TGP Vol. 7 | NS Originals S2E03 | Andreas Hatveit, Benedik Oye & Crew

Member of the Month

JalmarKalmar
April, 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!

Line bindings and the struggle to re-shape ski retail.

profile picture
jetski
Posts: 375 - Karma: 10
One binding many skis. Sick concept put forth by the only company with the balls to shake up the industry. Other companies are more than capable of developing a system with removeable binders but they choose not to. The big companies do not want bindings that are able to switch from one set to the other because they would loose money. When the pilot system was first released I asked a high up rep if "blank" skis would be sold. He changed the subject super fast telling me crap about how sick the binding ski interface is. I feel sorry for people that buy an integrated binding system only to trash their skis on a rock. In the next few years some companies will try to push integrated freeski/binding combos. At all costs do not support this. We need to be able to mount any binding on any ski.
Line realizes that most skiers want a quiver with skis for every type of snow conditions and the reactor will make this happen. I know I will get pounced on for supporting the reactor but it is a concept way ahead of its time that I am willing to back all the way. Is it the only binding I own? No. Have I broken a set? Yes. Will I break another? Probably but I can also tear through 912's pretty quick as well.
I guess the point of this rant is most likely pointless but I want to point out that I'm making a point, by pointing out that hating Line is pointless and counter-productive to the growth of our industry. So point point point and peace.



Oct 24 2005 12:04PM
0 0
profile picture
TheChef
Posts: 32 - Karma: 13
Dude, normal mounted bindings ain't shit. People drop their fucking gear up and pick it up the next day and think some fucking magic happened in between. They just drilled some holes in yo shits with a metal and plastic jig (its pretty uncommon anyways that the springs are aligned perfectly anyways). If you want to use one binding for a bunch of skis just measure and mark your skis, buy the drill bit and inserts and put them in yourself. Or have a shop do it, its really not that hard. Any shop that mounts tele skis should know how to do it, tele bindings rip out and you put inserts in. The line binding is an ill idea for the release pattern, inserts is a pretty standard thing.
Oct 25 2005 1:48AM
0 0
profile picture
hemlockjibber8
Posts: 5955 - Karma: 3,452
I don't understand why people call the Reactor a failure. The Reactor is not done so you can not determine what its existence can amount to.

I believe it is extremely sucessful. Not only did a small newschool company put their heart and soul and a lot of money into R&D, and come out with an amazing binding, they also changed how everyone in the ski world thinks a binding should work.

You may say they did not put out an amazing binding because it has issues. I say you are wrong. Things take time to be perfected. No products initial release is perfect. In time LINE, or someone else, will make the Reactor "perfect."

The biggest accomplishment is that they changed everyones thinking. People are starting to question how a binding should mount to your skis, be able to switch ksi instantly, and most importantly, release. I find it amazing Jason has done this. With so many other companies with millions of dollars running through their veins, making bindings for 30 plus years, a small 7 year old company flips everything around and makes a whole new binding. One that will not destroy your knee or your wallet. How many companies would sacrifice selling many more bindings, just so you are able to quickly change skis and not miss a lap? They built this binding for you and me. That is amazing to me.
Oct 25 2005 2:09AM
0 0
profile picture
mattster
Posts: 4120 - Karma: 41
very well put ^

i think i said this before, give the reactor time and everyone and their dog will be riding them.
Oct 25 2005 2:23AM
0 0
profile picture
bdskier
Posts: 932 - Karma: 14
I may be visualizing what you're saying, or coming up with the most revolutionary binding system every thought up.

Two parallel tracks the lenght of the mounting zone on the ski, or two sections one for heel, one for two, reducing weight and flex problems. In the tracks, threaded cylindars that move freely in the track. When you screw you binding in, it pulls these receivers into the track, locking them in position. The system is interchangable, and allows for various mounting points.

Someone get me a pattent lawyer
Oct 25 2005 2:37AM
0 0
profile picture
bdskier
Posts: 932 - Karma: 14
essentially how center fin boxes work on surfboards, oh and the the receiving nut or washer would probably be a square. the only need is for binding manufactures to standardize their screw patterns.
Oct 25 2005 2:51AM
0 0
profile picture
JDSkier_180
Posts: 39 - Karma: 14
Very True. But you talk about these other larger companies not caring, they do. They won’t to make large amounts of cash, the ski sells are way up. Why because you have, your park skies, your Powder skies, your charger skies (193 Head Monsters, scary.) They want you to have a larger quiver of skis, there begging us to have large amounts of skies. look at how many different varieties of skis you can get. And what I’m getting at is they don’t want us to waste or money on bindings when we could save up a little more and buy another pair of skies. Look at how much a pair of skies are, then look at a pair of bindings, skies are way more. So if they could some how get us to buy more skies they will, and that is to stop pissing are money away on skis. And they understand that little rich kids get their parents to buy them new skies every year (line…) and its smart. I respect anybody who figures out a way to bring in the cash. But making one binding to fit all those skies right now, is like trying to put a man on the moon. These companies need time it’s a lot of money researching new stuff, especially when all you want to do is make money. So when they do come out and they will (hopefully), I wouldn’t be surprised if they coast the same as a pair of skies (hell I would do it) that are durable as most bindings are today. So do what I do and just see where its going and hopefully the pro’s who should be pushing hard for this kind of stuff, will do it (instead of making skies that can only be ridden in the deepest of pow … spatulas, but they are really cool.) And hopefully my Head Mojo 90s show up tomorrow.
p.s. im bored now
Oct 25 2005 3:09AM
0 0
profile picture
JDSkier_180
Posts: 39 - Karma: 14
i ment, on bindings, my bad that was a lot thinking
Oct 25 2005 3:11AM
0 0
profile picture
gretch6364
Posts: 851 - Karma: 8
I skied the Line bindings for a year and I must say they were not bad...but I sold them and am skiing on Look/Rossi this year...I do think that all ski companies should be able to make bindings that switch from one ski to the next. I also think that they could still make money doing it...what we need is bindings that mount to a plate that can be mounted on any ski...the binding would mount onto this plate...oyu would just have to buy the plate for each pair of skis you own...there is no reason this is not possible...most bindings use lifters anyhow and the plate would take the place of the lifter...it won't happen though until a company like Line takes over the binding market and they are forced to...other wise it makes no sense for them to sell less bindings to appease us
Oct 25 2005 10:44AM
0 0
profile picture
telestar6
Posts: 2102 - Karma: 44
That was amazing. You used the word point 6 times in one sentence and it actually made sense. You are my new hero.
Oct 25 2005 1:03PM
0 0
profile picture
gretch6364
Posts: 851 - Karma: 8
You know a second party could always make these plates....aluminum with steal inserts and then sell them to the public....anyone have a tool shop?
Oct 25 2005 1:11PM
0 0
profile picture
ihatemyscratches
Posts: 753 - Karma: 9
if i can save enough money by not getting new bindings everytime i buy a pair of skis to afford one extra pair every three bought then of course id rather do that.
Oct 25 2005 1:14PM
0 0
profile picture
jetski
Posts: 375 - Karma: 10
They don't care!!! Many companies have the ability to produce a system that lets you use the same binding for all skis. The major players will never produce this system. They care about sales and market share. Why would they release a Line-like binding interface knowing they won't sell as many bindings? If the market demands it then the big companies will produce these quiver systems. My only fear as mentioned before by someone else is a major company will purchase the patent and never bring it to the market.
Oct 25 2005 3:37PM
0 0
profile picture
jetski
Posts: 375 - Karma: 10
Good point. I got no come back for this particular issue. I too was a little disapointed that the design was not tweaked.
Oct 25 2005 3:39PM
0 0
profile picture
jetski
Posts: 375 - Karma: 10
Well put Hemlock.
Oct 25 2005 3:40PM
0 0
profile picture
hemlockjibber8
Posts: 5955 - Karma: 3,452
I got a response. They didnt change it because they didnt build ANYMORE THIS YEAR.
Oct 26 2005 1:30AM
0 0
profile picture
Justo8484
Posts: 3905 - Karma: 204
gretch, line makes that plate already. you can put line bindings on any flat ski you want. you can put them ona pair or dynastar omeglass race skis for all they care, as long as you can mount the freedom plate to the ski.
Oct 26 2005 1:48AM
0 0
profile picture
Hedekar
Posts: 1816 - Karma: 15
The concept is brilliant, yet so simple. Ski bindings that mount like snowboard bindings. The snowboard industry has a standard for binding mounts, why can't the ski industry have a standard mounting system for freeskis? Just because Line may have the patent for the idea (I don't even know if they do), doesn't mean that other companies can't collaborate and realize that this is a superior system. We need to create a standard! Talk to your local reps kids, and spread the word.
Oct 26 2005 2:12AM
0 0
profile picture
gretch6364
Posts: 851 - Karma: 8
Yeah but it would be so easy to make a "freedom Plate" that would accomodate Rossi and Look bindings....this is what I want so that I can use the PX/Axial2 bindings
Oct 26 2005 10:01AM
0 0
profile picture
FUUUCK
Posts: 18426 - Karma: 4,888
true dat
Oct 26 2005 10:09AM
0 0
profile picture
OReJow
Posts: 1739 - Karma: 9
I would like to see companies like Armada and K2 (companies that don't already make their own bindings) put 4-hole inserts in their skis. I think that would be a huge step towards standardizing that mounting system. Even if the line binding sucks and you don't want to use it, at least it would prove a point that we demand interchangable bindings with a standard mounting pattern, like snowboards. and then maybe other companies would make bindings that fit those patterns, if they see the demand.
Oct 26 2005 10:28AM
0 0
profile picture
DANETRON
Posts: 6671 - Karma: 137
ya but theyd hate to even remotely help another company
Oct 26 2005 10:29AM
0 0
profile picture
sherLocke
Posts: 4701 - Karma: 8
but if somebody has line bindings now they most likely won't make the switch to another company for thier skis because they would have to drop more money on a second pair of bindings. If you could buy public enemies with inserts and put your line binding right on, then why wouldn't you? the freedom plate lines has out now sucks. it adds more weight, adds another componant to break, and adds even more lift.
Oct 26 2005 11:08AM
0 0
profile picture
shagboy
Posts: 1431 - Karma: 40
bindings could be WAY cheaper than they really are.

I've never owned anything made by line, but I support their shit
Oct 26 2005 11:10AM
0 0
profile picture
hemlockjibber8
Posts: 5955 - Karma: 3,452
...by giving them props on NS????
Oct 26 2005 10:43PM
0 0
profile picture
albatross.
Posts: 4380 - Karma: 772
haha i dont see how anyone can disagree with inserts and bindnings you can move from ski to ski.
Oct 26 2005 11:11PM
0 0
profile picture
mdvorak
Posts: 658 - Karma: 85
THats why I go with race stock rossignols. They never come off, they never break.
Oct 26 2005 11:32PM
0 0
profile picture
hemlockjibber8
Posts: 5955 - Karma: 3,452
its not an issure of bindings coming off or breaking.
what do race stocks cost $600 canadian or a bit less. whatever... wouldnt you love to be able to put those wicked indestructable bindings on everypair of skis you own? Yes, you say? well Im sorry if you have 3 skis. that will cost you $1800. why not have those french guys at rossi put down their bottle of wine, maybe collaborate with LINE, or do it themselves, and come up with something like the reactor?
For you to have three pairs of skis with those racestocks it would cost you $600 in bindings.
Hey look, you can afford more clothes, or food, or 3 months rent in whistler, or 2 more pairs of skis since they made the bindings switchable.

Yaaaaaa
Oct 27 2005 1:21AM
0 0
profile picture
sherLocke
Posts: 4701 - Karma: 8
/\ good fuckin call man, props
Oct 27 2005 1:51AM
0 0
profile picture
Jib_This
Posts: 8272 - Karma: 9
Because there's no money in it for Rossi. In fact, not only is there no money in it for them, but they'd LOSE money even if they developped a binding to fit the pattern, because they'd miss out on selling you more than one pair of bindings.

C'mon, why do you think integrated binding systems are becoming so common? Because they "help the ski flex from tip to tail, even underneath the boot, so there's no dead spot and your turns are smoother, faster, and funner!"..??? Ya fucking right dude, they exist to trap customers into ONE binding that's included in the ridiculous cost of the ski.

Basically, no one gives a shit about you, me, or anyone else, and unless you can show companies that there's a way to use this interchangeable binding concept without losing money in the long run, which is how it'd work out if they did it right now, it's not gonna happen.

Your homework for the night, Brian, is to go look into snowboarding, snowboards, snowboard bindings, etc, and come back to NS with a full report on how it works in their industry. If you can show the suits and fatties in Europe that they can make money with a standardized binding insert pattern and the bindings to match it, then it has a shot...
Oct 27 2005 1:57AM
0 0
profile picture
Hedekar
Posts: 1816 - Karma: 15
why can't other binding companies start making their own style of binding that will fit into Line's insert pattern. It would be a step towards a standard, and the companies would still make money.

Hell, all that is needed is a plate that mounts to a line ski that you can drill a binder into.
Oct 27 2005 2:37AM
0 0
profile picture
Jib_This
Posts: 8272 - Karma: 9
So you're Salomon...

Are you gonna sack up and admit that the way you've been telling everyone to mount your bindings for 30+ years is dumb and that some company from Burlington, Vermont, that only makes twintips and doesn't give a shit about anything else, came up with something better in what amounts to a shitty warehouse and a factory in Quebec?

Ego and pride play into this too.
Oct 27 2005 2:41AM
0 0
profile picture
Hedekar
Posts: 1816 - Karma: 15
Simon, all i am saying is that it is far overdue that a standard needs to be created.
Oct 27 2005 2:43AM
0 0
profile picture
Jib_This
Posts: 8272 - Karma: 9
And I fully agree. A standard should have been agreed to after snowboarding came up with the idea. We should have ripped snowboarding off 20 years ago. But companies like Atomic, Salomon, Elan, K2, Rossi, Dynastar, Blizzard, etc, are too old, too hardheaded, and too proud to say "yes, we need a standard, and it should at least kinda look like the Line one because that one makes the most sense economically, performance wise, and manufacturing wise".

Give it 10-20 years...things might change for the better?
Oct 27 2005 2:46AM
0 0
profile picture
shagboy
Posts: 1431 - Karma: 40
how is that not a good way of supporting a company?

notice the advertisements on this site?
notice how i never say linesucks or line as sold out or wtf is with line?

They are the ONLY progressive ski company out there. Everyone else is just copying age old methods of construction. (with the excption of prajekt)
Oct 27 2005 8:25AM
0 0
profile picture
OReJow
Posts: 1739 - Karma: 9
The next step here is not getting binding companies to adapt. That will come later... The next step is getting some ski companies to put the 4-hole inserts in their skis, thus standardizing that pattern. Armada, K2, Ninthward, Volkl, I'm looking in your direction. Standardize the patten. Binding companies will have to comply if we, the consumers, demand it from them... otherwise we will buy from someone who does.
Oct 27 2005 8:36AM
0 0
profile picture
jetski
Posts: 375 - Karma: 10
Some really good points in this thread. I also can't believe it didn't turn in to the usual Line is gay, you suck fag kind of thread I'm used to on here. Glad there are still people contributing positivly to this message board.
Oct 27 2005 1:08PM
0 0
profile picture
MarkieR
Posts: 5337 - Karma: 98
the line reactor binding does suck. however, the idea is absolutely ingenius. it might seem that ski companies would lose money by adopting this system, but i think they would make money, by enabling people to purchase two pairs of skis and one pair of bindings, instead of one pair of skis and one binding. i don't know, maybe i am wrong. i also think that the pride issue that was brought up earlier has alot to do with the situation. i similar scenario took place many years ago in the car industry. long story short, this random inventor came out with a car that had standard seat belts, anti-shatter glass, and countless other safety features for a price that was less than the competition (ford, chevy, etc...). the end result had the big companies basically run the little guy out of business, using some legal bullshit causing him to go out of business before the cars could even be sold. very similar, i think, to the current situation.
Oct 27 2005 1:28PM
0 0
profile picture
Uncle_Remus
Posts: 1880 - Karma: 368
look at it like this, in the 60's european motorcycles were the only things on the road there were a few jap bikes but they were cheap knock offs but the japenease companys put most of there money into r&d and look at it now, most of you have never heard of norton or bultaco all you ever see is honda or kawasaki. so the moral of the story is put money into r&d and stay ahead of the compatition line is doing this i think they will suceed in the long run
Oct 27 2005 1:33PM
0 0
profile picture
OReJow
Posts: 1739 - Karma: 9
maybe some of the smaller companies (liberty, ninthward, surface, etc.) could step it up, and start putting 4-hole inserts into their skis. that would be a start.
Oct 27 2005 2:00PM
0 0
profile picture
pbandj
Posts: 5610 - Karma: 28
word, my reactors are still good after 50 park days and 25 days just riding, my brother has them on his skis and has skiied 75 days with them (he doesn't do park)
Oct 27 2005 2:33PM
0 0
profile picture
Rich
Posts: 921 - Karma: 11
I would go further and suggest (you might argue, too boldly) that it has the potential of being the biggest thing to shake up the ski industry in the last 30 years. I mean all across the industry not just the freeski sector. I just wish there were more industry leaders with balls like Jay Lev. I love Jay's balls...they're so big ;) and always help him come up with the sickest, badest most revolutionary ideas. All hail Jay's balls!!
Oct 27 2005 4:22PM
0 0
profile picture
Krongos
Posts: 5214 - Karma: 47
this is totally true, no one should hate on line
Oct 27 2005 5:14PM
0 0
profile picture
hemlockjibber8
Posts: 5955 - Karma: 3,452
i was just telling the kid who has the wicked unbreakable rossi race stocks why the Line binding is such a good idea for US. I didnt say rossi would do it, or anything to that extent.

Possible ways for this to become standard are:

some little company creating it and taking a large chunk of cash from everyone else. Forcing them to jump on board.

Each company has their own pattern so that you have to stay with their skis and bindings. Would rely heavily on brand loyalty at first. But offers a chance for them to make MORE money. People would not be able to buy rossi skis and salomon bindings, they would have to get rossi bindings if they want scrathches.

And a theme that would play throughout every situation , no matter which way it happens. The insert bindings would cost a significant amount more than a standard one, to recoup some losses from the single binding sale.
Oct 27 2005 10:11PM
0 0
profile picture
minty
Posts: 317 - Karma: 11
im not ragging line but im not yet convinced with the binding. they feel different, have a huge riser and just arent the same as normal bindings. good idea? yes. going to catch on? you never know. revolution? no.
Oct 27 2005 10:17PM
0 0
profile picture
awsomecoolguy
Posts: 3536 - Karma: 13
sick concept bad binding
Oct 27 2005 10:26PM
0 0
profile picture
Literature
Posts: 13673 - Karma: 3,086
Why, if we have so many "progressive" ski companies, we are still looking to huge comgamerates for quite possibly the most important part of your skiing gear(if your knees are fucked, you can't ski).

Armada is now making poles. We don't need poles. Breaking poles is a fact of life, and generally, poles dont cost a lot. However, only line and 4frnt have produced a binding, one (the line) being durable if adjusted by the shop and a piece if you set them up. The other is only marginally better than the ones Salomon, Rossi, Look, Tyrolia or whatever are offering.

I think that the "core" companies have gotten complacent. A standardized binding jig would make a world of sense, and since these "core" companies supposedly dont have the problems of the corperations, why can't they make friends and work together.

Furthermore, there are no newschool boot companies. I are still stuffing my dogs into stuff that really isn't designed the way I would want a boot. I want comfort, shock absorbtion, and a little stiffness for control in a boot. This is not hard. But still, noone has stepped up.

At this point, I don't see a whole lot of difference between the lot of companies.
Oct 27 2005 10:30PM
0 0
profile picture
westnile
Posts: 372 - Karma: 10
ok the freedom plate is not interchanable and uses to many screws that are not spaced properly. this causes sevre flex pattern inconsistancies and creates extra stress points on the ski. i will admit that it is a good idea they just need to fire thier engineer and get some one who can actually build a binding that functions properly with about half the wieght and also eliminate they whole fact that they are so weak and fragile that if i skied on them i would be afraid to snees.
Oct 27 2005 11:30PM
0 0
profile picture
westnile
Posts: 372 - Karma: 10
oh and i can toltally switch my salomns from one pair of skis to another with very little efort. Oh and atomic has by far the best foundamental binding system in the world. it functions much better than any other binding in the since that it alows the ski to flex under foot instead of having a dead spot there. it alows the ski to deliver a very consistant flex pattern. also do to the fact that the binding floats on the ski it elimanates pre-releases that other binding like marker and rossi have such a bad problem with. Oh and notice how atomic has had this system now for 8 years and all the rest of the companys are just now starting to catch up and build there own randitions. like salomon with there pilot. also atomic released an interchanable binding system way before line it was indeed a hostage binding were you had to have atomic skis for it to be interchanable but you could swap the binding from ski to ski with the turn of 7 screws the atomic binding is also the only binding in the world besides a rental that will adjust from a size 23.0 to size 38.0
Oct 27 2005 11:39PM
0 0
profile picture
skimasterflex
Posts: 2064 - Karma: 16
Your angst is so misguided. Tyrolia has a working releasable heel like Line so desperately wants to make work. Line tried making boots but they flopped just as their bing has. 4FRNT went with an existing race binding and made a few modifications and called it their own. Their are tons of boots out there that do what you want you just don't know a good boot fitter obviously. It is a horrible idea to think that a company that makes uner 10,000 skis a year can just up and make good boots or a good binding, it isn't possible it just cost too much. It was easy for them to make soft park skis and wide skis for pow because they used existing technology, and just played around with different wood milling and sidewall shapes until Armada got it right last year. And finally if you tear your acl in a look/rossi it was because your din was too high to begin with. What you want is on sale in stores all over the country and the internet stop complaining.
Oct 28 2005 2:39AM
0 0
profile picture
Literature
Posts: 13673 - Karma: 3,086
^What I mean is we need a newschool company focused entirely on boots. The market is there, but the startup is ridiculous. I know it would be hard, but I think that it would be well worth it. Also, I broke 2 pairs of Scratch 140s last year, and still love the binding. However, they aren't bomb proof,a nd this year they scraped the turntable.
Oct 29 2005 10:39AM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-4)