Climb Tech Top Anchor Hooks
|
We have found these anchor hooks to be very durable for high-traffic climbs, and are now my go-to for new routes. |
|
They look great. But then again, so did these. Kind of sucks to pay a little extra to put in hardware that supposedly will be easy to remove when it becomes unserviceable, only to find that it's unserviceable right out of the damned factory. |
|
Haha. I'm not biting. |
|
I've also been installing these as my preferred lower-offs at the top of new sport climbs. With a single quicklink I think they make for one of the most durable, aesthetic and (visually) low impact anchors on the market. |
|
Tangents aside, I’ve put them on 4 routes now. Really like the wire gate that’s less likely to suffer rust issues opening like solid gate springs. Very easy to clip, one route the cheat at the chains was a heel hook above your head, high clip. Feels like you can just throw the rope at it and you’re clipped. Unlike the old fixe wires, hate those things |
|
+1 for loving these ClimbTech hooks! |
|
These are great, but is there a concern about using these on a stainless setup? I like the idea, but I see ram's horns as being more sustainable in the long run. |
|
Keep up the great work Mr Wolfe! |
|
Ross Ayer wrote: These are great, but is there a concern about using these on a stainless setup? I like the idea, but I see ram's horns as being more sustainable in the long run. The general thinking is that the hooks are intended as a replaceable part that will take the brunt of wear. Generally use at least one replaceable stainless link between the bolt/hanger and the hook so that anything touching the plated hook is easy to replace as it wears down. In high use areas, the hook will wear out before corrosion is a concern, and even if it corrodes before wearing down, replacement takes approximately 38 seconds with a wrench instead of a full bolt replacement. The rope-bearing surface on the hooks is wider and thicker than a standard ramshorn, so I bet they'll actually last longer in high use areas and are just as easy to replace and less expensive. But nothing inherently wrong with either system. |
|
Ross Ayer wrote: These are great, but is there a concern about using these on a stainless setup? I like the idea, but I see ram's horns as being more sustainable in the long run. No, no concern about using these on a stainless setup, they are external wear components, so corrosion isn't a concern. Why do you see ram's horns as being more sustainable? |
|
Thanks for the info Matt! Ken Noyce wrote: For lower traffic areas, I would be concerned about these in the long run, while a fully stainless (glue in) setup will last easily 50 years (so I have heard). |
|
Ross Ayer wrote: Thanks for the info Matt! Yeah, that is true for low traffic areas, I'm not sure why you would place either the climb tech hooks or ramshorns at a lower traffic area though since their purpose is primarily to increase safety and throughput at high traffic areas. |
|
Chris and I were talking about mussy's while climbing at Red Rocks during the Future of Fixed Anchors meeting in Vegas Told him that he should make a mussy with a real gate. Glad he took me up on the idea. :) |
|
Ken Noyce wrote: I mean they also dramatically decrease cleaning time, which to me, even at a low traffic area is still helpful to get more climbing in. And also, if I can make something that is pretty risky (cleaning anchors) a little less dangerous, I think it is a worthwhile investment. |
|
Matt Zia wrote: Thanks Matt. Exactly right. |
|
Kemper Brightman wrote: I've also been installing these as my preferred lower-offs at the top of new sport climbs. With a single quicklink I think they make for one of the most durable, aesthetic and (visually) low impact anchors on the market. I also have been ordering in lots of 10 - it’s sure cheaper per unit than 2! |
|
Ross Ayer wrote: In that case, I do agree that the stainless ramshorns are more sustainable, I just personally don't typically place lower-offs in low traffic areas. |
|
The problem with the Ramshorns and other glue-in, one-piece types (in non-corrosive rock) - as I see it - is this: |
|
Thoughts on using 5/16" vs 3/8" quick links with these hooks? |
|
MisterE Wolfe wrote: The problem with the Ramshorns and other glue-in, one-piece types (in non-corrosive rock) - as I see it - is this: Ramshorns are just clipped in place, when they are worn just remove and fit another. |
|
MisterE Wolfe wrote: The problem with the Ramshorns and other glue-in, one-piece types (in non-corrosive rock) - as I see it - is this: I can swap a rams horn faster than two tow hooks and I save the cost of QLs that may or may not be quality. I get their appeal in really gritty, high wear areas where you simply need more metal to resist grinding but anywhere else, an inline Rams setup makes so much more sense to me, both in use and replacement costs/ease. Personally, I'm not a fan of the CT hook geometry. I wish they had at least gone with the smaller, more common hook shape. As it is, the large "C" shape will roll to the side on lower angle terrain and, when in the SxS configuration, leads to twisting. I also have my doubts about the longevity of the wire gate. DMM smooth it is not. How long until they start sticking open? |