Edelrid Mega Jul?

When it comes to hands-off with a plate, I'm almost as fast as with an assisted braking device. The reason is that, as I mentioned earlier, I always use a plate in the gym, and every time my climber hangs for more than a few seconds I tie him or her off. I use the British method which ties off on the the plate attachment carabiner rather than the American method that ties off on the active rope above the plate, because I find the British method both faster and more secure. And I don't put on the finishing security overhand, since I'm not actually releasing the brake hand anyway.

The result of all that practice is that I can do the tie-off in 5 seconds or less without looking at the device at all, and so can go hands-free whenever I might want to.

climber pat wrote:I wish all the belay device manufacturers were required to publish a set of braking effeciency numbers. I suspect that the numbers in the charts from the DAV do not tell the whole story. What I would like to see is the amount of rope slippage to stop a UIAA standard test fall. For example does the ATC-XP slip 1 foot and the ATC slip 1.5 feet before the fall's energy is absorbed. In which case I don't care. But if the ATC would slip 20 feet then I care a lot.

these are on lower level falls ... remember that the amount of rope run depends ALOT on grip strength and everyone has different grip strength ...

DAV Panorama ... force at brake and top runner

theres more in the various articles over the years .. but im too lazy breeding beahs right now to look it up

climber pat wrote: One thing I like about the Eldrid mega/micro jul, alpine smart, clickup is that after they lock up they no longer require the belayers hand. The tuber styles belay device continue require the belayer's hand to hold the fall. Also the grigri continues to require the belayers hand because it can become unlocked if the rope becomes unweighted (because of the spring loaded cam).

This is an absolute fallacy

While it MAY stay locked up much of the time, ive seen it also release suddenly when "hands free" especially on rap

In other words itll stay locked until one day it doesnt with someones life on the line

These are NEVER hands free devices in assisted braking mode ... Always tie off the device or do leg wraps when going hands free

If you want one device thats best for "hands free" then get a grigri but even that one is subject to the "slow fall" failure

I own and use all smart extensively

;)

Stephen Felker wrote:I don't agreed with all y'all fuddy duddies and your insistence on belaying with the least forgiving belay devices available, as if it were a right of passage. None of us is immune to human error, especially new belayers. The whole "I'm more comfortable with a traditional tube style device" is a mark of inexperience. You can take a hike IMHO; I'd rather trust my silent partner. I have too much first hand experience with belay flubs and ground falls to trust anything less. It all boils down to chance, and a mega jul (or gri-gri) will statistically catch more falls than an ATC in the hands of any human being, period. I and every other climber I know with over 5,000 hours of belay-end experience uses a brake assisted device of some sort.

Basically youre saying that one should depend on the device and not the belayer in yr above post ...

Belay flubs and ground falls ....

Assisted belaying device make sense in some situations especially if one is hang dogging ... Or where theres rockfall ...

However the solution to poor belay skills, inattention and mistakes that you listed above is NOT to give em a device that one believes requires less attention

But rather to FIX those basic belaying problems first ...

Tons of drops happen on assisted braking devices such as cinches and grigris ... And theres been a few on the smart as well

Except for perhaps the cinch (which has issues) ... They all come down again to poor belay skills and inattention

Regardless on big high impact falls (not the same as big falls with alot of rope out) especially on skinnier ropes some of these devices provide LESS braking power than the atc guide ...

And the only thing keeping yr climber off the deck when it doesnt "autolock" in such cases is yr brake hand

For folks with smarts (8.9-10.5 version) .... Go do a single line overhanging rap on a 9.2mm or less rope .... And itll open ur eyes

Even with a 10mm it wouldnt lock up on my phat AZN azz

I own and use all versions of the smart extensively ... Just know their limitations

;)

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned rockfall yet.

For me at least, it nice to have a little insurance without having to haul a grigri and a tube to the base of a climb. I'm not picky about being belayed with whatever device. But after having almost been mucked out a few times in Sedona and hearing the constant rockfall at the waterfall I prefer to belay with something that "might" catch a fall on its own.

If I felt strongly about it I would just haul the grigri. But I'm fairly certain the the megajul, with the rope and biner I use with it, would probably catch an average fall with a bit of rope out. Also, I can give a better belay with the jul than I can with a grigri.

Edit
I guess bearbreeder did mention rockfall. Still, its the biggest advantage of assisted lockers for me.

bearbreeder wrote:the megal jul, jul2 and the thicker (8.9-10.5mm) smart/alpine smart devices are unsuitable for belaying on ~9mm ropes despite it being "within" the manufacturers range the DAV has shown in tests since 2010, and has recently done more tests which show ~ 0.5 KN of braking in a 8.9mm rope with those devices if one must use an assisted locking device in that range ... use the smaller versions ... ie the microjul or the thin version of the alpine smart ... or use a grigri basically the DAV folks said you wont catch a big high impact fall (doesnt mean the same as a big whipper with ALOT of rope out) on those devices with that rope size as a comparison heres the values they got for tube style devices on a 9mm rope ... i own all versions of the smart and personally i wouldnt go below 9.4/5 mm on the thicker versions ... and even then youll need to be careful ... just do a single line rap on a slick new 9.4mm and youll see why which is why learning and staying current on tubes is so important ... when the braking slips and the rope starts running through the ONLY thing keeping yr partner off the deck with these devices on thinner ropes if your SOLID BRAKE HAND ;)

I usually stay out of this sort of thing, but this is BS. Bear, I like all the data you gather, but sometimes I think your interpretation is way off.

That test does not claim that the devices are "unsuitable" for belaying <9mm ropes. It's just measuring the breaking force of the device with no break hand. If you threw a reverso on that chart, it would show a big fat 0 kN. Are you going to tell me that I can't catch a fall on an 8.9 cord with my reverso?

It's obvious to anyone who's used a megajul that that number should be about 0.5kN. I weigh about 0.8 kN, and if you were had me on a megajul with a slick 8.9mm rope and let go of your brake hand, the rope would slowly creep through the device and I'd be lowered gently back to the ground. Far better than just being dropped as the rope whips through an ATC.

While I'm ranting, people also looking at that other graph of braking force (linked below by Bear) and claiming that an atc-xp is "better" than a megajul are way oversimplifying. It's data from a very particular test and a higher number doesn't mean better. A lower number may in fact result in a softer catch with a very acceptable 10% more rope slippage; but we can't know for sure without accurate models and much more data.

EDIT: grammar and graph reference

mtnmandan wrote: I usually stay out of this sort of this, but this is BS. Bear, I like all the data you gather, but sometimes I think your interpretation is way off. That test does not claim that the devices are "unsuitable" for belaying <9mm ropes. It's just measuring the breaking force of the device with no break hand. If you threw a reverso on that chart, it would show a big fat 0 kN. Are you going to tell me that I can't catch a fall on an 8.9 cord with my reverso? It's obvious to anyone who's used a megajul that that number should be about 0.5kN. I weigh about 0.8 kN, and if you were had me on a megajul with a slick 8.9mm rope and let go of your brake hand, the rope would slowly creep through the device and I'd be lowered gently back to the ground. Far better than just being dropped as the rope whips through an ATC. While I'm ranting, people also looking at that other graph of braking force (linked by someone) and claiming that an atc-xp is "better" than a megajul are way oversimplifying. It's data from a very particular test and a higher number doesn't mean better. A lower number may in fact result in a softer catch with a very acceptable 10% more rope slippage; but we can't know for sure without accurate models and much more data.

heres the words straight from the DAV

Leichter Anfangswiderstand zu
überwinden, insgesamt etwas
unangenehmer zu dosieren als das
neue “Jul2“
Vorsicht: bei dünnen Seilen bzw.
schweren Kletterern, wenig Bremswirkung!

with some google-fu translate ....

Moderate initial resistance to
overcome, overall a bit
unpleasant to dose than the
new "Jul2"
Caution: for thin ropes or
serious climbers, little braking effect!

heres jim titts actual test on 9mm

Hand Force/belay Force 9mm rope.

and some discussion for him as he actually tests and designs belay devices

The locking friction in the Smart/MegaJul stays constant (or near enough), the additional friction you require for higher force falls which you apply by hand strength is proportional to the grip strength as in a normal plate. The sum of the locking friction and the hand force friction is the total braking force.
As these plates produce a low hand force component the initial total force is better as there is the locking force to be added, at higher loads the higher hand generated friction obtained though an ATC XP outweighs the benefits of the locking force.
Both types of plate exhibit progressive and consistent (as far as belay plates can) increase in braking power with increased hand force, just the Smart/MegaJul start higher and end up lower. With a single 8.5mm strand the MegaJul is superior up to about 5kg hand force and after that the ATC XP takes over, this represents a braking force of ca 90kg. With other ropes this point is different.
There is nothing "sudden" happening and no catastrophic loss of braking power, the MegaJul and the Smart are perfectly adequate belay devices with a braking power comparable with a large number of the currently available devices. What they DO NOT do is provide extra braking power in high force falls and less than other better performing conventional plates. Unassisted as in your belayer is knocked out by a falling rock they provide minimal if any extra security and in that respect are totally different to a GriGri.
The loss of braking power which the Cinch exhibits is a completely different problem.

mountainproject.com/v/edelr…

and to be blunt while you might "weight 0.5-0.8 KN" ... in a big high impact force fall the belayer may well feel MUCH more than 0.5 KN at the device ...

and as mistah titts testing shows, on higher impact falls, the braking power of these devices is LESS than yr ATC guide

the lack of sufficient braking when used "hands free" is also show by the DAV

Blockierunterstützung spricht
schon bei sehr weichen Stürzen an,
bei härteren Stürzen kann das Gerät
alleine den Sturz nicht stoppen!

google-fu

Blocking talks backing
even at very soft crash,
with harder falls, the device can
alone the fall did not stop!

heres a very simple experiment ... go do a single line overhanging rap on a ~9mm rope ... bounce around alot hands free .... theres a good chance it may well slip and with the smart anyways it doesnt slip slowly, so you should tie in short

;)

bearbreeder wrote: Basically youre saying that one should depend on the device and not the belayer in yr above post ...

No, I'm saying that no one is perfect. Plus, the longer you climb, the more likely you are to experience that "what if". I want redundancy when my life is at issue.

The only way traditional tube style devices "teach better belay technique" is by increasing the seriousness of the inevitable mistake. They have their place, but only when redundancy needs to be reduced in favor of some other factor(s).

This is as a worthy topic of ongoing debate. Mixing the Dunning-Kruger effect mixed with some groupthink can be dangerous in this sport. We needed a counterbalance to the gri-gri haters. Plus, to many, a wholesale refusal to use a brake assisted device will mark you as unseasoned.

Stephen Felker wrote: No, I'm saying that no one is perfect. Plus, the longer you climb, the more likely you are to experience that "what if". I want redundancy when my life is at issue. The only way traditional tube style devices "teach better belay technique" is by increasing the seriousness of the inevitable mistake. They have their place, but only when redundancy needs to be reduced in favor of some other factor(s). This is as a worthy topic of ongoing debate. Mixing the Dunning-Kruger effect mixed with some groupthink can be dangerous in this sport. We needed a counterbalance to the gri-gri haters. Plus, to many, a wholesale refusal to use a brake assisted device will mark you as unseasoned.

no one hates grigris in here .... ive used em, my partners use em, i use the smart extensively ....

the problem as shown by all the actual numbers is that many of these devices ARE NOT HANDS FREE ... there are cases in which the assisted braking mechanisms will be reduced or even fail to engage ...

when that happens the ONLY thing preventing yr climber from decking is a solid brake hand

there are many reasons to use grigris or other such devices ... hangdogging, rockfall, etc ...

however using them as a substitute for proper brake hand control is NOT one of em

if you cant catch whippers repeatedly in the gym on an ATC you have absolutely no business using one of these assisted braking devices

the danger is in folks who think such devices are "foolproof" and that they can just give it to anyone as a substitute for basic belaying and brake hand principles

around 4 years ago i wrote one of the first reviews of the alpine smart on here (and which incidentally show up on the first google page when searching for "mammut smart review") .... at which time i though the same as many do here ... that it is "mostly hands free" and the provides a "better margin of safety with beginners"

since then ive seen folks dropped with the thing, experienced several "failure" modes, had 4+ years experience on daily outdoor usage (800+ days), worn out quite a few binners and worn through a smart or two to a sharp edge .... ive used all the versions on everything from an ad hoc ascender to catching sport whippers over and over again

what ive found is that the smart is a good device providing you know its limitations ... and understand that it has a habit to promote dependance on the device rather than a solid brake hand over time

ive had that happen to myself, and ive seen it happen over and over again ... just go into the gym and look at how folks belay with grigris, smarts, etc .... youll see many "brake" with hands above the plane, not bring that hand down, use the "fast feed" method constantly, or grip the release of the smart even when catching a fall

i still use a smart 80% of the time ... but every now and then i take out the ATC and keep current with it, and to keep my brake hand trained ... im a firm believer that you NEED to feel that tactile feedback of grasping a weighted rope in order not to get lazy

and simply giving someone one of these devices to cover up significant flaws in their belay technique is just asking for it ...

with an ATC you KNOW what you do wrong .... with an assisted devices what happens is "oh why didnt it lock up, its all the device fault these are hands free" !!!

Jimmy Burckhard, 31, was climbing the bolted route Foot Fist Way (5.13a) in a limestone canyon southwest of Rapid City on September 26. He had previously worked on the route a couple of weeks earlier. On this day he climbed partway up the route, yelled “take,” and his belayer held him for a rest. He continued up the climb and then, at about 70 feet, near the top of the route, he let go again. He expected to take a short fall, then lower and rest to attempt the redpoint. Instead he plunged toward the ground, impacting on his heels. Burckhard broke both feet, his wrist and thumb, and three vertebrae in his back.

A local climber hiked out of the canyon to a point where he could get cell reception and dialed 911. Responders carried Burckhard out of the canyon to an ambulance.

ANALYSIS

Burckhard was climbing with one of his regular partners, and both men are very experienced climbers. The belayer was using an assisted-braking device, and when Burckhard asked him after the accident what had happened, he responded, “The device failed.” No further information was available. (Source: The Editors.)

publications.americanalpine…

I've got one for sale...It's been used twice. Don't really care for it much.
There's no way I trust an 8th inch piece of material in guide mode, and rapping with the thing is terrible. . I m sure once you get used to it, it's fine. ..
I'll give you a sweet deal..

bearbreeder wrote: “The device failed.”

I am good friends with Jimmy and have seen him go from hospital bound by multiple fractures back to solid 5.13 in less than a year! The ugly truth is that both his belayer (very experienced indeed) failed and the device failed, nearly costing him his life.

I am sorry I implied that it is ok to treat any of these devices as hands free. They most certainly is not hands free and backup knots are a very good idea. I tie them frequently. Playing with my grigri, I cannot imagine how anyone would think they are hands free.

However the point I tried to make is still getting glossed over. How much rope needs to slide through a given device to arrest a UIAA standard fall. I know that the choice rope will make a big difference. Let's just imagine the device is being used properly. Some context as to what is important and what is not important would be helpful.

Looking at the charts presented by bearbreeder, where does the standard fall apply and where do we go beyond anything that can be generated given the entire system? Also, in Jim Titt's graph, does high power mode for the ATC mean using two caribiners (that's how I read the DAV charts). If so I would really like to see numbers for the regular mode. I don't think I ever seen someone belaying using and ATC with two carabiners. I have seen a few people repelling with two carabiners.

Stephen Felker wrote: I am good friends with Jimmy and have seen him go from hospital bound by multiple fractures back to solid 5.13 in less than a year! The ugly truth is that both his belayer (very experienced indeed) failed and the device failed, nearly costing him his life.

was it a cinch?

thats the only assisted locking device i can see "failing" ...

almost every case of any other device "failing" is user error or inattention

climber pat wrote:I am sorry I implied that it is ok to treat any of these devices as hands free. They most certainly is not hands free and backup knots are a very good idea. I tie them frequently. Playing with my grigri, I cannot imagine how anyone would think they are hands free. However the point I tried to make is still getting glossed over. How much rope needs to slide through a given device to arrest a UIAA standard fall. I know that the choice rope will make a big difference. Let's just imagine the device is being used properly. Some context as to what is important and what is not important would be helpful. Looking at the charts presented by bearbreeder, where does the standard fall apply and where do we go beyond anything that can be generated given the entire system? Also, in Jim Titt's graph, does high power mode for the ATC mean using two caribiners (that's how I read the DAV charts). If so I would really like to see numbers for the regular mode. I don't think I ever seen someone belaying using and ATC with two carabiners. I have seen a few people repelling with two carabiners.

that really depends on how much grip strength the person has ... in short women on average have 20-30% less grip strength than men and when tested on a rope there is no grip strength at which you can really say "everyone will hold" ...

zzzzzz

even in general tests (not on a rope) ... you can see that grip strength varies quite a bit accross the population

zzzzzz

the lower the grip strength, all other factors being equal the more the rope runs ... beyond a certain point if you dont wear gloves its rope burn and the person will likely let go

zzzzzz

on thing which few folks differentiate on (the DAV does) ... there are 2 types of "assisted locking devices"

- one that are fairly independent of the braking hand force .... grigri, cinch, matik ... these devices the brake hand acts as a backup and in the grigris case, pulling down hard towards the hip wll insure the cam triggers

- ones that depends on the grip strength beyond a certain point ... smart, clickup, megajul ... these are "ATC plus" if you will in which you get a greater initial braking force at possibly the expense of greater braking at higher loads ... the brake hand is integral to the proper function of the device under anything but minor loads ... in these devices your brake hand is what keeps the rope from running through at higher loads on skinny ropes

as i said with the 8.9-10.5mm smart its an easy test .... set up a single line overhanging rap on a ~9mm rope, youll be glad you remembered how to brake properly with an ATC !!!

the great advantage of an ATC guide is that you can increase the friction by using 2 biners ... with most of these assisted locking devices, theres not much you can do for the belay

ive done it plenty of times on thin ropes and got friends to do it even when TRing on slicker ropes if they have low grip strength (small women kids belaying heavier folks while anchored)

the second chart i posted on the last page has the braking numbers for the ATC guide in all configurations

this site also has a bit of info ...

canyoneeringusa.com/techtip…

Chris Reyes wrote: I was looking for a replacement and was actually considering getting something like the pivot.

I recently got one of these as I dropped my atc guide. So far the thing rocks and lowering people is much more controlled in guide mode.

climber pat wrote:I am sorry I implied that it is ok to treat any of these devices as hands free. They most certainly is not hands free and backup knots are a very good idea. I tie them frequently.

You frequently tie back-up knots during normal belay situations? Or when you want to go hands free?

I've got some time, so here's some things to think about...

bearbreeder wrote: heres the words straight from the DAV Leichter Anfangswiderstand zu überwinden, insgesamt etwas unangenehmer zu dosieren als das neue “Jul2“ Vorsicht: bei dünnen Seilen bzw. schweren Kletterern, wenig Bremswirkung! with some google-fu translate .... Moderate initial resistance to overcome, overall a bit unpleasant to dose than the new "Jul2" Caution: for thin ropes or serious climbers, little braking effect!

Better translation:
Less initial resistance to overcome, but a bit more awkward to pay out rope with than the new Jul2. Caution: less braking effect for thin ropes and heavy climbers!

"There is nothing "sudden" happening and no catastrophic loss of braking power, the MegaJul and the Smart are perfectly adequate belay devices with a braking power comparable with a large number of the currently available devices. What they DO NOT do is provide extra braking power in high force falls and less than other better performing conventional plates." -Jim Titt

bearbreeder wrote: and to be blunt while you might "weight 0.5-0.8 KN" ... in a big high impact force fall the belayer may well feel MUCH more than 0.5 KN at the device ... and as mistah titts testing shows, on higher impact falls, the braking power of these devices is LESS than yr ATC guide the lack of sufficient braking when used "hands free" is also show by the DAV

Of course my belayer feels much more than my weight when he catches me. However, I don't expect a megajul to catch me at a dead halt without a brake hand involved. What Jim said, precisely, is that they provide perfectly adequate braking power comparable to a large number of other devices. They don't provide extra power at high (hand grip) forces though, only extra power at lower forces.
A question to you and the crowd... Is higher force better? Too high and the catch is static, like a grigri, and increases impact force. Too low, and you risk too much rope slip, burning your hand, and dropping your climber. How much is enough force?
Climber Pat is on the right track. I think the point he's making is what really merits more discussion.

bearbreeder wrote: Blockierunterstützung spricht schon bei sehr weichen Stürzen an, bei härteren Stürzen kann das Gerät alleine den Sturz nicht stoppen! google-fu Blocking talks backing even at very soft crash, with harder falls, the device can alone the fall did not stop! heres a very simple experiment ... go do a single line overhanging rap on a ~9mm rope ... bounce around alot hands free .... theres a good chance it may well slip and with the smart anyways it doesnt slip slowly, so you should tie in short ;)

Better translation: Blocking activates with very little force; with harder falls the device alone may not stop the fall!

Haven't managed to cause a slip more than a couple inches yet bouncing around on a single 8.2mm line. Quite the opposite. I refuse to rap in locking mode on the jul because it locks too much. Fortunately you can just flip it around to rap atc style.

mtnmandan wrote:I've got some time, so here's some things to think about... Better translation: Less initial resistance to overcome, but a bit more awkward to pay out rope with than the new Jul2. Caution: less braking effect for thin ropes and heavy climbers! "There is nothing "sudden" happening and no catastrophic loss of braking power, the MegaJul and the Smart are perfectly adequate belay devices with a braking power comparable with a large number of the currently available devices. What they DO NOT do is provide extra braking power in high force falls and less than other better performing conventional plates." -Jim Titt Of course my belayer feels much more than my weight when he catches me. However, I don't expect a megajul to catch me at a dead halt without a brake hand involved. What Jim said, precisely, is that they provide perfectly adequate braking power comparable to a large number of other devices. They don't provide extra power at high (hand grip) forces though, only extra power at lower forces. A question to you and the crowd... Is higher force better? Too high and the catch is static, like a grigri, and increases impact force. Too low, and you risk too much rope slip, burning your hand, and dropping your climber. How much is enough force? Climber Pat is on the right track. I think the point he's making is what really merits more discussion. Better translation: Blocking activates with very little force; with harder falls the device alone may not stop the fall! Haven't managed to cause a slip more than a couple inches yet bouncing around on a single 8.2mm line. Quite the opposite. I refuse to rap in locking mode on the jul because it locks too much. Fortunately you can just flip it around to rap atc style.

the basic simple fact which i pointed out and you re-iterated is simply this

- with thinner ropes these assisted braking devices may well have much less braking power

- many of these devices a brake hand is absolutely integral to the functioning of the device ... they are not hands free devices by any means

- some simply do not provide the braking power of an ATC guide at high loads ... this is especially true when you can use doubled biners with the ATC ...

- proper brake hand technique is essential to most of these devices ... and its quite hard to learn proper braking when many folks think its "autolocking", that is the device does everything and they dont need to do much

really thats all there is to it ...

try a smart on that rope on an overhanging single line rap ... even my thin version wont lock on an 8mm .... even the thicker version has slipped on a slick 10mm to the point where if one lets go, you would deck, no "slow fall"

as to whether "extra gripping force' is better ... that depends if

- you think it should catch you "hands free" .. ie you take a big whipper because you pulled a big rock and it smacked yr belayer ... pray yr on a grigri ...

- you take a big runnout fall off the belay with no pro in (theres plenty of multis where you may not have pro for 30+ feet or more) .... pray ur on a grigri, unless yr on a shiet gear anchor on shiet rock then pray its on an ATC so your partner wont die as well

- if yr a bomber bolts and taking whips ... then use a grigri so it makes it easier for your belayer when you hangdog after every whip

- if yr on marginal gear, every bit helps then you should probably use a tube ....

- on "normal" gear it gets more complicated ...

lets brake it down ... just note that we are WAY beyond the OPs question here

1. the force on the anchor in regards to belay device depends upon rope slippage ... ill repost this, as one can see the more the rope slips towards loss of control, the less the force on the anchor ... so with a strong gripping person, the impact force may approach that of a grigri especially with a munter or some of these tubes un high friction

zzzzzz

the slippage in relation to not just grip strength, but also depends on the fall factor ... the lower the fall factor the less the slippage, and thus more similarity to a grigri in terms of impact forces ... so in "regular falls' with alot of rope out it may not matter .... however in big high factor falls it does, so on multi off the belays ...

petzl

2. the force felt at the belay device, and thus its impact on the anchor is dependent upon real life drag and rock friction .... as you can see from the chart below the force on the belayer is reduced the higher the drag ... so on a lower angle moderate wandering route with the rope rubbing against features what device you use is probably not that important ... however on a climb thats slightly overhanging and almost sport like, it matters much more as the belayer feels greater force in a fall


Petzl impact forces

3. the rope matters just as much in terms of impact force at the anchor .... if you want to maximize your odds of "gear not pulling" then go out and get a low impact rope ...

BMC Technical Conference 2006

infact a lower impact rope will reduce the force on the belayer as well possibly reducing the chance of excessive slippage

of course the flip side is that the greater the "slippage" the greater the chance of a loss of control ...

to put it simply one can say that on lower factor more common falls it doesnt really matter as shown above, nor when theres real life moderate route rope drag and friction ... however if that piece fails and you get into a higher factor fall situation, PRAY you have something that breaks REALLY WELL

;)

Wow, what I thought was a simple question, has turned into a lot of good insight. I figure I will let her give it a try for a while, and let her decide. I have only been climbing for about 10 months, and have grown fond of my ATC XP and Guide. One thing that I did notice, and has been stated above, is that it will wear out a carabineer quicker then a tube device. That is defiantly true. The locker that was with the MEGAJUL I bought was a vaporlock magnetron, and it has considerable wear on the top from contacting the device. I know first hand how much the device was used, because I was the only one belayed with it, and I can say that it would wear out the locker fast.

ChaseSmallwood wrote:Wow, what I thought was a simple question, has turned into a lot of good insight. I figure I will let her give it a try for a while, and let her decide. I have only been climbing for about 10 months, and have grown fond of my ATC XP and Guide. One thing that I did notice, and has been stated above, is that it will wear out a carabineer quicker then a tube device. That is defiantly true. The locker that was with the MEGAJUL I bought was a vaporlock magnetron, and it has considerable wear on the top from contacting the device. I know first hand how much the device was used, because I was the only one belayed with it, and I can say that it would wear out the locker fast.

in the long run a grigri will likely be cheaper for an assisted locking device ...

i go through a biner every 6 months or so with my smarts ...

grigris have been known to last years of constant use ... i gave my partner my older grigri1 and shes still using it

you can see how i-beam biners wear quickly to a sharp edge with the smart ...



;)

csproul wrote: You frequently tie back-up knots during normal belay situations? Or when you want to go hands free?

I pretty much always tie knots during hands free. Very rarely during normal belaying, just when I think the potential for a serious fall is there; high impact, rock fall or the climber actually hitting me on the way down.

Thanks bearbreeder. That's some pretty interesting information to think about.