Line Skis

ok, dont know if this will help you at all...as I have NO experience with line bindings.
I have owned a pair of lines since 2000? i guess. My first twins were the black dragons the year they came out. I still ski on the red dragins as my beater skis, and they will not die. Only damage i have to one of them is en egde blew out at the tip because i landed about a 8 foot drop onto a tree stump. i have jibbed on skogens for 4 years ,on east coast ice at about 180 lbs, and have not delammed one yet. Havent really put my mo-ships through a lot of abuse, but i have the 192's and love them. I know there has ben discusion about their customer service, PR, etc...and i have no opinion on that. Jyst my .02 abour the product.
<edit>spelling errors due to the 10 many malt beverages consumed uring baseball game<edit>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jibij

It doesn't help you, McWop, but Front Rangers can demo the Line binding and Line skis from the Jibij Pro Shop in Boulder.

disclaimer: I am not affiliated with the Jibij Pro Shop.

---

I have been looking for feedback on the binding from actual users - so I emailed
the Jibij Pro Shop (thx for the beta jibij). Here is the feedback (in italics) from Josh on the Reactor binding (he was quick to get back - nice service):

I have personally ridden the binding myself, and I stand by it 100%. Any problems that it previously had have been fixed. The reactor is one of the most solid, stable bindings I've ever ridden on. Nobody has had any issues with it so far. In my opinion, it will become the industry standard for bindings, and soon all skis will have the insert pattern in them, just like
snowboards do.

After reading through that thread, there was a few other points I thought I should mention. The screws for the binding have a vertical strip of nylon which keeps them in the inserts. It works very well. Weight is also not an issue. It is a few grams heavier than a look pivot. The old ones were heavy, but I guarantee the new ones are not.

The bindings were designed by some of the guys who made the look pivot turntable heel. So they utilized that technology and improved upon it. The way that it mounts with the 4-hole pattern in the center eliminates a dead zone on the ski. It effectively keeps its flex and the binding allows you to turn from the center of your boot, instead of the toe and heel. The ski feels more like a part of your foot.

Josh
Jibij Pro Shop

Do you lose the ability to decide how far forward you mount your skis if you use the Reactor binding?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phUnk

Do you lose the ability to decide how far forward you mount your skis if you use the Reactor binding?

---

Nah, the skis come with a complemantry hacksaw. It's sort of like cut-her-hair Barbie...

We finally got our shipment of Line bindings last week, and according to one of the back shop guys the release values were more consistent than a Salomon, Look or Tyrolia. I wasn't there when they were doing it so I'm not sure as to the specs, but it was done on a Wintersteiger calibrating machine, so some of the human error was taken out of it.

I haven't personally skied on them, but a few of the guys I work with have, and two of them rode them for a bit last year, 10-15 times, I think. They both said the problems from last year looked like they were remedied, but one thing was brought up was the small mounting pattern feels a little funny for guys with bigger feet. Basically that there starts to me some slack or lack of response with a big boot. Not sure how much you would notice that, but it seems to be the one complaint they don't really have a remedy for without changing the mounting pattern. Line claims the mounting pattern is supposedly 5x stronger then a traditional mount, but, I don't think it's a far comparisson due to the forces of two locations versus one, maybe I'm wrong, I dunno.

Only thing I noticed, has already been mentione, the switch to adjust and the weight, their skis are light, which is good 'cause that binding is heavy, like atomic 1018 heavy.

I'd love to demo a pair and see if they lasted one run at La Grave.

i checked some out the other day. it seems there is some flex for and aft of the four mounting holes. the binder kind of hovers abvove the ski at the toe and heal. seems flexy. its obvious the it will really eject your foot with gusto though. i'd like to try it and see how responsive it feels.

Ok here is the scoop. I am not going with any Line stuff. Here is why:

I was at the shop, and they had 3 pair of Chronics, 1 pair Pollard Pro's, 3 MTX's. The cap on the sides of 60% of the skis were warped/irregular. On one pair of chronics, one sidewall was flat, and the other had the slight curve from the cap to the metal edge. Others were noticeably irregular, and the sets were irregular from one ski to the other.

Too bad, Line has a nice lineup, but not too sure on the QC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mcwop

The cap on the sides of 60% of the skis were warped/irregular. On one pair of chronics, one sidewall was flat, and the other had the slight curve from the cap to the metal edge. Others were noticeably irregular, and the sets were irregular from one ski to the other.

---

So apart from that was everything else fine? ;)

I fondled some Reactor bindings at the shop today; they were mounted on some Motherships.

There are several degrees of rotational play in the binding just sitting on the ski: you can hold the toe and heel and wiggle them back and forth with very little effort. Assuming only 3 degrees of movement, this would translate to over 5 centimeters of slop at the tip of a 188cm ski!

Even Skiing Magazine said in their tests: "Since the center mounting point is the only solid contact between binding and ski, it was tough to transfer energy to the tip and tail—muting edging sensations and making it difficult to initiate (or finish) carved turns."

Bleh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spats

I fondled some Reactor bindings at the shop today; they were mounted on some Motherships.

There are several degrees of rotational play in the binding just sitting on the ski: you can hold the toe and heel and wiggle them back and forth with very little effort. Assuming only 3 degrees of movement, this would translate to over 5 centimeters of slop at the tip of a 188cm ski!

Even Skiing Magazine said in their tests: "Since the center mounting point is the only solid contact between binding and ski, it was tough to transfer energy to the tip and tail?muting edging sensations and making it difficult to initiate (or finish) carved turns."

Bleh.

---

pfft, who needs to carve going into a tabletop anyway

I was just wondering if anyone has had problems with Line Skis. I love riding Armada AR5's but the dimensions and the price for some of the Line's are hard to pass up but also leave me a little weary about the quality of the ski.

i have sir francis bacons and really like them. i haven't had any problems. slant sidewalls, not capped like most of the line skis. they are made in china, but so are K2. its tough beat some of their prices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki

I was just wondering if anyone has had problems with Line Skis. I love riding Armada AR5's but the dimensions and the price for some of the Line's are hard to pass up but also leave me a little weary about the quality of the ski.

---

solid nearly irrelevant thread bump.