Why do people hate binding innovation?

Itsbackfliptime

Itsbackfliptime

Active member
The mad trix system failed, lines bindings and quickmount system also failed.

I realize that both of these were really heavy and kinda crappy but they were pretty good ideas. Especialy the quickmount thing.
 
well...if they were heavy and kinda crappy thats prolly why they failed. just my opinion tho. people tend to not like shit.
 
When things break the first day you use them, that is not innovation.

Great ideas are awesome, but the job of a company that is trying to innovate is to turn those ideas into something people can use, and then profit from that.

I had the Reactors. Great idea, for sure. But the rise over the ski, weight, and amount of plastic parts made them very brittle and not user friendly.

If it was made entirely of metal, it would probably work great. But as it was, it was quite shitty.
 
You're drawing ridiculous conclusions. Yeah, both those systems were innovative. But as you said, they sucked and didn't work. So people either hate innovations, or crappy bindings that don't work. Do you really think it's the former?
 
heads idea was just retarded. who wants a ski that is actually backwards??

lines idea though was way to far ahead of its time. i cant wait until they figure that binding out to be sick as fuck.
 
if lines quik mount thing was the thing were they had pre drilled holes. than that would be the dummest idea for any ski that wasnt symetricall because if someone might want to mount them somewere else, and if they do they will already have 2 sets of holes in their skis.
 
Exactly. Even if its just for twins, cause guys who ride twins are usually the type who have a constant need to change their mounting.
 
the new rossi quik mounting bindings are great, they are like a demo binding but not as heavy and shitty, they mount in prob 2 min, not sure if they have the same system for there scratch line, anyone know
 
the deadbolt has the same brake system as other bindings. I've messed them up landing switch..

4frnt is switching to tyrolia bindings or something next year anyways.
 
the brake system has 2 springs on each side of the brake to prevent any movement at all of the brake. pretty much every other binding only has 1 spring which, when you land switch hard, allows the brake to deploy quite easily. I've broken several pairs of brakes on my old axial 120's, and not 1 pair i've broken or even bended in the year and a half i've had my deadbolts. and the brakes seem alot beefier then on other bindings...
 
I would pee my pants if they did this, I would be so excited.

And the next step? A universal pants to jacket attachment system. So annoying when you don't buy the same brand of coat and pant.
 
that was my brothers senior project last year. he designed it and everything, but never had a prototype made or talked to any companies to see if they would help him produce it / make it compatible with their binding
 
ya.... about the duke.

3 of my friends got it.. best binding ever, good for anything. sadly the platic mounting plate is now fucked and the plastic on all 3 pairs is breaking and its almost impossible to change modes. at least warrenty is there.
 
Amen!

I now have no brake on BOTH skis because they both totally broke off...

...this is like the millionth time this has happened...
 
the mad trix binding was insanely stupid... I remember taking those skis, and hiding them in the back of the shop. Horrible idea, even worsely executed.

The line binding, well I dont think anyone hated on the general idea, I think the majority of people were pretty stoked on it, but when you cut costs and put out a shitty product youre going to get hated on. Too bad K2 didnt buy line the year before the reactor came out... maybe it would have lasted. Maybe.

I like the jester and duke and the idea behind them, but marker just has a product that is best suited for elderly women, and the kind of people who only ski mellow groomers. I hope they toughen those things up, or salomon steals the idea... then Id buy them.
 
bingo, but people like to mount there bindings all over there skis so there would have to be patterns for standard, modern, center, and progressive in some cases.
 
I had the same problem with the stupid px12's. I'm a newbie, but I still broke my breaks all the time.

Just cashed out for some 416's instead. Worth it imo.
 
It's more like companies are too smart to do that because of the wonderful thing called capitalism. If they made a universal mounting pattern the co's wouldn't sell as much product. If you fuck up a binding and want to switch to something with a different mounting pattern, many people are more likely to buy new skis so you can get them remounted in the exact position you want while keeping the integrity of the ski. by not making things universal the companies don't give the skiier much more of a choice than shelling out more bread. Same thing for the universal pant/jacket attachment. It will never happen because companies want you to buy all of your product from them. If you could buy any outerwear you wanted and it all fit together perfectly the companies would lose money.

God bless the USA! Capitalism forever!
 
I think your argument holds up for the jacket and pants, but not for bindings.

Mounting position is dictated by the underfoot line on the ski and the midsole mark on the boot. If I understand this right, we are thinking of a universal hole patten, so there would only need to be one jig for all new binders. This would not vary from ski to ski, so it wouldn't cause any loss of sales or brand loyalty.
 
or smart enough to know that they will make more money making you buy a binding for every ski you own?

look at burton, if you want to use a different company's binding on their boards you gotta buy special base plates to match the bolt pattern. it's genius!

 
Say that if I had a pair of look's and a pair of solly's with the same hole pattern and I broke the look's I would be able to just swap them out with the solly's using the same holes. But since they use a different pattern, I'd be more inclined to replace the broken binders with a set of look's so that I wouldn't have to change the hole pattern and remount the skis. It makes sense to me but maybe I'm wrong
 
they're talking about the quickmount system which allowed you to take the binding from one ski and put it on a different ski in about 30 seconds, so yes the companies would lose money in binding sales
 
sorry but not a very intelligent post. the line bindings SUCKED. not only were they heavy as shit they broke like it was their job. i think that people even bought those pieces of shit is proof that people dont fear binding change at all.
additionally id like to add that bindings are possibly the most pivotal (excuse the pun) aspect of safety in skiing. why would you jump at something new and not proven if look pivots have been around and kicking ass for what, 30 years?
 
snowboarding really has a great system. fairly adjustable positioning, and unlimited number of remounts. Ski bindings are super dumb and hopefully will take after windsurfing universals.
in case you don't know what a universal is for a windsurfer is, it's the flexible joint that attaches the sail (more specifically the mast) to the board. in the past they were all different designs, but now there is basically an industry standard.

moral of the story is ski bindings need a universal system with metal inserts placed from recommended mounting to like +5cm. It will keep everyone happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top