Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

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!

McConkey's new skis -- K2 Pontoon

profile picture
AKJM
Posts: 64 - Karma: 10
Anybody hear about these? There was an article in Powder about them. 130 underfoot. Conventional sidecut, unlike the Spatulas. Still has the reverse camber. Tails are skinnier than the tips so they sink down in the back in the deep stuff
Jan 6 2006 10:55PM
0 0
profile picture
DanSkier11
Posts: 310 - Karma: 10
old news....but they sound adn look sick...there is a pic floatin around somehwere...they are guna be so sickk
Jan 6 2006 10:56PM
0 0
profile picture
Anti-Hero
Posts: 1269 - Karma: 338
sound sick, i heard the name pontoon a while ago and was wondering what theyd turn out to be
Jan 6 2006 10:56PM
0 0
profile picture
Kev
Posts: 7411 - Karma: 35
dude the spats were unconventional sidecut and had a reverse camber with the tail skinner.....?

This is just the revised K2 version, either way can't wait to see them
Jan 6 2006 10:57PM
0 0
profile picture
Kev
Posts: 7411 - Karma: 35
oops misread.
Jan 6 2006 10:59PM
0 0
profile picture
Vicious
Posts: 3862 - Karma: 140
Click for larger image

Click for larger image
Jan 6 2006 11:00PM
0 0
profile picture
AKJM
Posts: 64 - Karma: 10
Is there really a pic? I would love to see what these puppies look like. Should be interesting. Sounds like Shane is changing the game again
Jan 6 2006 11:00PM
0 0
profile picture
J.D.
Posts: 21362 - Karma: 5,142
It's not a conventional sidecut if the ski is narrower in the tail than they are in the middle. 154-130-120 is far from conventional.
Jan 6 2006 11:00PM
0 0
profile picture
Vicious
Posts: 3862 - Karma: 140
I'm somewhat surprised to see they are capped.
Jan 6 2006 11:01PM
0 0
profile picture
J.D.
Posts: 21362 - Karma: 5,142
Click for larger image
Jan 6 2006 11:01PM
0 0
profile picture
Kev
Posts: 7411 - Karma: 35
anyone know exact dimensions?
Jan 6 2006 11:01PM
0 0
profile picture
J.D.
Posts: 21362 - Karma: 5,142
Just posted 'em, 154-130-120.
Jan 6 2006 11:02PM
0 0
profile picture
Kev
Posts: 7411 - Karma: 35
thx, missed it.

Ya that's not conventional.. Those have 0 turning raduis.

right?
Jan 6 2006 11:05PM
0 0
profile picture
DanSkier11
Posts: 310 - Karma: 10
r they a twintip wonder how they would b on rails hahahahahahaha
Jan 6 2006 11:06PM
0 0
profile picture
forfun
Posts: 4916 - Karma: 66
the tail is only 120??? what happened to switch pow landings
Jan 6 2006 11:09PM
0 0
profile picture
Kev
Posts: 7411 - Karma: 35
there pretty close to Line Prophet Dimensions other than the fact that the tail is skinner then the waist.
Jan 6 2006 11:10PM
0 0
profile picture
J.D.
Posts: 21362 - Karma: 5,142
The point isn't really to "turn" in the conventional sense... you don't carve in pow. The point is you can move the ski without hooking your tails. What's the term those spat users use for turning... it always escapes me...
Jan 6 2006 11:12PM
0 0
profile picture
Vicious
Posts: 3862 - Karma: 140
Slash?

Smear?

Slide?
Jan 6 2006 11:13PM
0 0
profile picture
J.D.
Posts: 21362 - Karma: 5,142
There's like a nickname for the spatula that has something to do with smearing out the turns. That's a good word for it though, smear. Like butta.
Jan 6 2006 11:16PM
0 0
profile picture
Kev
Posts: 7411 - Karma: 35
Im aware of that.

I was talking about the dude who first posted said they had a "conventional sidcut" which is a ski that has a turning radius. ex. 155 / 130 / 140.

Which these K2 Pontoon's clearly don't have. Much like the spats. But a little different.
Jan 6 2006 11:18PM
0 0
profile picture
Vicious
Posts: 3862 - Karma: 140
I'll be interested to see how they ski.

I'm guessing they won't be that similar to Spats.
Jan 6 2006 11:19PM
0 0
profile picture
J.D.
Posts: 21362 - Karma: 5,142
No, aside from the tail hooking I would agree, pretty different... and probably a lot less of a burden when traversing, they look fairly light for such giant sticks. Well, we'll see on that note; K2 manages to make some real bricks for big mountain skis.
Jan 6 2006 11:21PM
0 0
profile picture
Kev
Posts: 7411 - Karma: 35
possibly a reason why they went with cap construction? lighten them up?
Jan 6 2006 11:24PM
0 0
profile picture
J.D.
Posts: 21362 - Karma: 5,142
That or cheapen production and reduce delam, since there's no good reason for a sidewall that I can think of considering what those sticks are for.
Jan 6 2006 11:26PM
0 0
profile picture
AKoblitz
Posts: 1201 - Karma: 113
those look sick, i wonder like many others how they ski
Jan 6 2006 11:26PM
0 0
profile picture
SHastatahoe
Posts: 3414 - Karma: 19
they dont have any rocker to them like the spats, which was a major part of the spats construction. They still look fucking sweet, I would love to rip them on some AK lines. . . come to think of it I would love to rip AK lines period, even if they are on my fujis.
Jan 6 2006 11:26PM
0 0
profile picture
Vicious
Posts: 3862 - Karma: 140
Yea, they do appear to be light, but then again, I can't tell shit from a few photos.

Yes, they will have the lack of tail hooking in common, which is soooo rad in pow.

Pontoons will definitely be better on hardpack and traverses...the Spats are a bit scary on slick, sketchy traverses, but once you get to the goods...mmmmmmm.
Jan 6 2006 11:28PM
0 0
profile picture
garrett.
Posts: 9304 - Karma: 3,670
^i would like to see u try to ski AK lines on fujis
Jan 6 2006 11:31PM
0 0
profile picture
SHastatahoe
Posts: 3414 - Karma: 19
I would like to show you
Jan 6 2006 11:39PM
0 0
profile picture
nothanks
Posts: 13551 - Karma: 31
Good shit. But everyone should have also posted these pictures in the 06-07 ski thread! https://www.newschoolers.com/ns3/web/forums/readthread.php?cat_id=8&thread_id=179943&page=6&
Jan 6 2006 11:42PM
0 0
profile picture
KeegLove
Posts: 10166 - Karma: 55
those are so fucking sic i'm excited to see if this new "tecnology" works out
Jan 6 2006 11:45PM
0 0
profile picture
freeskibum82
Posts: 6355 - Karma: 5,055
you guys do know about reverse camber and the fact that they are based off water skis right?? or is this news to you?? the idea is to float on snow like you do on water... just watch forward...
Jan 7 2006 12:11AM
0 0
profile picture
bmxican_89
Posts: 2617 - Karma: 23
what the hell man? no one said any thing about skiing AK lines on Fujatives.
Jan 7 2006 12:44AM
0 0
profile picture
t3shellvenom
Posts: 3491 - Karma: 56
those skis look so hot...if i start riding more pow i might have to go get em
Jan 7 2006 12:45AM
0 0
profile picture
Elife
Posts: 2829 - Karma: 44
holy slutnuts batman!!
Jan 7 2006 12:46AM
0 0
profile picture
Kev
Posts: 7411 - Karma: 35
hence why McConkey actually mounted a pair of water skis and used them in the AK.
Jan 7 2006 12:47AM
0 0
profile picture
garrett.
Posts: 9304 - Karma: 3,670
look 2 posts above me
Jan 7 2006 1:24AM
0 0
profile picture
Schoening
Posts: 14332 - Karma: 1,268
i saw these things like 4 months ago when i was at the k2 factory.
Jan 7 2006 1:33AM
0 0
profile picture
Tapes
Posts: 1469 - Karma: 7
hes shanes old skis:
Click for larger image
Jan 7 2006 3:40AM
0 0
profile picture
johanblaze
Posts: 4987 - Karma: 345
k2 capped the sidewalls, eh?
Jan 7 2006 4:10AM
0 0
profile picture
SHastatahoe
Posts: 3414 - Karma: 19
does anyone remember the enemys?
Jan 7 2006 4:25AM
0 0
profile picture
OAK_TREE
Posts: 2683 - Karma: 12
those skis look sweet.
Jan 7 2006 4:32AM
0 0
profile picture
r.w
Posts: 3489 - Karma: 18
those are bigger than i am!
Jan 7 2006 2:05PM
0 0
profile picture
Schoening
Posts: 14332 - Karma: 1,268
haha i remember when i pulled them off the ski rack at k2 im like wtf are these? they were ridiculous
Jan 7 2006 2:09PM
0 0
profile picture
schmies
Posts: 2032 - Karma: 511
It is utilizing a cap construction to lighten the ski. Being the dimensions it is, sidewall construction would weigh it down more than needed.
As for the convntional sidecut, it is just that. We are not using progressive sidecut nor a blend of three, it is one sidecut. The Spatula's downfall was it's lack of skiability on traverses or harder snow conditions. Leaving the Pontoon with a non reversed sidecut underfoot retains control and edge hold.
Jan 7 2006 6:29PM
0 0
profile picture
skoganskier101
Posts: 2067 - Karma: 14
that is one big ski
Jan 7 2006 6:37PM
0 0
profile picture
C.J.
Posts: 5460 - Karma: 72
Funny looking back at this now. Kev was so wrong. They do indeed have a turn radius. They would really measure something like
tip 160
waist 130
12" up the tail 140
tail 120
There is a side cut, and it makes them kill any other pow ski.
Jan 9 2009 2:48AM
0 0
profile picture
freeskiiertjm
Posts: 533 - Karma: 15
You never been on the new JJ or an ARG I take it... Poootoons ski like a kids ski after those....
Jan 9 2009 11:23AM
0 0
profile picture
C.J.
Posts: 5460 - Karma: 72
I'm anti-armada for non ski related reasons. Aside from that have you even ridden all three of these skis? If so I know you would not say that!
Jan 9 2009 11:32AM
0 0
profile picture
goneforever
Posts: 794 - Karma: 18
I used the Pontoons in Japan for a little bit of the trip, but then I broke them.  On the other hand, they are really, really well built and they broke because I did something really stupid.  No worries though, K2 is sending me a new pair. :)
Jan 9 2009 12:02PM
0 0
profile picture
Drail
Posts: 14012 - Karma: 10,010
I demoed the Pontoons last season and they suck on anything that's not powder. Compare that do the JJ's which I am skiing on now which just yesterday I went from dropping cliffs into pow in steep trees to carving and buttering the groomers with ease to jibbing fridges and rails at a backyard sesh.

Needless to say, they Pontoons got nothing on the JJ's.

On a side note: my friend just picked up a pair of the Moment Bibby Pros, they seam very similar to the JJ's in rideablity. They're a bit softer underfoot and don't have the narrow nose/tail, but they both have sidecut and rocker on nose and tail. Solid ski for sure.
Jan 9 2009 5:01PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)