2011 K2 obSethed vs 2012 Line Sir Francis Bacon

For all out powder definitely the Obsethed, the SFB is going to be more versatile, they will still be great in powder but better in the trees when it gets more skied out. If you like your P90's, go with the Bacon's, basically a more playful soft snow version of them. The SFB could definitely be a 1 ski quiver for a small dusting to chest deep powder, of course they will be better skis for each of the giving, but these will work well in both.

If you live in the EC I would get the Sir Francis, it seems to be more versatile than the Obsethed. I think The P90+SFB would be a good set of skis for EC and the SFB should serve you well in powder.

 

I have no experience with any of the skis but from what I see in the web the obsethed wouldn`t be an all around ski like you saying powder, trees, groomers if needed. SFB is a much more versatile and gets good review, for cheap you can`t go wrong.

 

I would get the SFB based on your description of the requirements. I would get the K2 if I were looking for a pure powder ski.

 

Hope someone that have skied both or one of these two can share some thoughts!

 

Yes the rocker is legit. Used and off season.. it's hard to say really, it would depend on the condition each are in, but without binding probably around 200-400$, really depends where you look. In season and for new they would be around 700 without bindings.

The idea that the P90 can't be skied in anything over 5-6" and the SFB is going to be over matched by 12" is just silly.  You're putting *way* too much emphasis on how much width and/or rocker are required to ski fresh snow.

 

That said, I'd go SFB.  The Obsethed does have quite a bit of rocker, more that I personally think is necessary in most situations.  That's probably the main reason I would lean towards the SFB if it was me.  They both lean towards the soft and playful side, rather than being chargers.  That's not a bad thing, depending on what you like.  

I thought they were supposed to have a bit of early rise, less than the P98 though.

 

So, shame on me for starting this discussion up again.  I don't know if your original statement was hyperbole, because I won't argue that there are better skis for a a foot of snow than P90's (IMO more due to their stiffness than their lack of rocker... or I guess both, a good soft snow ski needs, at the minimum, a little bit of a forgiving flex, or some rocker).  But I'm continuing to take this discussion off topic.  I'll stop now.

 

You will love the SFB's in a foot of snow.

 

You could break out Hellbents if you wanted to, would they be optimal? No. So yes you could take out the Obsethed, but tree skiing is definitely not where these shine, the Bacon's would work much much better for this.

 

I also have to agree with Jaobrien also, you seem to be expecting a miracle stepping up into one of these skis. Sure the P90's aren't amazing in powder, but they can handle it just fine. You're not going to hop on the SFB/Obsethed, and suddenly be skiing on top of the snow because they float so well. Yes they will be an improvement but, but ski's can only do so much for you.

Can you? Sure. Should you? That's the better question. What's underneath that 5-7"? Is it a week of 3" per night or 2 weeks of a high pressure system? If the former, heck yeah. If the later, probably not the best call IMO. However, everyone is different.

 

I was going to say the same thing - he should definitely get something over 180cm.