 Poster: A snowHead
|
So I finally decided to upgrade my long suffering Salomon Lord's for something better suited to the epic winter we've had in Europe.
Lord's were 169, and 96mm underfoot... the SFB's are 184 (nominally) long, and 108 underfoot.
Destination: Engelberg
Forecast: Initially, 1.5m+ of fresh - as it was, there was at least a foot of fresh on each of the first 3 days - day one with reasonable viz, days 2 and three with almost (but not quite) unskiably poor viz, and day 4 was bluebird
Ski level: SCGB purple (prob Purple +, but lets not start on tea club grading!) on/off piste, and reasonably fit
The SFB's have been around a few years, and a friend was skiing the 11/12 year (white and blue graphics), whereas mine were the current 'blood mountain' graphic.
Fitted with Atomic Trackers (small), with complementary orange colouring... mounted at the 'recommended' position approx 2cm back from 'centre' (and mounted gratis, thanks to the kind folk at Ellis Brigham Covent garden, as that's where I got the skis from.)
Likes:
In powder, I'm transformed. I honestly feel I could give up snowboarding now, as the feeling is quite similar, of actually 'surfing' in powder. Now I understand why all the powderhounds have planks for snowy days. And the feeling is maintained even when the snow is tracked, which is when the Lord's would struggle.
On piste, they are harder work - it feels like there is less 'suspension', and it's harder to get an edge dug in for speed control/stopping - but I'm probably still getting used to them. On the return road to Engelberg village, a typical single-track mountain road, they turn adequately well - not quite as snappy as the lords, but i did go up a whole length, so some of that will be down to me.
They feel quite nimble - it was easy enough to do 180's on the snow.
On the wider pistes, I was able to get the carving, but need a fair amount of space (or need to get my knee down a bit more!)
There seems to be a bit of enthusiasm amongst owners - met a couple of other Line skiers in Engelberg...
Dislikes:
the skis are quite heavy, and with the Trackers are probably up near the 4kg per plank. They feel noticeably heavy trekking across the carpark, and I'm not looking forward to back-packing them up a slope.
Final thoughts
I've not tried them in the 'park' yet - although they feel indestructible, I'm minded to keep them for powder days at the moment.
For anyone wondering whether to 'go wide' - the positives are massive - but I imagine a week on piste with them could be less fun.
Still, they look great propped up in the lounge, much better than my SO's White Dots.... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Well done for posting a review.
Out of interest, why the step up from 169 to 184? How tall/heavy are you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I had the 10/11 SFB's in 182cm, which were 115mm at the waist. That year they had a multi-coloured asymmetric design, with Pollard's tree and root design. I had mine mounted with Marker Baron's, and they were the heaviest skis I have ever used.
The weight allowed them to blast through most things, but conversely the rocker and profile provided great powder performance, and the short running length allowed them to work on piste. I only sold them as I became more interested in backcountry touring, and they were way too heavy for any significant height gain.
I have always been wary of skis which change design/shape every year, as it suggests you are not getting the best product. Because next years skis will have already been designed and maybe even produced, while you are buying the 'old' model. Having said that, the SFB's are Pollard's personal playthings, so he changes them to suit himself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
@Layne - partly cos I'm 174 tall/66Kg, and felt I could/should be able to handle longer skis, and 'cos there is both tip and tail rocker, so the _actual_ length is more like 160 on piste.
@Powderaddict - interesting, hadn't realised the older ones were wider - one of the other Engelberg posse had the white & blue SFB's, they looked a _bit_ shorter, didn't notice the width. Agree theyll be heavy for touring... but for the stuff I'll be doing, I'm hoping I won't notice _too_ much...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Nice review.Bought 177 last few months ago(previous model blue/white graphic) but returned them as actual length was 173.Did not seem heavy though.Lords(BTW 88 underfoot) are completely different skis one of the best all mountain skis I have ever skied but more frontside oriented.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
How do you measure the "actual length"?
The length is a tape pulled round the base from tip to tail, a "straight pull" is stand the ski on the floor and measure how tall it is.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OK so straight pull was 173 in Bacons case,was a bit surprise as I spent last 3 years on Fujas 179 where 179 was a straight pull and length 185.177 Bacons looked like shorties next to them.Definitely prefer K2 measurement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They're all measured different sadly.......
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
@hamilton, the main size changed happened for the 11/12 season, when the skis was redesigned. A brief history of SFB's:
10/11 142-115-139, Multicoloured tree and colour wheel design
11/12 140-108-136, White with green and black trees
12/13 140-108-136, White with brown, red and black trees
13/14 140-108-136, White and blue design
14/15 140-108-136, dark green and red design.
As mentioned, Line measure their skis on the base, so they are generally shorter than other brands.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
