KneeBindings interest me a lot. I love marketing, almost as much as skiing. It's what I will be studying next year in college. Marketing intrigues me because it shows how businesses can trick people into buying their products. This trickery isn't always bad for the consumer. I personally believe that KneeBindings are a big bunch of marketing hype, for a few simple reasons.
1. Race Bindings.
I've raced on the icy slopes of Wisconsin for 10 years now. I've fallen a lot and never torn my knee in any way. I've only witnessed on ACL tear. In that fall the skier was going through a poorly set slalom course ( about 12 meters with very little offset). She was carrying was to much speed for anyone to have in slalom course, pinched her line a bit to much, tipped a gate with her inside ski boom hit the snow, binding released, but it was too late for her knee. She was on Fisher WC 155s, with matching bindings and had her dins set at 12. She only weighed 125 pounds, so it was obvious she cranked her dins to high, had it been set on 7 or 8 it may have popped off with less pressure on her ACL and she would have skied the next run. What I find interesting about this is that the binding released, go on KneeBindings website and all the information on their is that her binding shouldn't have released - but it did. The next day I looked at the fisher bindings I have mounted on my slalom skis and noticed they do pivot laterally! Isn't the lateral release KneeBinding's claim to fame, or am I missing something.
If KneeBindings id save ACLs as they say, I think they would have found their way onto race skis by now. Something is up there. Would KneeBindings have a problem pre-releasing under the stress of a GS course? I have never seen KneeBindings on anyone's race boards, not one pair of skis!
2. TRUE data on KneeBindings.
Watch a comercial for snow tires sometime and the comercial will show cars stopping an accelerating much better then cars with all season tires. These claims are backed up by raw data. Manufacturers will go out to an icy lake and time stopping distances, uphill acceleration and base acceleration. I would consider that TRUE data. Kneebindings have no true data. I would be instantly sold if KneeBindings took a ski, constructed a 'crash test' leg and measured the force on specific ligaments in the knee, before the binding releases. Then take a marker and look style binding and put it through the same test. Give me the results and I'd be sold.
My last point is that there are a ton of ACL tears that happen because the DIN was set to high. I ski on Marker and Fisher Bindings, with my DINs set to 10, I weigh 185lbs and have a 315 boot. The only times I had problems with pre releases was when my forward pressure was not set correctly. I believe that some knee injury happens because of overly high set dins, which is common in ski racing. What is to stop a consumer from setting the KneeBinding din higher then recommended and wouldn't that give them the same result as with a conventional binding.
I did some searching before posting this and I am not trying to troll, like some other users have done to the KneeBinding. If the true data that I described was to come out I'd probably buy the system for my next pair of skis. I guess I'm just a skeptic.
EDIT: I did a some more searching and I am sorry, because this post really seems like I am taking sides against KneeBinding. I like the idea, but cant believe it till I see some testing. Sorry for rehashing the discussion that happened a few months ago.
Edited by IMT00FIERCE - 1/2/12 at 11:33pm