So LINE is really ahead of the times..

Osek206

Osek206

Member
I was looking for bindings randomly on the net and spoted a pair or line reactor bindings. Crazy thing is they look exactly like marker dukes/jesters. I'm not sure if they bought the pattern from Line but its pretty crazy. This was years ago and I feel when they dropped the reactors it was the dopest concept expecially with the 4 hole drill pattern.

Anyway props to line, everybody bites their concepts so thats a sign of the times. From fat skis(early taper/rise) to bindings.
 
good idea but bad manufacturing, the bindings had a very high fail rate. I knew 2 people that had them, and they both broke.
 
Marker is owned by K2, who are now partnered with Line. So that's part of the reason. However, the really revolutionary thing about the Reactor was the hotswap; the fact that you could with relative ease switch bindings from one ski to another.
I mean... uh... Line didn't make bindings. You're crazy. Go away crazy person.
 
The Reactors were nothing like the Duke. Sure the toe piece look similar, but their function was completely different.

Line had a great idea, but it failed in performance. I do love the mounting principle though in the way you can swap bindings between skis quickly.
 
I think they weighed more around the weight of a small child.

But i had them and never got hurt, but they broke about 20 times.
 
the number one revolutionary thing with the line bindings was the ability to rotate out of the heel, reducing ACL and MCL injuries, unfortunatly it never really worked well as alot of people suffered from pre releases. They were also heavy, and not constructed well interms of strength. oh well thats what comes with inovation.

And the toe is really not that simmilar to the marker toe, they just look the same, its like saying tyrolia bindings are close to look bindings because the spring in the toe runs lenght wise.
 
they need to find a way and all the companies agree to make a universal binding system like snowboard bindings so you could own two pairs of skis and one pair of bindinds and switch it out without messin anything up
 
Those bindings were a great idea, but didn't actually turn out well... They had weird mount patterns, and all the line skis had holes already drilled into the skis, so if you used line skis and bindings you could essentially mount your own skis really quickly. I used them for a little while, and they were the heaviest bindings in the world, and they had a huge fail rate... Mike Wilson skied for LINE back then, and refused to ski on their bindings.
 
yeah, in a perfect world that would be great but its an easy bet it wont happen. all in this thread are spot on with regards to how the binding turned out, great concept and design but very hard quality control on a completely new product. its refreshing to see people noticing that and not just saying Line produced crap. The company has been consistent since the beginning, all about skiing and the skiers and i hope that never goes unnoticed. That goes to show skiers are at a higher education level, ha! so go vote if you're over 18.
 
Yeah, I had my DIN set at like a 12 and i would pre release on a 180 landing on a 30fter. I have px12's now and have yet to pre release.
 
i never really was a fan of those huge plates you had to install in order to mount them, and theyre a huge reason why the whole binding was so much heavier than most...

never had any though, skiied on em a few times but didnt own any, ive heard the failure rate was just ghastly though
 
I'm sure somebody has tried this, if not it's food for thought:

In the early days of snowboarding, I know because I'm 36, the boards did not have the current 'nutsert' pattern.(nutserts are things that you screw the bindings into) They were blank just like skis are. On a couple of occasions my binding ripped completely out of the board. I always though that was a stupid way of of attaching the binding as you ran a high risk of stripping out the screw as well as having a limited amount of mounting options.

Why aren't ski/binding companies using nutserts? Greed? Are there technical limitations with skis? I would rather have to buy a ski/binding combo that is swappable even if I have to stick with one brand.

I think I may get some nutserts and screws and try doing this with an old pair of skis. Hopefully I don't blow out my knee!
 
i think thats a great example of how shops are holding back the progression. if a company were to do that they would have to pioneer the bindings and the ski for that, which would take alot, and snowboards are adjustable for comfort, skis are not adjustable for saftey.

HOWEVER

i think a big inhibitor will be the shops cause thats 35-55 bucks on top of every ski they sell that they make mounting, re mounting etc. i mean who buys new bindings and mounts them themselves? not too many people.
 
^ to the above post.

that'd be pretty easy to do as well. I wonder if you could find the metal inserts you mentioned from snowboards at a hardware store in the size of a ski binding screw. be so sick to have a one binding fleet of skis so easy to fly with and pack in cars. WOW THIS HAS TO BE DONE!!
 
Refering to the prior posts, they don't make the nutserts in skis because of the variety of different binders on the market. different binders have different mount patterns. You can't make 100 different holes in a ski. You could buy only one binding, and only one brand of skis, but that would suck.

Snowboards have what is called an "industry standard". That is, it is a standard in the industry to make all parts interchangable.

ski companies havent done this probobly some what because of greed, somewhat of tradition, and somewhat becasue the mount patter effects the performance of the binder.
 
I think a big problem was that line couldn't do anything about some huge problems with the concept. Besides the durability

If they had an 8 hole patern instead of a 4 hole you could have 3 different boot centers. What's the point in having park skis(1260) if the mounting holes are 5 inches behind boot center?

Also the freedom plate or w/e it was called that was used to mount line bindings on non line skis was a bad idea in my opinion. It mad your skis look cheap and they should've stuck to line bindings on line skis for the first season.
 
I've actually considered toying with that on a shitty pair of skis. Basically taking a pair of bindings, and inserting metal threaded inserts into the ski, and then attaching the bindings via the inserts.

I'd imagine it would work fine and see no reason why it wouldn't work.

Something like these could be used...

http://www.ezlok.com/InsertsWood/softWood.html
 
that was my plan for last year. i was going to get metal inserts at dead center, and then a set like 5-8cm back for pow days. i intended to use heli-coils for that... then i found out what heli-coils actaully were.

i ended up getting demo bindings with movable heel and toe.

im actually interested if someone does do the threaded inserts though. i'd be really interested in trying it.
 
I'm tempted. if I go through with it, I will surely do a full write-up on the experience and results.

I see no reason why it wouldn't work though.
 
One issue not mentioned would be the inflexibility of mounting location. How many could you offer? That seems like a barrier.

Let's say you can do a custom setup.

Here's a little analysis:

New skis (All Mtn) - $400

New skis (Park) - $400

New bindings - $200

Nutsert install on both pairs - $80 est.

Total = $1080 with nutserts. This essentially saves the cost of a new pair of bindings ($200).

I agree that there will be little motivation for ski companies to adopt this unless binding manufacturers standardize.

I'm also curious as to whether or not the safety concerns are valid. I would feel much better about having my bindings loc-tite screwed into nutserts than just screwed into the core.

 
I don't expect ski companies to ever offer threaded inserts on skis, it would have to be a personal undertaking. There is way too much variety in ski bindings and mounting points.

Also, looking at prices of E-Z Lok threaded inserts, it would run about $170 PER SKI, based off the price of inserts at $10+ per insert.

I did not realize the inserts were that much. I will NOT be experimenting with this, because it is actually cheaper to buy bindings.
 
It's good to give props where props are due. Line works SO hard to not just sell skis but to try to make shit better, even if they get fucked financially and through reputation. Yeay Line
 
because it would be really hard to keep the holes water tight and your skis will delam from the inside
 
I actually don't see this being a problem.

If you store your skis in a dry place, and use Loc-Tite when swapping bindings, there would be no place for the moisture to enter the core of the ski while the bindings were mounted. The interface of the binding screws to the insert would be waterproof.

It's moreso an issue of cost. It is not cost effective at all. Threaded inserts are far too expensive to purchase at an individual level, and at a corporate level, it is impossible to do because of the amount of different mounting positions and patterns.
 
damn, what equipment are you buying? and i want in. I'm here spending fucking $700 - $800 on new skis and $550 on new bindings... i'm a sucker for technology i guess.
 
those bindngs were such and awsome idea, they allowed the ski to flex naturally with little binding indterferance, and the swaping idea was great. if only they could of had higher dins and were lighter, i think they would be still be around.
 
i actually rode reactors for a couple years. they were absurdly heavy. like you have no idea, they easily doubled the weight of my set up. a cool concept, but kind of harsh in application.
 
I think it was a great idea it was just to mutch ahead of its time.

I think line should definetly try making these again. I mean now that they are even more established now and are owned by K2 they have more money than ever, not to mention since K2 owns marker that's alot of technology that line can use. All they have to do is make the necessary tweaks to the design and make it out of lighter materials( i know, easier said than done.)

i think its worth a shot
 
well rossi is starting to do this movable bindings concept with the free system on the s4. you can move the binding forward and back on the ski, it uses a track like Burton uses, so you can adjust for certain snow conditions. if rossi did it with all their skis then it would be great, which i think they probly will expand it throughout the freestyle line up in the upcoming years. it would be great to have a universal binding pattern but each binding is so different in shape and construction that it would be hard to do. i had the reactors when they first came out on my 1260's. it was the most bad ass setup, but the bindings never stayed attached to my boots. they released all the time. they were fine the first year, but after a season on them, they started to die. i wish line would bring the reactor back with out the plate, just a swivel toe and heel with the inserts on every line ski. that would be awesome. what can i say, ive always skied on Line.
 
i could be mistaken, but I think that was only when they were using vist style bindings, now that they switched to the tyrollia program (like everyone) its just normal bindings
 
Incorrect. Marker is owned/partnered with Volkl. I think K2 works in correlation with Marker. Marker had absolutely nothing to do with the making of the reactor. The same year all the reactors were failing was when line was producing skis with shit quality. With all the returns and warranties Line had lost a lot of money and K2 saw the brand had potential and purchased Line. So the innovation of Line is great but it cost them quite a bit. The binding was a great idea and would save people a lot of money. Unfortunately it just didn't work out that great for Line or anyone.
 
Sheesh. I figured they'd be around $.50-$1.00. That's $170 just in hardware, not including shop install costs. Definitely not that cost effective.

Unless you're spending $550 on bindings!!
 
Yeah, that's what I had expected, a buck or so per insert.

Definitely not worth the cost.
 
I dont think that itll be an industry standard for another 5 years. ski companies (excluding core twin tip manufacturers) are so into the money they can make its ridiculous. I think that stores could offer the service to save some kids some money but other than that it wont be coming up anytime soon to have an industry standard hole pattern. and plus itd be better that way then you could have your skis mounted just wher eyou want it.
 
I cannot see how those would be installed in an already made ski. They look like something that is included during the process with their wide, solid base area.

A threaded insert would be just as prone to pull out as a traditional screw mount screw as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top