They did, it was interesting but poorly executed, don't remember where it was manufactured, no longer indemnified IIRC. I didn't ski it enough to form an opinion more useful than "it's heavy."
Originally Posted by skierhj
There is a constant attempt to make bindings safer, with better release to reduce injury. Here in the US the manufacturers are so consumed with law suits that they are almost panicked to get the next great thing out. The problem is not simple to address. The people who generally test the "new" bindings are racers, they want their feet "glued" to the skis for maximum control and speed. The manufacturers spend huge amounts of money testing these new bindings and even when they release them it takes several years to make their R&D money back.
This strikes me as a whole lot of badly formed conjecture. Racers ski comp bindings that rarely change and have fewer modes of release than bindings marketed to the public...racers may
test the latter, but that really doesn't mean anything other than poor product test design.
Also, lawsuits are far more commonly impediments to innovation (even in the realm of safety) than incentives towards it. I could write on that topic for hours, but I'll just hope it is common knowledge in 2008.
Further, the "panic to get the next thing out" has resulted in zero new standardized or widespread modes of release in the half of my lifetime that I've been paying attention, and nothing but incremental changes in the existing (and by most accounts very effective) base of product designs. Either this "panic" doesn't exist, or it is occurring on a timescale unheard of in consumer products.