Petzl nomic vs ergonomic?

Hi, so I'm becoming a more experienced ice climber. I am very confident leading WI4 on my 2016 petzl quarks. I think I am going to buy a more technical ice tool in the next year as I start following and ultimately leading WI5. I understand that Petzl redesigned the ergo into a steep ice and mixed climbing machine, the ergonomic. The nomic on the other hand is not much different, only a few slight improvements. I imagine this is because the nomic is and always has been a great tool on steep ice. My question to whomever has had a chance to climb steep ice on both these tools, should I just go ahead and by the ergonomic instead of the nomic? One supporting question to help answer this first one could be: Could there ever be a scenario on steep ice where I might prefer the nomic over the ergonomic, despite the less pronounced handle?

Thanks

Mostly replying to follow the thread (although, yeah I could just follow the topic without replying). That said, I think when people want something more aggressive than Nomics they tend to go for the X-Dream instead of the Ergonomic, not sure why. Price, perhaps? You can usually find the X-Dream for less than the Ergonomics.

I truly love my Nomics on steep ice (plenty of WI5) and have never felt like I needed anything else (I also have very little interested in mixed/dry terrain) but who knows? Could be a grass is greener on the other side situation or maybe the new Ergos are something special, I just don't know a single person who owns them.

Looking forward to hearing from some Ergononics owners and also maybe (hopefully not to derail the thread!) people who can compare the Ergonomic to the X-Dream.

never used them, but the things i have heard about ergos either through marketing or peoples comments make them seem like they were designed more specific to drytooling. whereas xdreams are meant as a highly configurable all-rounder. in ice mode, their angle is less aggressive than the ergo and in dry mode their angle approximates the ergo.

i could be totally off base here. interested to hear from someone who has used all 3 (nomic, ergo, xdream). i use x-dreams on everything now after getting decent at leading steep ice on x-alps (similar geometry to Quarks).

FWIW, nomics have a much cleaner more minimalist aesthetic which i enjoy.

Steve Marshall wrote:"...like they were designed more specific to drytooling..."

Thanks for the thoughts Steve. But I’m wondering if you are referring to the previous generation ergo that was certainly specific to dry tooling. Its aggressive angle made it almost impossible to climb ice with. However, I’m referring to the newst generation which gives the tool a new name all together— the ergonomic. The ergonomic is different from the ergo in that it is less aggressive and is designed to tackle steep ice and steep mixed terrain. The new ergonomic, unlike the ergo, has the same shaft and head as the nomic. The difference this time, however, is the handle in the ergonomic is much deeper, allowing for an aggressive pick angle for drytooling but also maintaining a good shaft geometry for steep ice. ( the ergo on the other hand had the same handle as the nomic but a different shaft geometry). If you google petzl ergo and then petzl ergonomic. You’ll see the difference pretty quickly.

Save your money and buy some ultralight ice screws. 

 I’ve used every tool that’s been mentioned because either I own or cragging with friends so here goes..

 The old and new Nomics, the XDreams and the new Ergos you could probably get away with owning one tool for everything. The new Ergonomics and the new Nomics feel, to me, worst than the old models. I think marketing played a huge role into the redesign. It’s also like Petzl wanted to kill off a tool for hard winter climbing and replace it with something like the Nomic... which now looks like an XDream. I like the swing and angles of the old Petzl tools. Maybe I just need to get used to something new?

 I feel the the old Ergos climbed 4+-5 ice really well. I’m not sure why no one likes them unless they’re climbing 2s or 3s. They drytool fantastic. Always felt very secure and predictable... which for me is great. Since drytooling’s always so fun and then.. BOOM you’re off and going for a ride.

 In the end it’s the same ol rock which tool you feel comfortable with. Let’s face it it’s not the tool holding you back from sending that WI5 M6+ 5.7

that guy named seb wrote: Save your money and buy some ultralight ice screws. 

No... not this

Mikeybarro wrote:
Thanks for the thoughts Steve. But I’m wondering if you are referring to the previous generation ergo that was certainly specific to dry tooling. Its aggressive angle made it almost impossible to climb ice with. However, I’m referring to the newst generation which gives the tool a new name all together— the ergonomic. The ergonomic is different from the ergo in that it is less aggressive and is designed to tackle steep ice and steep mixed terrain. The new ergonomic, unlike the ergo, has the same shaft and head as the nomic. The difference this time, however, is the handle in the ergonomic is much deeper, allowing for an aggressive pick angle for drytooling but also maintaining a good shaft geometry for steep ice. ( the ergo on the other hand had the same handle as the nomic but a different shaft geometry). If you google petzl ergo and then petzl ergonomic. You’ll see the difference pretty quickly.

you are correct about that.

We’ve got both the new nomics and ergonomics. The ergonomics feel awkward on anything below WI4 I found. Above that they come into their own, especially with the pur ice pick in. On steep tooling or mixed routes it feels like you’re cheating as they just seem to stick to anything. I prefer the handle on the ergonomics to the nomics too. I find that the ergonomic is my go to tool out of the 2 of them. 

https://www.thealpinestart.com/2018/10/07/field-tested-petzl-nomic-ergonomic/

Here's a great review of the new petzl line that also compares the new and old nomics. 

Ziggy Chalkdust wrote: Your quarks are fine for wi5 bruh.

I've climbed with vipers cobras xdreams quarks 2nd gen nomics ergos and ergonomics. the ergonomics are awesome for drytooling but overkill as an all around tool.

Is there really a difference in the performance of the 3rd gen nomic Bill? I havent tried them yet but nomics are my fav and I was planning on getting a set of the third gen for next season.

 I think the swing is different so yes. I like the Nomics with a pur ice pick and micro hammers for hard brittle ice. I only tried the new Nomics for a lap and didn’t feel the need to buy the latest. 

 What did you think about old vs new Ergos? For me it’s the same as the Nomics. The old ones were great for drytooling and steep ice. The new Ergo design leaves me scratching my head why?
 Check out the Trango Raptors. I love them for moderate ice but the grip’s too small for me to climb steep ice. I think you’ll dig them if the grip fits.

I have used the Ergonomic extensively for ice, mixed, and dry tooling.  I have used the first generation Nomic extensively and fondled the 2018 Nomic.  

Since you already own Quarks, I would advise:

• Get the Ergonomic, if you want to dry tool or climb mixed routes that are overhanging ( >= WI6 / M6).  Note that if you plan to use them on long, committing, multi-pitch routes you will likely want to create your own tether attachment or buy the Nomic handrest.  
• Get the Nomic, if your primary interest is in climbing sustained vertical ice (WI4+ to WI5).  Note that you will likely want to buy a separate T rated pick (or scavenge the Ice picks from your Quarks) for mixed climbing and drytooling. 

In general terms, the Ergonomic is better for hooking and the Nomic is better for swinging.  The Nomic is probably a better "quiver of one".  The Nomic is also probably a better alpine tool, when shaving a few grams is a higher priority.  The Ergonomic is probably a better complementary "quiver" tool for someone that already owns Quarks and enjoys climbing overhangs.  

I own the Quarks and find that they swing better than either the Nomics or Ergonomics.  I have no issues with using them on steep and sustained vertical ice.  I just find that they are just more of a pain to use, when going over small-radius bulges.  When ice cragging, I generally prefer to use the Quarks on fresh ice and the Egonomics for ice that is already hooked out or overhanging.  

Agree that the nomics swing better and the ergo is better for hooking. 

It is also worth noting that the Quark is likely a better option for climbing with tethers than either the Nomic or Ergonomic.  The clip in point on the Quark spike is much stronger than the clip in point on the Nomic spike.  

If you think you might fall onto your tethers, with the Nomic or Ergonomic, don’t attach them to the hand rest, like you would with the Quark.  So, in my opinion, the spike on the Nomic isn’t really a selling point.  The spikeless hand rest is better for climbing and I prefer to invert the tool for use as a cane.  However, the cut outs in the handle might be a selling point for people who want to climb with tethers or use the tool for improvised fall protection.  
The following link explains why taking a tether fall onto the Nomic hand rest is a bad idea. https://www.thealpinestart.com/2019/01/22/tech-tip-impact-forces-during-a-fall/ 

I've used new nomics a bunch this season, I've climbed quite a bit on X dreams, and I've got to hang around in a cave on the ergonomic's on a couple of occasions...
my thoughts:
 New nomics are a significant upgrade from gen 2, I have an older pair and have switched with my partner between pitches, old nomics feel great until you are alternating with the new one, the handle is more ergonomic and accommodates a much wider range of hand sizes, they are much stiffer, pick weight is better, and the Pur ice pick is miles better than even a heavily modified ice pick.

X dreams swing about as good as nomics, the pick is really good, the handle you either love or hate, it's kinda huge and if it doesn't fit your hand there's not much adjustment, the tool is also super flexy, not really a huge issue as far as performance but sometimes it's hard to tell if your pick is shifting or it's just the shaft flexing...not ideal on really hard stuff...

Ergonomics I have less experience with on ice, most of my time on them is hanging upside down in a cave.. they have the best handle of the three IMO, they do seem to be a tiny bit more awkward than the nomic's to swing, kinda like an x dream in dry mode, probably some of that is in the pick. they hook much better than nomics but again I think a lot of that is the dry pick,  and they seem a little more flexy due to the longer kickback at the handle and they pivot a tiny bit more when you go to the second grip than nomics, again, more like an x dream..

you wouldn't go wrong with any of them but for me, the ideal tool for hard ice would be an ergonomic with a Pur ice pick, followed closely by the Nomic, followed by the x dream just because I don't like the grip. That said, If the day involves any easier pitches the Nomic becomes the preferred tool very quickly, it is a better all-around tool...

I'm actually quite disappointed in the handle design of the Ergonomic. IMO when Petzl changed the angle of the handle they made it far harder to hold on.

I think you can get used to anything, but if you think about an ideal handle to hold onto, you will be barely holding on and instead pinky resting on the pinky grip. This is why it is significantly harder to traverse under a roof with your tool cocked at odd angles vs a lip traverse where you can pinky lock on your tool grip the entire way.

I have done some decently pretty hard drytooling on the 2nd gen Nomics (M9-M10). Their biggest failing is their short reach. The new Nomics are still a short tool, but they have raised the height of the upper grip on the latest generation, which should help with reach.

I think for an all arounder tool (for ice, dry and mixed) the Nomic performs quite well and I would choose it over the Ergonomic.

I know this isn't exactly what the OP's thread is on, but since they were brought up numerous times I'd rather just ask here.  Has anyone noticed significant changes in the new and old models of the Quarks?   I'm looking to getting a pair and want to know if I should prefer one model over the other or if the changes are irrelevant.  

Steven Roberts wrote: I know this isn't exactly what the OP's thread is on, but since they were brought up numerous times I'd rather just ask here.  Has anyone noticed significant changes in the new and old models of the Quarks?   I'm looking to getting a pair and want to know if I should prefer one model over the other or if the changes are irrelevant.  

The 2018 Quark flip-up pommel is significantly more efficient when doing lots of plunging in firm / crusty snow.  It also makes using the hammer / adze more comfortable, when the pommel is flipped up against the shaft.  Otherwise, I would say that the changes are not significant.  

Karl Henize wrote:

The 2018 Quark flip-up pommel is significantly more efficient when doing lots of plunging in firm / crusty snow.  It also makes using the hammer / adze more comfortable.  Otherwise, I would say that the changes are not significant.  

I plan to use them on steep snow climbs as well as ice climbs, so the new models being significantly better at plunging is a deciding factor.  Exactly what I was looking for, thanks.

I should mention that the Ergonmic handle is significantly wider and has sharper corners than the Nomic handle.  I personally find that the like the wider and more rectangular handle on Ergonomic can be painful, when the front "corners" dig into your fingers when heavily loaded.  I have medium sized hands and find hanging my entire body weight on one of the lower handles to be painful.

Karl Henize wrote: I have used the Ergonomic extensively for ice, mixed, and dry tooling. I have used the first generation Nomic extensively and fondled the 2018 Nomic.

Since you already own Quarks, I would advise:

• Get the Ergonomic, if you want to dry tool or climb mixed routes that are overhanging ( >= WI6 / M6).  Note that if you plan to use them on long, committing, multi-pitch routes you will likely want to create your own tether attachment or buy the Nomic handrest.  
• Get the Nomic, if your primary interest is in climbing sustained vertical ice (WI4+ to WI5).  Note that you will likely want to buy a separate T rated pick (or scavenge the Ice picks from your Quarks) for mixed climbing and drytooling. 

In general terms, the Ergonomic is better for hooking and the Nomic is better for swinging. The Nomic is probably a better "quiver of one". The Nomic is also probably a better alpine tool, when shaving a few grams is a higher priority. The Ergonomic is probably a better complementary "quiver" tool for someone that already owns Quarks and enjoys climbing overhangs.

I own the Quarks and find that they swing better than either the Nomics or Ergonomics.  I have no issues with using them on steep and sustained vertical ice.  I just find that they are just more of a pain to use, when going over small-radius bulges.  When ice cragging, I generally prefer to use the Quarks on fresh ice and the Egonomics for ice that is already hooked out or overhanging.  

Anyone “fondling”tools for too long , especially in a climbing shop could draw attention and get in trouble. Just saying. I know.