2018-2019 Line Sir Francis Bacon

Comparisons (plus a Sad Disclaimer)

I’m sad to report that I’ve never skied the previous Sir Francis Bacon, so I can’t draw direct comparisons there. But the previous Bacon has been heavily referenced, reviewed, and awarded on Blister. Jason Hutchins has great reviews of both the 184 cm and 190 cm models of the previous Bacon, and Jonathan Ellsworth has skied the previous 184 & 190s as well as the new Bacon while we were in New Zealand. So I’ll have to defer to those guys for Bacon comparisons.

Line Sir Francis Bacon vs. Rossignol Sickle

Frequent Blister readers already know that the 186cm Rossignol Sickle is one of fellow Bister reviewer Jason Hutchins’ favorite skis of all time, and the 181cm Sickle is one of my personal favorites. In Jason’s review of the previous Bacon, he said that choosing between the old Bacon and the Sickle was difficult to do. The previous Bacon—with its wider waist and much-less-tapered tips—certainly looks more like the Sickle.

Alex Adams reviews the Line Sir Francis Bacon for Blister Gear Review.
Alex Adams on the Line Sir Francis Bacon, Craigieburn Valley Ski Area, NZ.

I would say that now, the decision of when to use the new Bacon or the Sickle is more clear: the new Bacon feels like a very jibby all-mountain ski that performs very well in the park, while the Sickle is a jibby all-mountain ski that performs very well in deep snow and technical lines.

As for me, I would take the Sickle out on a pow day, and take the Bacon out a day or two after, and especially if I was going to spend some time in the park.

Line Sir Francis Bacon vs. Line Mordecai?

As you know by now, in addition to overhauling the Sir Francis Bacon, Line also discontinued Mr. Pollard’s Opus and brought in the new Mordecai. The Mordecai comes with a much stiffer flex pattern than the Mr. Pollard’s Opus, and at first glance, the Mordecai basically seems to be beefed-up Bacon. We spent time skiing the Mordecai and the Bacon back-to-back in New Zealand, and we were really intrigued by the differences between the two. We’ll be saying more about this comparison in an upcoming ‘Vs Review, but for now, I’ll just say that it would be wrong to think of the Mordecai merely as a wider Bacon.

Who’s It For?

Line sums up the new Bacon quite well, stating that it’s “for the skier whose playground is the entire mountain.” Freestyle-minded skiers looking to jump off everything all over the mountain will love this ski, especially if you also enjoy lapping the terrain park.

Alex Adams reviews the Line Sir Francis Bacon for Blister Gear Review.
Alex Adams on the Line Sir Francis Bacon, Craigieburn Valley Ski Area, NZ.

I see the Bacon as a 60 / 40 all-mountain / park ski. More traditional, directional skiers looking for an all-mountain powder ski will probably want to consider other options, unless you ski with a very light touch; otherwise, the near-center mount, tapered tips, low swing weight, and tight sidecut radius will likely feel twitchy at times. But those same characteristics are precisely what will make the Bacon so much fun to those looking to trick their way down and around the mountain.

Bottom Line

If you are looking for an energetic, quick, poppy, and (most importantly), FUN ski to jib and jump around the entire mountain, the new Sir Francis Bacon ought to be on your radar. This ski doesn’t nose-butter as well as other skis in its class, but it makes up for it with lots of pop and energy in the tip and tail.

On days when I plan to lap the terrain park at Taos, I still always take at least a few runs down Reforma, West Basin, or something off of Chair 4. The Bacon is perfect for this type of skiing; it can ski the whole mountain very well, but it also feels right at home in the terrain park. For my next park / all-mountain ski, the new Bacon is quickly making its way to the top of my list.

For comparisons to the Armada ARV 106, K2 Marksman , and ON3P Kartel 108 check out our Deep Dive.




17 comments on “2018-2019 Line Sir Francis Bacon”

  1. Nice review. Great pictures. Looks fun. As an older skier who skies the whole mountain on the older Bacon, except not in the park and not in the air, I like the older Bacon very much.

  2. Oh my are these a beautiful ski. Now I’m torn between pretending I can afford this model and pretending I can afford last year’s version!

  3. Thanks for the well-written thorough review. If the new version is twitchy, mounting a little back from Eric’s Choice may help. I’ve owned the 12/13 Bacon mounted at 2cm behind Eric’s Choice and the 14/15 model mounted at Eric’s Choice. The 12/13 were incredibly stable (not twitchy or chattery at all) but I had to get over my tips to turn quickly in trees and bumps. The 14/15 feel more nimble, but at speed they are a bit twitchy with some tip vibration (but it’s more psychological than problematic). So I’m guessing that somewhere between 0.5cm and 1cm behind Eric’s Choice would provide the optimum balance between stability and nimbleness.

  4. Hi Jason,

    I currently ski the 12/13 Bacon, but i have the opportunity to buy a 12/13 Sickle in 178.
    I´m 5.9 tall, weight 165lbs and consider myself an advanced skier.
    I tried to get a hold on a 186 sickle for quite some time now but they are impossible to get anywhere. So i´m thinking about buying the shorter, newer model.
    Do you think the Sickles in 178 would be too short for me, or are they as much fun as the 186s?

    Cheers and thanks in advance

  5. Have you by any chance skied recent Gotamas? I’ve have some and love them (2014 model) but have recently tried some new Bacons. I loved the pop on the Lines, just wondering if it’s worth dropping a pair of skis that have only had a few weeks’ skiing, and a coupla hundred bones, just to get the Lines? Prolly only I can decide, but just throwing the question out there…..

  6. Hi Alex,

    Great review. I’m thinking of getting these skis as an all mountain touring ski for the Alps. I used to ski the Opus type powder skis of old and loved them for touring in BC so the new lighter SFB was my first thought. Your review seemed mixed but mainly positive, would you recommend them as a poppy, big drop, all mountain touring ski? Also, how did you find the tail stiffness? did it flop out on you at all?

    Cheers for the review,


  7. Curious if you guys ride different lengths of skis depending on whether they’re centered or traditionally mounted? I typically ride 184 Katanas and picked up a pair of 186 SFB’s (I wanted a very playful ski at the other end of the spectrum from the Katana), but as soon as I stepped into the bindings the 5″ shorter nose threw me off. Even though they ride as I wanted, I can’t shake the feeling I’m going to fold the noses up on a landing and cartwheel down the hill.

  8. Oh wise Blister folk. I’m in need of help. I’m trying to replace my tired pair of 2014 Line Bacons with a new ski that performs the same. I’m having difficulty in trying to pick the right ski and even narrowing it down seems to be a tough venture. Anyone know of a ski that rides like the 2014 bacons and will allow me to mount at a more central stance (all mountain freestyle).

    Was aiming to have the width between 105-110 so that I could treat it as a 1 ski quiver


Leave a Comment