2014 Line Sir Francis Bacon Skis Review

Line Bacon


Model: 2014 Line Sir Francis Bacon Skis

Size: 184cm

Actual Length (Pull Chord): 181cm

Dimensions: 140-108-136

Stance -2.0cm from Center (Pollard’s Mark)

(Line Has a new line for 2014 that is -6cm’s for skiers who don’t want to be as close to center) I however found the ski to ski the best where Eric designed the ski to be skied which was at -2cm. the reason for this is that where Eric put’s the line is the sweet spot of the ski compared to the Early Rise vs the Early Taper of the Ski.  If you know how to ski a ski center then DO NOT mount the skis anywhere but on the -2cm Mark.

Again for 2014 Line Skis has done an amazing job with the Sir Francis Bacon. It comes back for 2014 with an updated graphic which is another piece of art by the master Eric Pollard. I didn’t think that Line could do a better job with the graphic and I was wrong, Eric really put some amazing color into the ski and the graphic has been getting amazing reviews.

Now to the skiing. I said it last year and I will say it again this year, if you are looking for a one ski quiver ski that is playful and wants to always be searching out for the terrain off the trail then you will be very hard pressed to find anything more versatile in the 100-110mm category than the 2012/2013 Line Sir Francis Bacon Skis.

Other companies seem to always be playing catch up with Line and with the Early Rise/Early Taper on both the SFB and Opus Skis  it is easy to see why! They turn on a dime with no effort at all, yet when you need stability on groomers the Line Sir Francis Bacon really holds on edge and with a turn radius of about 17m you will think you are on a ski 90mm in the waist. The Bacon allows you to easily get in and out of turns quickly and playfully. If you are like me and enjoy skiing the side 10 feet of the trail in the crud and sugar snow the Sir Francis Bacon eats those conditions up with ease! With the Early Rise and Early Taper the ski has a surf like feel to it and will easily ski all conditions that you throw its way. If you are into skiing pillow lines and searching out deep snow you can ski the Bacon, but you may want to look at its big brother the Mr. Pollard Opus for true powder lines in the backcountry.

One major factor you need to consider when buying this ski is the length. These skis not only measure short but they ski short as well. The one thing that is need with the Sir Francis Bacon is a 190cm length ski and for 2014 there is now a 190cm length!!!  The 184cm length is the top selling length and when you get on it you will see why. It turns like a 170cm length ski and sometimes you forget that you have a ski on that is over 180cms. For bigger guys and more aggressive skiers I think the 190cm length would be a no brainer for adding to your line up. Just don’t sell yourself short, these skis may be 108mm in the waist but you still want the length to truly get all optimal ride out of this ski. If you are over 160lbs you should be skiing the 184cm length.

As for mounting point I would really suggest the Eric’s Choice mark that Line has already suggested. The skis do ski the best mounted on that line and if you are a tele skier I would really suggest talking to whoever is mounting your bindings and make sure they mount them so your boot mid sole is around the mid sole mark on your boot. These do ski best toward center even on a tele set up. If you are a skier that is not very centered when they ski then maybe you want to have them mounted a little further back, but I will be honest with you the ski skis best where Eric originally designed it to be mounted.

I look forward to getting out this weekend on the Bacon’s again and see how they perform on true firm Northeast snowpack! Please feel free if you have any questions to post them here and I will do my best to get back to you in a timely manner. Although it is April the weather and snow feels more like February so I have been getting out on the hill and testing as many skis as possible so look for more reviews to follow.

These skis did excellent on groomers but to be honest with you I rarely find myself on the trail these days.

2013 Line Sir Francis Bacon Skis Video

11 Replies to “2014 Line Sir Francis Bacon Skis Review”

  1. Skied SFB’s (100 days at Alta) apst two years. Sooo easy everywhere (not perfect on deep pow days but close enough). At 6′ 1″ 180 lbs did feel that a 190 might be better. Did get the Marker Schizo binding in case I wanted to be back further but never really thought much about it after skiing them 2-3 cms from center. Just started Tele skiing and want to use my old SFBs for that and get a 190’s for Alpine days. What do you think? Should I go 190 for both? I am concerned about tele-turning on fatter skis as I have been teleing on K2 super stinx – pretty narrow under foot. Of course I also have no idea what binding to get with all the NTN stuff going on.

  2. Hi Peter,
    I totally agree with you about the mounting point on the bacon and that it is already in a perfect spot and no need to move where it is. The 190 would help you in the deeper snow but that is also why I own the AK JJ and the 192cm Opus for those big pow days. For your Alpine Ski I would certainly suggest the 190cm length, for tele you could do either. If you are skiing tighter trees on tele you may want the 184cm length so that you don’t go to big in the woods, but if you are areally good tele skier the 190cm isn’t really an issue. What are you using for a telel binding now. If you like to alpine sometimes on your tele it is hard to suggest anything other than the NTN. As for width that may take some getting use to a wider tele ski, but more and more I am finding a lot of tele guys that I ski with ski skis in the 110+ range and over 185 no problem.

  3. Adam

    Thanks for the feedback. Just beginning on tele so my old rather skinny k2 superstinx work well to teach me proper turning on the groomed trails. Struggled in teh crud but working on it and hope my “old” 184 SFBs will help in teh pow / crud. Hoping not to lose any turning fun on alpine 190 sfbs and gain a bit more float in pow. Right now I’m sticking to old style tele gear as I have the boots and from what I read not everyone likes NTN – i.e. the jury is still out or atleast the revolution is not finished.

  4. Adam

    Thanks for the feedback. Just beginning on tele so my old rather skinny k2 superstinx work well to teach me proper turning on the groomed trails. Struggled in teh crud but working on it and hope my “old” 184 SFBs will help in teh pow / crud. Hoping not to lose any turning fun on alpine 190 sfbs and gain a bit more float in pow. Right now I’m sticking to old style tele gear as I have the boots and from what I read not everyone likes NTN – i.e. the jury is still out or atleast the tele binding revolution is not finished.

  5. Can’t blame you for sticking with what works. The NTN has a lot of great reviews and I know some people that love it, but I see many people that use them more as an Alpine bindings than actually ever dropping their knee into a true tele turn. If you want more alpine capability on tele setup then that is who I would suggest should go with a NTN setup, otherwise I would say stick with a more traditional tele binding.

  6. Adam,

    I am looking at a new ski to fill the 100-110 gap in my quiver and decided on the SFB last year. I held off on buying tho until this year to see if the 190 might be a better choice over the 184. I am 6′ 185# with gear, ski mountain west mostly and want a new daily driver. I would say I am an intermediate (4-5 seasons of the rockies at ~30-40 days a season?). I have something in 120+ for the deep days and a groomer ski in the 90’s so those aren’t much of an issue. More curious to know if the 184 would be enough or if the 190 would be more appropriate for an all around playful ski. Looking for something I can turn tight in the tress with and still butter and hit some pow stashes on days that aren’t full blower. Thoughts?

  7. Hi Chris,
    Great questions. If you told me you were an aggressive skier I would 100% say go with the 190cm in the Bacon as they do ski super short. If you are looking for tighter turns and are not aggressive then you may want to consider the 184cm length which will be a little easier to navigate in tighter areas. If you do tend to be aggressive more often than not then I would have no problem with you looking at the 190cm length.

  8. Hi Adam,
    If the “184” SFB is 181cm chord length, is the “190” 187cm chord length? I find that 3 cm makes a big diff for me doing jump or kick turns esp.
    Thanks, Dave

  9. Hey Adam,
    Similar question as Chris, I have the opportunity to snag a pair for a sweet deal, they are pretty beat but that works since I intend on scratching them up a bit. I am currently working with 165 and 100 underfoot, these are 172cm with 110. I would classify as an aggressive skier but am concerned with how the height difference would fair if Im looking for all mt but work well in the park, Im 5′ 5. Thanks so much for the help.

  10. Hello,
    At 5’5″ you would want the 178cm length. It’s more than just waist width and length that you have to take into factor too. The 172cm measures 168/169cm but on top of that with the amount of both early taper and early rise in this ski they ski like a 140cm which is why on skis with this much rocker and taper you move up in length. For reference the 2016 Bacon actually measures closer to the actual length and they ditched the 172cm size as it was to short for most consumers. If you weigh under 140lbs you could get away with the 172cm length over you should consider longer. They just ski so short. Another ski to consider that I loved and does not measure or ski as short as the bacon but was just as playful and fun was the Head Collective 105 – http://www.untracked.com/p5356-15_head_collective_105_all_mountain_freeride_skis.html It comes in a 171cm and I know the guys there will give you a great deal if you give them a call for a 171cm and want a binding with it too.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *