19th 2018 at 2:26:43pm
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
LineSkier
Posts: 243 - Karma: 446
Also have you considered Sick Days or Bentchetler 100's?
6 years ago
1 0
profile picture
-eREKTion-
Posts: 1632 - Karma: 10,987
Thanos dog is a good choice also the Jskis Vacation.
6 years ago
1 2
profile picture
Mahii
Posts: 17 - Karma: 29
LineSkierI've demoed them myself. Two things to keep in mind: the demos will almost certainly be mounted at the freeride line or whatever they call it and not the more centered "Candide line"; the tails can get pretty hooky if they aren't detuned, so ask the shop or check the edges.

Otherwise I think they're a really good light playful ski with a lot of pop. They're great in the trees and on soft snow but aren't particularly damp on hard pack.

**This post was edited on Dec 19th 2018 at 2:26:43pm


Yah, thanks for the info... Was thinking the same thing with the binding mount which is a slight worry. I'll give them a shot.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mahii
Posts: 17 - Karma: 29
LineSkierAlso have you considered Sick Days or Bentchetler 100's?


The sick days are an interesting thought... Mount points are more traditional, and I'd be moving to a more centered mount. Don't know how that would affect the turn initiation. Have looked, just not persued.

The bent 100's seemed like they may fit the bill. I went into my local shop and did some flex tests. Don't know if they are even close to the same ski as the 120. The flex in the rear is a bit more stiff than I would like and to me would throw me off if I had them center mounted. 100 under foot would make me think I would need more under there for a pow day. I don't know if that boat hull technology will lift it out of some of the deep.

One thing to mention is that I'm riding the BC west coast, so my thought was to try and have a little bit wider ski. Technology better now to go thinner?
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
G5_KiD
Posts: 263 - Karma: 383
can confirm the newer bacons are super fun, im 5'9" and ski the 184's. much quicker turning radius, still manageable in tight stuff, and still a good amount of float for being 104. i think they would be a sick option for a 1 ski quiver.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
DrZoidberg
Posts: 5676 - Karma: 4,299
I would imagine 178 bacons are a bit small for you. I just bought 178s and I'm small at 5'5" 120lbs. I demoed whatever year the white with the blue tree ones were (not this years blue ones), and the pair I bought is last years, which I haven't ridden yet. I was a bit worried the 178 would be extra ski for me when I demoed them, but they really don't ski long and they're very manageable. Although I guess it depends what you like as far as ski length. If they were super stiff and rigid it'd be a different story, but they're not.

But yeah, I like that the turn radius on bacons is pretty tight and they're overall very compliant without being unstable. A lot of other mid fat skis have a longer turn radius and are aimed more at going fast, but I was fine going fast on bacons.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
LineSkier
Posts: 243 - Karma: 446
MahiiThe sick days are an interesting thought... Mount points are more traditional, and I'd be moving to a more centered mount. Don't know how that would affect the turn initiation. Have looked, just not persued.

The bent 100's seemed like they may fit the bill. I went into my local shop and did some flex tests. Don't know if they are even close to the same ski as the 120. The flex in the rear is a bit more stiff than I would like and to me would throw me off if I had them center mounted. 100 under foot would make me think I would need more under there for a pow day. I don't know if that boat hull technology will lift it out of some of the deep.

One thing to mention is that I'm riding the BC west coast, so my thought was to try and have a little bit wider ski. Technology better now to go thinner?


If I were in your shoes I'd probably want two pairs: One all-mountain/freeride twin around 95-ish with camber underfoot and rocker in the tips/tails, then something 110+ for true pow days. I've heard amazing things about the Bent 120's but not tried them myself.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
dpskiFORLIFE
Posts: 6 - Karma: 41
I would definitely look into Atomic bentchetlers
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
CalumSKI
Posts: 4379 - Karma: 26,123
TRVP_ANGELBacons have changed a lot since 2014 era but not a terrible choice still.

might i suggest thanos dog?


Thanks you TRVP
Also mabye poachers even though they are a bit stiffer than the legendary THANOS DOG
6 years ago
1 0
profile picture
Newschoolers
Posts: 486 - Karma: 64,026
Some pretty questionable advice in this thread given he wants a ski to replace a 108mm underfoot soft flexing ski.
- So firstly, don't buy an ARV 96 or a Poacher (obviously) they are both skinnier and stiffer than what you're used to.
- Secondly, OP, you really are riding skis that are pretty short for you at 6ft/195lbs, especially with the 178 Bacon actually measuring out at like 175. You should at least try spending a couple of days on something longer and see how you get along. For reference, I rode the 184 Bacon and I'm 5'9 and 145lbs.

I would say you probably should be looking in the 184 sort of range for what you are talking about, especially given the near center mount (Pollard's choice was -2cm from true I believe) however, if you do decide you want to go with the 178 length that could just be what suits you.
As for the skis mentioned so far:
- The new Bacon is not a 'worse' ski than the old one, but it is a very different ski (lighter, stiffer etc). I liked both but they don't feel much like the same ski aside from the short sidecut. The durability of the new Bacon on rails is also not that hot in my experience.
- Nordica/Fischer are too directional to be ideal at the mount you want to be at.
- The CT 3.0 is a more chargy/less surfy ski, but it could work. If you're looking at faction, the Prodigy 3.0 is closer to the Bacon in terms of surfy feel, though it is more rockered.
- The ARV 106 is the closest ski at the moment to the old Bacon, they definitely share a lot of on-snow feel despite a longer radius. The 180 is a touch longer than the old 178 Bacon so that could work too.
- Other options might include: Moment PB&J Jib (the regular model is way stiffer than the Bacon), K2 Marksman (quite a similar construction feel to the old bacon) works great in tight spaces, probably some others I can't think of right now.

Edit: Twig, signed in on this account by accident

**This post was edited on Dec 20th 2018 at 11:01:55am
6 years ago
8 0
profile picture
HaydenB
Posts: 1074 - Karma: 8,190
TRVP_ANGELBacons have changed a lot since 2014 era but not a terrible choice still.

might i suggest thanos dog?


Wonderful choice
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mahii
Posts: 17 - Karma: 29
NewschoolersSome pretty questionable advice in this thread given he wants a ski to replace a 108mm underfoot soft flexing ski.
- So firstly, don't buy an ARV 96 or a Poacher (obviously) they are both skinnier and stiffer than what you're used to.
- Secondly, OP, you really are riding skis that are pretty short for you at 6ft/195lbs, especially with the 178 Bacon actually measuring out at like 175. You should at least try spending a couple of days on something longer and see how you get along. For reference, I rode the 184 Bacon and I'm 5'9 and 145lbs.

I would say you probably should be looking in the 184 sort of range for what you are talking about, especially given the near center mount (Pollard's choice was -2cm from true I believe) however, if you do decide you want to go with the 178 length that could just be what suits you.
As for the skis mentioned so far:
- The new Bacon is not a 'worse' ski than the old one, but it is a very different ski (lighter, stiffer etc). I liked both but they don't feel much like the same ski aside from the short sidecut. The durability of the new Bacon on rails is also not that hot in my experience.
- Nordica/Fischer are too directional to be ideal at the mount you want to be at.
- The CT 3.0 is a more chargy/less surfy ski, but it could work. If you're looking at faction, the Prodigy 3.0 is closer to the Bacon in terms of surfy feel, though it is more rockered.
- The ARV 106 is the closest ski at the moment to the old Bacon, they definitely share a lot of on-snow feel despite a longer radius. The 180 is a touch longer than the old 178 Bacon so that could work too.
- Other options might include: Moment PB&J Jib (the regular model is way stiffer than the Bacon), K2 Marksman (quite a similar construction feel to the old bacon) works great in tight spaces, probably some others I can't think of right now.

Edit: Twig, signed in on this account by accident

**This post was edited on Dec 20th 2018 at 11:01:55am


Thanks for the info. I agree fully that my old Bacon's are too short for me especially since I gained weight. I'm over flexing the ski meow and it don't feel right.

The arv 106 is a good candidate which my buddy has just bought. I'm going to see if I can squeeze of a ride on them next week.

Thoughts on
ON3P Kartel 108
J skis the metal (heavy IMO)
Liberty Origin 106
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mahii
Posts: 17 - Karma: 29
G5_KiDcan confirm the newer bacons are super fun, im 5'9" and ski the 184's. much quicker turning radius, still manageable in tight stuff, and still a good amount of float for being 104. i think they would be a sick option for a 1 ski quiver.


Thanks, they are still on my list. There is just no way to test as it seems like not many ride them any more
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Greg_K
Posts: 963 - Karma: 2,791
The Armada ARV 106 and K2 Marksman come to mind as similar skis to your old Bacons. In the Faction line, the Candide 2.0 would be the most similar in flex and mount with the 3.0 being stiffer and more directional. Still think you should consider the current Sir Francis Bacon as it does many things better than the old especially when you get it in the 184cm length for your size. One of the few drawbacks to the newer Bacon is it does have standard edges so it won't take rail abuse as well as some of the other options that have beefy edges. Having skied the older bacon and owning the 2018, the new one still has that fun, playful feel you like. Some of the "bad reviews" for the newer version of Bacons came when they changed the profile in 2016 and went TOO light with it. Was easily bucked around in crud and wasn't very stable. In 2017 versions and later, there is a heavier(but still lighter than yours) core and it is a much better ski. It will still turn on a dime with your size in the 184cm size.

Of the JSkis, The Vacation would be the better bet over the stiffer, heavier Metal which is more of a charger than what you're used to. The ON3P Kartel 108 would be a great ski thats playful but with a beefier backbone and fantastic build quality.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mahii
Posts: 17 - Karma: 29
Greg_KThe Armada ARV 106 and K2 Marksman come to mind as similar skis to your old Bacons. In the Faction line, the Candide 2.0 would be the most similar in flex and mount with the 3.0 being stiffer and more directional. Still think you should consider the current Sir Francis Bacon as it does many things better than the old especially when you get it in the 184cm length for your size. One of the few drawbacks to the newer Bacon is it does have standard edges so it won't take rail abuse as well as some of the other options that have beefy edges. Having skied the older bacon and owning the 2018, the new one still has that fun, playful feel you like. Some of the "bad reviews" for the newer version of Bacons came when they changed the profile in 2016 and went TOO light with it. Was easily bucked around in crud and wasn't very stable. In 2017 versions and later, there is a heavier(but still lighter than yours) core and it is a much better ski. It will still turn on a dime with your size in the 184cm size.

Of the JSkis, The Vacation would be the better bet over the stiffer, heavier Metal which is more of a charger than what you're used to. The ON3P Kartel 108 would be a great ski thats playful but with a beefier backbone and fantastic build quality.


Thanks Greg,

I just ran into a guy at a local shop that has last year's Bacon's. He loves them with the caveat that he's selling them at the end of the year due to durability.

I took a look at the Bacon's he brought in for a tune and they looked gnarly. Delam all over.. under foot glued, front glued, top sheet was meh. I started looking for delamination issues on the net and this seems like a frequent issue.

How have your Bacon's held up for you? Do you ride the *bleep* out of them?

I took my Bacon's out the other day and was reminded how I love them for their pop and turning capabilities. I'm still leaning towards the Bacon's in general as I can't seem to shake the feeling that Pollard knows how to shape a ski.
Man, without lines/K2's Pro's I doubt they'd sell as many skis. I'm a sucker in the making.

Maybe I'll just buy a bulletproof Icelandic Nomad 105, center mount it and call it a day. o_O

Ive had the flu the last couple of days, so have not been able to test anything.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Greg_K
Posts: 963 - Karma: 2,791
MahiiThanks Greg,

I just ran into a guy at a local shop that has last year's Bacon's. He loves them with the caveat that he's selling them at the end of the year due to durability.

I took a look at the Bacon's he brought in for a tune and they looked gnarly. Delam all over.. under foot glued, front glued, top sheet was meh. I started looking for delamination issues on the net and this seems like a frequent issue.

How have your Bacon's held up for you? Do you ride the *bleep* out of them?

I took my Bacon's out the other day and was reminded how I love them for their pop and turning capabilities. I'm still leaning towards the Bacon's in general as I can't seem to shake the feeling that Pollard knows how to shape a ski.
Man, without lines/K2's Pro's I doubt they'd sell as many skis. I'm a sucker in the making.

Maybe I'll just buy a bulletproof Icelandic Nomad 105, center mount it and call it a day. o_O

Ive had the flu the last couple of days, so have not been able to test anything.


As soon as you ride rails hard, all bets are off for skis not really made for that abuse. If you ride the current Bacon's everywhere but rails, you'd probably be okay but they lack the beefy bases and edges like yours or skis like ON3P Kartel, Armada ARV etc. I just do occasional park laps over jumps and rails aren't my thing. I'd rather hit natural features and do glades and trees. So my Bacon's and Bacons that I've seen used as daily drivers outside of the park are in good shape still and although I ski fast, I'm not as hard on gear as others. I like more "playful charger" skis myself and just picked up a pair of Moment PB&J to add to the quiver in that size range and my buddy is using my Bacons and he's loving them.

So, if you want a similar feel to yours and still want to do rails in the park(or just a beefier built ski), the Kartel 108 and the improved 2019 ARV106 would be great skis. They would have great performance everywhere and tip/tail tapers and shapes similar to Pollard skis. They will be more stable than your current Bacon's or new Bacon's too. The Origin 106 is supposed to be a great, fun playful ski in that range too but not sure if it's really designed for park abuse and more of a well built all mountain twin with a -8cm mount. Have met people that love them but they use them outside the park.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mahii
Posts: 17 - Karma: 29
Greg_KAs soon as you ride rails hard, all bets are off for skis not really made for that abuse. If you ride the current Bacon's everywhere but rails, you'd probably be okay but they lack the beefy bases and edges like yours or skis like ON3P Kartel, Armada ARV etc. I just do occasional park laps over jumps and rails aren't my thing. I'd rather hit natural features and do glades and trees. So my Bacon's and Bacons that I've seen used as daily drivers outside of the park are in good shape still and although I ski fast, I'm not as hard on gear as others. I like more "playful charger" skis myself and just picked up a pair of Moment PB&J to add to the quiver in that size range and my buddy is using my Bacons and he's loving them.

So, if you want a similar feel to yours and still want to do rails in the park(or just a beefier built ski), the Kartel 108 and the improved 2019 ARV106 would be great skis. They would have great performance everywhere and tip/tail tapers and shapes similar to Pollard skis. They will be more stable than your current Bacon's or new Bacon's too. The Origin 106 is supposed to be a great, fun playful ski in that range too but not sure if it's really designed for park abuse and more of a well built all mountain twin with a -8cm mount. Have met people that love them but they use them outside the park.


After reading about the Moment PB&J and the Candide 2.0 I realize that I'm just going to have to bite the bullet on a product. My dreams of a one ski quiver are slowly being dashed. Haha I just want them ALL!

Thanks for all your insight, you seem to know your bacon.

I'll be trying the ARV 106 in a couple days as well as a random choice. We will see where it takes me.

Final thought is my park days are most likely behind me with the occasional jaunt here and there. My Bacon's are not too much of an eye sore, so maybe something less ruggid will be fine.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Greg_K
Posts: 963 - Karma: 2,791
MahiiAfter reading about the Moment PB&J and the Candide 2.0 I realize that I'm just going to have to bite the bullet on a product. My dreams of a one ski quiver are slowly being dashed. Haha I just want them ALL!

Thanks for all your insight, you seem to know your bacon.

I'll be trying the ARV 106 in a couple days as well as a random choice. We will see where it takes me.

Final thought is my park days are most likely behind me with the occasional jaunt here and there. My Bacon's are not too much of an eye sore, so maybe something less ruggid will be fine.


Candide 2.0 would also be another softer, playful ski in that range with the 3.0 being a little stiffer and a little more directional. The PB&J is stiffer with a longer turning radius so more of a charger that’s still playful. The Kartel would have similar great build quality like a Moment ski but more playful like your current Bacons.

So try out the ARV 106 and see what you think. Armada like every other company have wider or skinnier skis to eventually build up the quiver. Lots of great skis out there that would work for you.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Kevski
Posts: 7056 - Karma: 2,788
For what it’s worth I’m transitioning from a 2008 bacon (pre-rocker, 115 waist) to a Kartel 108 as my daily ski for playing all over the mountain.
Also BC-based, 6’ 165 and bought the 186. Haven’t had the chance to take them out yet but my research suggested that they’ll have all the fun of my past bacons with more support to send when I want to. Stiffer but super rockered to be still playful.
I can update when I take them out in the next couple days if you’re still debating.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
freeskibum82
Posts: 6355 - Karma: 5,056
Marksman in a 184 or Bentchetler 100 in a 180. If you like jibby quick skis, dont get anything with metal in them.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
SoAnG
Posts: 386 - Karma: 388
You should take a closer look at the K2 Marksman. They have a liberal range of mounting points and will still ski as intended if you still choose to mount close to center. ON3P Kartel is another solid choice for you. They have less flex but have more rocker then the Marksman which keeps it in the "playful" side of things. Good luck OP
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Twig
Posts: 6469 - Karma: 61,989
MahiiThanks for the info. I agree fully that my old Bacon's are too short for me especially since I gained weight. I'm over flexing the ski meow and it don't feel right.

The arv 106 is a good candidate which my buddy has just bought. I'm going to see if I can squeeze of a ride on them next week.

Thoughts on
ON3P Kartel 108
J skis the metal (heavy IMO)
Liberty Origin 106

Gonna briefly weigh back in here, mostly on the Kartel. The Origin is a much more directional ski than the Bacon, the Metal seems unnecessary since J make the same (or nearly the same) shape (the Vacation) with no metal in which will be much closer to the Bacon (not that I have skied those sadly, hopefully I can try some this season).

It's generally against the NS rules to say anything against ON3Ps and with some good reason, they are great people making great skis. The Kartel 108 is definitely a great ski, however, the style of skiing that fits it best is different to the old Bacon. The old Bacons (and, to a decreasing but still relevant degree, skis like the ARV 106, newer Bacon and Marksman) ski best with a fairly centered stance (I'm talking about the skier rather than the mounting point). If you drive them too hard through the tips, you can overpower them, so they reward a balanced ski stance. The Kartel (and all ON3P skis I've tried) feel much more comfortable when being driven hard (even when mounted fairly far forward), and don't, in my opinion, ski very well when they aren't being pushed. If you are the former kind of skier, and it sounds like you probably are, then I would say they wouldn't be that fun to ski.
6 years ago
1 0
profile picture
WorstSkierOTM
Posts: 7 - Karma: 25
Hey man

For what it's worth I rode the Francis Bacon with the black top sheet and shark graphic (fairly similar to the current one) all last season. They were my daily work skis 7 days a week so I got a lot of time on them. I'm roughly 5'7 and own the 179cm and spent the entire season wishing I had gone longer. Even though they have made the bacons stiffer in recent years they are still relatively easy to push to the limit when railing turns on hard snow, an issue I felt was exacerbated by having the shorter length. They were fun to ski in up to boot top pow, but again being fairly flexy and not having much ski in front of me they became tricky in deeper snow. I found them to be most fun in late season slush/soft snow. They have a really surfy feel and great pop, and are awesome for hitting natural trannys. They're great in moguls and trees as they are really easy to pivot but as others have mentioned this short turning radius coupled with their lightness means they get deflected very easily in heavier chop.

I waited until late season to start taking them in the park and they did not hold up well. Broke edges and the top sheet and base began to separate from the sidewall under the binding very quickly. I loved the bacons but feel that the areas I didn't like so much (less beefy construction, inability to drive hard, lightness) are things solved by the Kartel 108s. So I'm switching to them this season.
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Cade2
Posts: 2124 - Karma: 2,706
Definetly go 190 on the bacons
6 years ago
0 0
profile picture
Mahii
Posts: 17 - Karma: 29
To give an update to all the peeps that helped.

I tried out a pair of ARV 106's and they skied fantastic. I found that they actually like to charge more than the bacons and still provided a nice pop with the added bonus of being more stable. with all that being said, I did find that they forced me to ski different than I am used to and was not keen for that.
I talked with a couple ski buddies that had rode the Faction ct3.0's and they suggested that I stay away from the candide 3.0's as I tend to not ski they way those are supposed to be ridden. fast and chargy.

I would have loved to take the On3P cartel 108 out for a rip or at least take a look, but Canadian stores don't seem to carry them and buying across the boarder would have cost me an arm and a leg.

With my love for the previous bacons and a boxing day sale going on, I picked up a pair of 184 bacons 40% off. I figure if they make me vomit, I should be at least able to sell them to a young jibber later on.

Once they have been mounted and in my hands I'll post a review.

thanks Everyone
6 years ago
5 0
All times are Eastern (-4); Currently it's 5:58AM