EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › LINE - Bacons Vs Sickday 110's
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

LINE - Bacons Vs Sickday 110's

post #1 of 10
Thread Starter 

I have been skiing 182 Sir Francis Bacons most days out here in Utah - unless things get icy then i pull out the Q98's .

have to say i really love the Bacons - super soft rocker in tips and tails and 115 waist  gets the job done most days in Big Cottonwood Canyon . Skis are 2011 year model and have really been put through the ringer by myself and their previous owner so i am considering an upgrade for next year.


anyone on the board ski the Sickday 110's?  and if so how do they compare to the SFB's? 





post #2 of 10

i ski the sick day 110 on east pow days but have never been on Bacons.  I assume that Bacons are more versatile if you ski backwards, but i don't do that.  The sick days are light, fun, playful.  No metal.  Super fun.  My .02.  Edit- i am on 186's and am 5'10' 185-190lbs.  

post #3 of 10
I am in the exact same predicament. Skied the bacons out west this yr and loved them. Would like to know alot more about the sick day 110, highly recommended by a lot of people but I have never been able to find one to demo. Only reason I don't get the bacons is I am directional, don't really need the twin. Read the blistergear review of the supernatural 108 v Bacon and now wondering about a nontwin. Any help I couldn't thank enough.
post #4 of 10
Originally Posted by madriversven View Post

Skied the bacons out west this yr and loved them. 


If you loved them, you should get them.  

The fact that they're twins ain't no thang!  If you can ski 'em forward the way you like, that's all that should matter.  That twin-tail will make them break out of turns in chop super-easy, which is a nice trait to have.  Also, if you end up in a tight patch and need to back up a little, it's obviously easy to do on them!

post #5 of 10
Originally Posted by blackke17 View Post


have to say i really love the Bacons




Originally Posted by madriversven View Post

Skied the bacons out west this yr and loved them.


I have to agree with @Skierish.  To paraphrase someone on this forum about this topic, once you strike oil, you should stop digging.


Now having said that, I haven't skied the Bacon, but I bought a pair of SD110 this year and I love them.  Obviously good in powder (haven't had them in anything deep) and other ungroomed (chopped up, cream cheese, corn), but they are miles better on hardpack than I ever would have thought.  I even brought them out on some typical Eastern conditions (frozen cord and scraped down in the high traffic areas) just to see how they would handle, and I had no regrets any of the days.  Pretty low swingweight too, so they can billy goat down a tight path admirably for something that's 110 underfoot.


I'm 6' 230lbs, and got the 186.

post #6 of 10
Thread Starter 

thanks for the replies!  - very good points - i'll be upgrading to some new Bacons - i don't ski backwards much ,but the twin tips definitely eliminate any chance of hooking the tails


despite the low snow totals this year i have been in alot of deep snow - had over 12 fresh inches under the Bacons yesterday at Brighton , which they handled nicely

post #7 of 10

My husband skis the SFBs; I have the SD110s. They are incredibly similar, except that the SFBs have twin tips. I wouldn't consider either my first choice on a big powder day, but they're both great in a few inches. They both get thrown around a little in crud/day-after stuff that's a little more assertive than powder. I think that's the tradeoff for how playful they feel in soft snow.

post #8 of 10

I have always been meaning to get on some SF Bacons too, but never seem to pull the trigger, and they are always priced low these days too.


Another twin to consider, and available for very cheap, is the Kastle XX110

They were being blown out for $350 new at a few sites not too long ago.

It is the same as the current XX110 model, only last years graphics


PSA:  I just saw that there are 2 sellers at the TGR forum that have new xx110 180cm ( might be short for you ? ) for $300 / $350.

( I am not affiliated with either, just passing it along )

Favourable Reviews at Blister, and one from Epic:





- Andy

post #9 of 10
Thread Starter 

soft snow is definitely the Bacons sweet spot - i try to stay off groomers all together if the conditions allow - they are my daily driver in Utah, and more days than not i can find soft snow off piste. If you are charging through the trees with 4 of your buddies in Utah fluff , there is no better ski i have found. 


But I would not classify them as the do it all ski however. 

Rest of the quiver = Salomon Q98s (180s) when things get a bit icy ,and Faction Royale (183s) for the really deep stuff  ( these things float no matter what!)


those Kastle's look really nice - but carry a bit more weight than im used to skiing with the SFBs


New Bacon's will be added this summer -  Here's to Big snow totals next year across North America!!



post #10 of 10
I have the sfb in 178 and I mount them on Eric's line. Great ski but I wish I had gotten the 184 as mine felt short. I am 5'8" and 148 lbs. I didn't feel there was enough ski up front when I really want to drive. I do love how playful they are in all conditions, and with a 1/3 tune I can tip them over and carve to a certain point.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › LINE - Bacons Vs Sickday 110's