Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
Capital G-Funkenstein XXL - HOLY FUCKING SHIT
Posts: 10448
-
Karma: 10,021
Capital is making some ridiculously sick skis....
be these have to be the craziest things I've ever seen.
Normal G-funkensteins are 180cm and 155/162/132
These are 193cm and 157/163/137.
HOLY CRAP.
[img]http://www.friflyt.no/collage/images/10948/c_10948_23.jpg[img]
Posts: 10448
-
Karma: 10,021
damnit....
Posts: 8602
-
Karma: 539
Oh my surface area. hahaha, they make the Spatulas look small. thats whack. Ridden then yet? how do they perform? they don't seem necessary unless its at least waist deep.
Posts: 2391
-
Karma: 28
Posts: 2494
-
Karma: 10
Posts: 3901
-
Karma: 9
i would love to get those on a rail... is that really nececarry though? i mean elizabeths float fine
Posts: 6631
-
Karma: 41
that is an absolutely fucking insane beast of a ski. congrats man.
Posts: 14332
-
Karma: 1,268
Posts: 12973
-
Karma: 500
Posts: 11256
-
Karma: 424
Those look like they'd be fun as hell on a big powder day!
Posts: 8198
-
Karma: 258
Posts: 4427
-
Karma: 1,955
^word
the fattest i would ever use/want/need is the prophet 130. you just dont need water skis on the slopes. but w/e.
Posts: 10448
-
Karma: 10,021
i agree they are just too fat.
they are not mine, either.
Im more than happy with my fat skis, which are only 118 in the waist.
163 though? Jesus christ that is fat.
Capital has a lot of other, more practical shapes.
El Jefe is gonna replace my SV when they die.
Posts: 10448
-
Karma: 10,021
what an intellegent comment......
i would LOVE to see a park rat ATTEMPT to ski this ski.
As I said above....this ski isn't mine as everyone seems to be assuming....
but from just the picture as well as people who have skied similar capital skis, you actually have to know what your doing to get these down the mountain.
Granted...that mountain would have to be huge and at least waist deep.
But a park rat would die trying to ski them.
Posts: 882
-
Karma: 27
Posts: 31125
-
Karma: 336
i saw those in SBC skier...just about shat
Posts: 8602
-
Karma: 539
i think Freezed was joking about calling them "Park Rat skis". And it amazes me. 10 years ago guys were shredding the waist deep with 60 underfoot skis. Now they are just outta control.
Posts: 10448
-
Karma: 10,021
meh. either way the point is....
skis are getting ridiculous.
I can remember getting skis that were 88 in the waist and people being like "you can ski those in anything less than 3 feet" and shit like that.
163 in the waist is ridiculous. I wonder hoe functional those ski would actually be in pow. It would be virtually impossible to get a face shot.
Posts: 10471
-
Karma: 2,182
those arent skis. theyre snowboards
Posts: 720
-
Karma: 15
thats insane i wonder how they ride considering the waist is thicker then the rest of the ski
Posts: 10448
-
Karma: 10,021
does the term "spatula" mean anything special to you?
Posts: 118
-
Karma: 10
it would probly be cheaper to buy water skis at that point...
or just boot up and take those water skiing
Posts: 13673
-
Karma: 3,085
You would have to spread your legs soo wide to ski with those, after a day on the hill it would be like getting off a horse.
Posts: 11256
-
Karma: 424
Tanner Hall would have no problem with the stance issue, and yes, I did just go there.
Posts: 61648
-
Karma: 123,472
Dude, i use those in moguls.
Posts: 7411
-
Karma: 35
haha wow, that makes those spatula's look like race skis.
Hahah that's INSANE.
Captial Rocks, I would love to get on one of there skis.
Posts: 7549
-
Karma: 14
that's a fucking monoski holy shit.
Posts: 6301
-
Karma: 349
im sorry, but that just absolutely pointless. there is NO, NO need for a ski 7 inches wide. part of the fun of skiin pow is actually skiing in pow, with those, you mise well be skiing normal skis on groomers, cause you wouldnt be able to get those to sink if you tried. 90-130 is PLENTY for pow. anything more is just added weight.
Posts: 10448
-
Karma: 10,021
i agree that 163mm is just too huge, but....
from people skiing them they are the sickest pow skis ever.
Posts: 613
-
Karma: -5
Posts: 1216
-
Karma: 11
yea. there isnt really a point to make them that wide. they dont look like they would perform too well. they are too wide. its like having two snowboards on your feet.
Posts: 2171
-
Karma: 17
Posts: 3862
-
Karma: 140
Posts: 1718
-
Karma: 11
yup, i agree also. that is tooooo big. its fun to sink into powder. but with 7 inches under your foot, i dont think youd be sinking much. theyd be a dream for cliff dropping though...like a pillow. and the stance to ride those...dear lord. it would look like you shit your pants.
Posts: 2391
-
Karma: 28
Posts: 12973
-
Karma: 500
I was joking, I would love to own a pair of Capitals. Probably not these specific ones though.
Posts: 95
-
Karma: 80
Reverse camber, reverse sidecut skis are totally different animals. No sense to compare those to traditional sidecut skis.
The idea is not to sink but to float/slide on top of the snow...I guess those are Spatulas on steroids. Can you say SLIDE? :)
McConkey is probably right saying that most "mainstream" ski companies are heading totally wrong direction with pow skis having way too much sidecut...(and yes, maybe those are going to bee almost too wide to use on anything but 3feet of pow. Maybe the new K2 Pontoons will be the ticket though...?)
Posts: 1746
-
Karma: 15
Posts: 31125
-
Karma: 336
Posts: 6050
-
Karma: 100
they are made for groomers stupid. gosh
Posts: 1216
-
Karma: 11
^haha. dat would be crazy.
Vicious-did u see it?? haha. crazy.
Posts: 6
-
Karma: 10
dude hitting pow with skis that wide must be like landing on hardpack
u dont sink in at all
Posts: 152
-
Karma: 10
screw it, i'm just going to mount my bindings on some snowboards
Posts: 6436
-
Karma: 109
ye im just gonna go out and buy2 snowboards and mount those, forget about breaks, its all about leashes.
Posts: 934
-
Karma: 11
How would u even find breaks for those
Posts: 32
-
Karma: 10
Posts: 932
-
Karma: 14
Probably awesome, on spatulas i can go down runs sideways doing nose presses (hardpack) it's a pretty fun way to get to the pow.
I would also agree that those are too large, my face shot count has decreased significantly since buying spatulas, and as someone said above, part of the fun of skiing powder is skiing powder. I think skis are just at about the point of max width, certainly a huge jump in the last few years, but at some point you reach the ideal width.
My friend is certain that I will buy a pair of Pontoons, and i'm not saying that I won't, but i'm pretty darn happy with my spatulas. But then again I was pretty darn happy with my 78 waist K2 xp's 4 seasons ago......
Posts: 10448
-
Karma: 10,021
saw the pontoons today at Xtal.
they look SO sick.
guy said they are better than the spatulas too.
So....I think Im going to replace my FFF with another one....and I want pontoons too. They look amazing.
guy has ones with a sidewall too. that is the only disappointing thing to me = cap contruction. come on.
Posts: 8272
-
Karma: 9
The pontoons looked plenty beefy to me in person, even with a cap rather than sidewalls. the cap supposedly keeps the ski lighter, which is important considering its dimensions.
Posts: 10448
-
Karma: 10,021
its a powder ski.
if your complaining about the weight of a powder ski you need to take you tampon out and grow some balls.
Posts: 21362
-
Karma: 5,143
And yet, light doesn't hurt, ie: Armada ANT and Jp vs. Julien
All times are Eastern (-5)
