Line Skis

Must start off by saying that I am aware of this thread, but don't know what to make of it yet.

Regardless, I checked out a pair of Line Eric Pollard Pro's. I have to say that I like what I see and feel. They have similar diminsions to Pocket Rockets, but feel much stiffer. In fact they felt suprisingly solid. This is what I am looking for. Plus the Line binding thing is interesting because I could also get a pair of Mothership Titaniums for some new fat boards, and not have to buy another binding. Plenty of feedback in tech talk on the Moships, but does anyone have some feedback on the Pollard Pro? Wish I could just demo a pair, but that is tough to do in the Mid-Atlantic. Plus this shop will let you return the ski (for credit) if you hate it - nice deal.

Quote:

---

Edit - I did find one endorsement from Meats of Evil: "The skis are the line eric pollard pros. I dig them, i mounted them back two 2cm and they kick ass. There the best all around ski line makes."

---

http://beta.lineskis.com/products/im...pollard_lg.gif

The ski is probably pretty good. The dimensions look good, and if it feels good to you, I'd say go for it.

I'd be a lot more worried about the binding. They say they've fixed a lot of the durability problems from last year, but it's still really new tech in a field where the best tech is over a decade old (look turntable heel, for example.)

Plus, I don't know if you ski with snowboarders a lot, but they are constantly having to tighten the binding screws in their boards. At first it's solid, but after 20-30 days, they are like lock-tight junkies. This sure looks like a similar sort of setup, so it might have the same sort of long term wear problem.

So, you wanna be a beta-tester for Line bindings, eh? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phUnk

So, you wanna be a beta-tester for Line bindings, eh? ;)

---

Still undecided on the binding. I figure if it does not work, then the skis can be mounted with traditional bindings.

If I am the beta tester - then consider it done for all of maggotdom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joshbu

...I don't know if you ski with snowboarders a lot, but they are constantly having to tighten the binding screws in their boards. At first it's solid, but after 20-30 days, they are like lock-tight junkies...

---

New snowboard bindings come with the screws coated with locktite. Once you install the bindings, they will stay tight forever, UNLESS you turn the screws to change the stance width, angles, etc. Anything that breaks the seal means you need to reapply the loctite. (That includes cranking on the screws even a fraction of a turn - just to make sure they are tight.)

Any automotive mechanic knows this, and so should any snowboarder who is constantly bringing out the screwdriver to tighten their bindings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mcwop

Still undecided on the binding. I figure if it does not work, then the skis can be mounted with traditional bindings.

---

Unless it fucks up your ankle/leg/knee.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phUnk

Unless it fucks up your ankle/leg/knee.

---

]


What a strange way to gauge the effectiveness of bindings...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splat

]


What a strange way to gauge the effectiveness of bindings...

---

Aware of that, and one of the many things to think about in terms of their binding.

Man - need snow bad - October is such a cruel month.

looking at the line binding all i can say is that i'm concerned. the little switch that you use to set the length of the binding to dial in your boot sole length seem like they could open kinda easy. it'll be interesting to see how they hold up on hill. props to coming out with a new idea but it's gonna be a time will tell thing for sure.

line binding looks interesting and, if it works like it says it does, could save some ACLs, but i definately wouldn't want to be one of the guinea pigs for it.

my advise - buy some rossis or looks and if you start hearing good things about the line bindings (ie - they don't break) and you still want them, go for it. otherwise stick with something that you know will work for sure.

The one big problem with the lne Reactor bindgings is that they are HEAVY. I just picked up a ski with one on it the other day. If you don't mid the feel of a Heavy demo binding on your skis all the time then, check them out, but if not, go elsewhere (LOOK solly).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eldo

New snowboard bindings come with the screws coated with locktite. Once you install the bindings, they will stay tight forever, UNLESS you turn the screws to change the stance width, angles, etc. Anything that breaks the seal means you need to reapply the loctite. (That includes cranking on the screws even a fraction of a turn - just to make sure they are tight.)

---

Yet the whole point of the binding is that you can have one binding and a quiver of skis and constantly switch. That's the selling point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joshbu

Yet the whole point of the binding is that you can have one binding and a quiver of skis and constantly switch. That's the selling point.

---

Agreed, that seems to spell trouble ahead with Line binding screws coming loose - unless you carry a tube of loctite with you.

The Burt binding setup that I had back in the 80s (70s?) was one system where you could easily swap bindings from one set of skis to another. You just needed a mounting plate for each pair.

Good reports from people in the EC with them. A lot of the shop monkeys liked em too.

the ski. I too think the mount footprint is too small.

this was in response to the "binding or ski q below"

I don't have any feedback on the bindings, but I love the Pollards. Best performing all mountain twin I've been on.

I remain skeptical about the mounting pattern. It's a very tiny square that will be seeing a lot of torque, and I predict that this creates a very sloppy boot/ski interface -- making skiing more difficult, and eventually resulting in a meaningful quantity of T-nuts coming loose or being ripped out of the ski.

Plus it means that the binding must be made incredibly heavy in an ultimately doomed effort to counteract the problem.

I like their release technology. It's too bad they're ruining it with an unsound mounting system. There are many easy ways to solve this, but it appears they were too concerned with doing it "just like a snowboard".

That's what concerned me. Why does the footprint of mounting screws need to be so tiny? You'd need a really beefy sole plate on the binding to resist the twisting and bending forces that a big, aggressive skier is going to put on them, thus adding weight or, if it's not up to the job, compromising release.

I love the concept but can't see how it can work with such a fundamentally flawed foundation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schuss

Good reports from people in the EC with them. A lot of the shop monkeys liked em too.

---

The binding or the ski?

Any binding that only uses 4 screws to stay mounted to the ski worries me.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by splat

What a strange way to gauge the effectiveness of bindings...

---

Inconsistent release can hold you in when it should release you, possibly resulting in injury. How is that a strange way to gauge the effectiveness of bindings? (I admit my original response was glib & didn't explain what I meant.)

Bindings
Parachutes
Helmets
Condoms

Those are a few things that you don't want to beta test.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phUnk

Inconsistent release can hold you in when it should release you, possibly resulting in injury. How is that a strange way to gauge the effectiveness of bindings? (I admit my original response was glib & didn't explain what I meant.)

Bindings
Parachutes
Helmets
Condoms

Those are a few things that you don't want to beta test.

---

What if the Condom beta test was with Rebecca Stamos?

How difficult would it be to use some other hardware (ie, besides adhesives or sealants like lock-tite), such as lockwashers, to help secure screws and bindings in the inserts.

I know that in my work, we have a great many panels or components which must periodically or routinely be removed to perform maintenance on stuff underneath or inside. When the panels are put back on, they aren't always sealed shut, as hardware can provide the resistance necessary to prevent the screws or bolts from backing out. Since these are aircraft parts, they undergo a whole lot of stress and a huge temperature range.

On a side note, McWop, it is very noble for you to make yourself a guinea pig to further the cause, but since your body is possibly on the line I'm not sure it's worth it, unless you're being paid to do it.

I agree that inserts for ski bindings would be wonderful. The bitch to buying new skis is the 200 bucks or so you always have to spend to put binders on 'em. Unless you're fortunate and can get freebies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jumper Bones

How difficult would it be to use some other hardware (ie, besides adhesives or sealants like lock-tite), such as lockwashers, to help secure screws and bindings in the inserts.

I know that in my work, we have a great many panels or components which must periodically or routinely be removed to perform maintenance on stuff underneath or inside. When the panels are put back on, they aren't always sealed shut, as hardware can provide the resistance necessary to prevent the screws or bolts from backing out. Since these are aircraft parts, they undergo a whole lot of stress and a huge temperature range.

On a side note, McWop, it is very noble for you to make yourself a guinea pig to further the cause, but since your body is possibly on the line I'm not sure it's worth it, unless you're being paid to do it.

I agree that inserts for ski bindings would be wonderful. The bitch to buying new skis is the 200 bucks or so you always have to spend to put binders on 'em. Unless you're fortunate and can get freebies.

---

Still may not pull the trigger on the binding (or the ski). Gave it a good look over in the shop, and it looks straight-forward. The binding is basically comprised of two toe pieces compared to traditional bindings. So the rear moves side to side (similar to a toe piece on any binding), and up.

So long as the materils are solid - the physics of it make sense. The tough part will be in how to evaluate the binding after a season of people using it. How do you measure injury rate, and determine if the injury was caused by the binding or not. People, and a lot of them, do get hurt on traditional bindings every year. Question is, is it the binding or some other factor.

I may have the shop do a release test/demo to see how the boot comes out as a result of different forces. Not a perfect test, but maybe some indication of what to expect.

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.

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.