Just got a view on the shape of this new Ski - really exiting!
It has a regular sidecut on the front half and reverse on the rear:
154-130-120
This is a thing i definately have to try!
K2 Pontoon
Moderators: Head Monkey, kelvin, bigKam, skidesmond, chrismp
i have read somewhere (TGR forum ?) that the camber is regular in the front half and slightly reverse at the end... don't know if its true...Anyway, very, very interisting ski... lets build it!! 
Any info about sriffness?
edit> sorry, wrong info...whole ski has reverse camber...
http://media.newschoolers.com/uploads/m ... 611fat.jpg
Any info about sriffness?edit> sorry, wrong info...whole ski has reverse camber...
http://media.newschoolers.com/uploads/m ... 611fat.jpg
@littleKam: yes that's exactly the thing!
After a lot of skiing with my reverse sidecut - i came to a similar design idea. Not that radical but with a little regular sidecut in front of the binding. I'm quite optimistic that this will compensate the realy ugly behavior of a reverse sidecut on the piste and especially when you have to take some speed straight ahead (i had some awkward falls...). The only way to ski it on Piste is with a lot of lay back and sliding sidewards.
I'm quite curios if this shape will still provide the fantastic attributes for powder skiing of a reverse sidecut - especially the sliding turns with lots of spray :-))) (like a snowboarder).
@Greg: let's exchange our design ideas - i will make a drawing of mine and post it here....
Has anybody an idea how to calculate the radius of such a ski?
After a lot of skiing with my reverse sidecut - i came to a similar design idea. Not that radical but with a little regular sidecut in front of the binding. I'm quite optimistic that this will compensate the realy ugly behavior of a reverse sidecut on the piste and especially when you have to take some speed straight ahead (i had some awkward falls...). The only way to ski it on Piste is with a lot of lay back and sliding sidewards.
I'm quite curios if this shape will still provide the fantastic attributes for powder skiing of a reverse sidecut - especially the sliding turns with lots of spray :-))) (like a snowboarder).
@Greg: let's exchange our design ideas - i will make a drawing of mine and post it here....
Has anybody an idea how to calculate the radius of such a ski?
I just finished two pairs of skis (writeups soon to follos). The first is essentially just like the Kung Paoder, except really stiff. I was at first worried that they might be too stiff, but after skiing them today in heavy powder, I decided that I really like the stiffness. They really blast through the snow when it gets clumped up at the end of the day, and they ski really powerfully.
The second pair is a 183cm ski that is 140mm at the tip, about 130mm at the tail, and the tips are quite long. Centered on the binding, I put 90cm of deep sidecut. The idea is that they will be a good tree-skiing ski that will float well, and be really quick.
I would post drawings of them, but I didn't bother making drawings. I just drew the shape out on a board using a square edge and a stick that I flexed to get the proper sidecut curve. It seemed to work pretty well, and I plan to keep using this method for my future skis.
The second pair is a 183cm ski that is 140mm at the tip, about 130mm at the tail, and the tips are quite long. Centered on the binding, I put 90cm of deep sidecut. The idea is that they will be a good tree-skiing ski that will float well, and be really quick.
I would post drawings of them, but I didn't bother making drawings. I just drew the shape out on a board using a square edge and a stick that I flexed to get the proper sidecut curve. It seemed to work pretty well, and I plan to keep using this method for my future skis.
The Dr. Strangeloves (pair on the right) are along the same line but would probably look skinny next to the pontoons. The dimension are 136-126-113. There is a bit of reverse sidecut, but it is very slight. The widest part is about 10" back from the tip and tapers down to the tail.
I liked the way the reverse sidecut skis, like the Upper Krusts, turn, but don't like how they are so squirrley on hard snow. The Dr. Strangeloves are still really easy to turn, float like a dream, and give more of a carving turn than a sliding turn. The real benefit is that they are much more predictable on harder snow. The last 1/4 of a turn has a tendency to wash out, so high speed carving turns are a bit scary. It's doesn't take too long to get used to especially during p-turns rather than tele.
A full writeup of these skis should be posted soon.
-kelvin
I liked the way the reverse sidecut skis, like the Upper Krusts, turn, but don't like how they are so squirrley on hard snow. The Dr. Strangeloves are still really easy to turn, float like a dream, and give more of a carving turn than a sliding turn. The real benefit is that they are much more predictable on harder snow. The last 1/4 of a turn has a tendency to wash out, so high speed carving turns are a bit scary. It's doesn't take too long to get used to especially during p-turns rather than tele.
A full writeup of these skis should be posted soon.
-kelvin
@kelvin: you're so quick in trying things - amazing! So your experience is that sliding suffers from the regular sidecut in the front half? Is it still possible or does this ski behave like a regular one?
@Greg: I'm curios how your tree skiing construction works! I'm thinking about more stiffness too - espacially with zero camber and a long shovel a soft flex should not be necessary...
Here is the design I want to try:
What i don't like about the pontoon is the shovel. I will go on with those long shovels making them even a bit higher this time!
@Greg: I'm curios how your tree skiing construction works! I'm thinking about more stiffness too - espacially with zero camber and a long shovel a soft flex should not be necessary...
Here is the design I want to try:
What i don't like about the pontoon is the shovel. I will go on with those long shovels making them even a bit higher this time!
There was a similar discussion here:
http://www.skibuilders.com/phpBB2/viewt ... 40&start=0
http://www.skibuilders.com/phpBB2/viewt ... 40&start=0
more K2 Pontoon pics, descriptions
Here is a link to a page from last month's SAI program.
http://www.skipressworld.com/SIA/2006/D ... Day249.htm
http://www.skipressworld.com/SIA/2006/D ... Day249.htm
Alex,
I made these in Dec/Jan, so wasn't so quick. These skis have a little reverse sidecut and I think the K2s have regular sidecut. They are kind of in between a true revese sidecut ski and a regular ski. In the softer stuff, they carve pretty well and harder snow, they are ok (especially the 1st half of the turn) but definetly won't be cutting trenches in the groomers. The last half to 1/4 of the turn tends to slide.
-kelvin
I made these in Dec/Jan, so wasn't so quick. These skis have a little reverse sidecut and I think the K2s have regular sidecut. They are kind of in between a true revese sidecut ski and a regular ski. In the softer stuff, they carve pretty well and harder snow, they are ok (especially the 1st half of the turn) but definetly won't be cutting trenches in the groomers. The last half to 1/4 of the turn tends to slide.
-kelvin
There's actually a pair in the shop down the street (why anyone in the northeast would buy skis like this I have no idea) if anybody wants me to go take some detailed notes or a few pics.Dave wrote:The word I've got on the Pontoon is that it's "rockered" in the tip and tail, with no camber underfoot. And there is a little sidecut directly underfoot, but overall the ski "tapers down"
I've also heard great things. I want to try em.
------------------Take nothing I say as expert advice------------------