Trango Vergo - the GriGri slayer?

Risk sport participants generally don’t process statistics very well.

Bill Schick wrote:

Risk sport participants generally don’t process statistics very well.

Pretty much as badly as everyone else

It should be mentioned that the Cinch and the Vergo do not have the same configuration in how their clamshell rotates (also part of Trango's explanation for the changing of the name as it was a considered a significant enough difference in device construction to be a different device. how much one believes this was the actual reason versus trying to get away from the associated issues with the Cinch construction is obviously debatable) As such, IMO transfering all of the data regarding how the Cinch performs to the Vergo is disingenuous at best. 

I suppose that if a belayer is using the device correctly for lead belaying and in the event of a fall, they were to somehow fall to the side in a way where they let go of the rope that's in their hand and the device rotates along with the fall so that the harness/belay loop is not twisting the device and the line between the rope going up to the climber and the down to the slack end of the rope was completely straight then the breaking could be defeated, but even in controlling for all of this at home to setup the perfect failure mode, it was difficult to force this failure mode. (Without any data) I would assume that the likelihood of this happening is minimal enough that it would place this failure mode in the same range as something defeating the grigri's cam in the event of a fall. 

Andrew Denmark wrote:

I don’t like how the Vergo trains the belayer to fully grip the device with the right hand.   Seems to me like that is a dangerous habit to establish, especially when/if the belayer were to then use a different belay device.

I’m also of the mindset that a belay device shouldn’t be measured on how easy it is to pay out slack.  The primary objective should be functionality in assisting the catch and mechanical (or not) integrity.   I never quite understood when people complained about the difficulty of giving slack.  

There’s a reason that the Grigri is the industry standard.

Good point on the difference and inappropriate transference of the learned technique of one device to another. 

But you make a mistake in assuming that just because the ease of paying out slack is being trumpeted as a value of the Vergo, that this means that paying out slack is being understood as the primary objective of the device. (Just look up the various reviews of the newer versions of the grigri since the grigri1 to see that there is text spent upon the ease of paying out slack) The mere fact that how it catches IS the primary objective of any belay device means that there is a high likelihood that the ability of the device to catch a fall is assumed and therefor doesn't need to have space wasted on explaining that "Yes, this device does what it is supposed to do because it probably wouldn't have been released as a belay device if it had this issue in anything but outlier failure modes" (which all devices have). And if you have never understood why people complain, this should help: If multiple devices are equally good at catching a fall, then the complaint about paying out slack (as not only a convenience issue but a safety issue for some) is important on top of the primary objective and thus, selecting a device that will catch a fall AND pays out slack with less difficulty is an appropriate topic to bring into the selection process. 

Allow me to summarize:

Some people like the Vergo and some people don't. Whew, glad we solved this.

Jim Titt wrote:

The hard catch wasn't what we were investigating, it was the large number of unexplained failures to control the rope by experienced belayers predominantly on single- pitch routes.

"Large number". Was this an issue specifically with the Cinch?

Also, not @ you Jim, but whoever brought up the name change, it's pretty obvious these are two different devices.

FrankPS wrote:

Allow me to summarize:

Some people like the Vergo and some people don't. Whew, glad we solved this.

I think you may have missed the point of my posts.

I like the cinch and the vergo. 

They are both easier to use than a grigri. 

And in my experience, they work 99.97 percent of the time.

I used the cinch despite the "unexplained drop controversy" of ten years ago.

I felt sure that those episodes were caused by user error.

I stopped using the cinch when I experienced a minor, but worrisome, unexplained drop.

I switched to the vergo because it offers a little more friction at the expense of making paying out slack slightly more difficult.

I again had a minor drop episode, so I went back to the grigri.

99.97 percent of the time isn't good enough for me.

If it doesn't happen to you, then you may be perfectly justified, and maybe even correct, to assume that the episodes were purely user error on my part and that the cinch episodes in the past were also user error.  

But I was there. I couldn't pinpoint a specific error on my part, so there's no specific error I could correct. 

The grigri has error modes, they are known and predictable. I can live with that. I can avoid those errors. 

But exactly what's causing my cinch/vergo problems...I just don't know.

On another subject-

The cinch and the vergo have the lowering handle in different places, but I don't think this has any effect on the function of the devices. 

It does make it more of a pia to load the rope into the vergo.

Mark E Dixon wrote:

I think you may have missed the point of my posts.

I like the cinch and the vergo. 

They are both easier to use than a grigri. 

And in my experience, they work 99.97 percent of the time.

I used the cinch despite the "unexplained drop controversy" of ten years ago.

I felt sure that those episodes were caused by user error.

I stopped using the cinch when I experienced a minor, but worrisome, unexplained drop.

I switched to the vergo because it offers a little more friction at the expense of making paying out slack slightly more difficult.

I again had a minor drop episode, so I went back to the grigri.

99.97 percent of the time isn't good enough for me.

If it doesn't happen to you, then you may be perfectly justified, and maybe even correct, to assume that the episodes were purely user error on my part and that the cinch episodes in the past were also user error.  

But I was there. I couldn't pinpoint a specific error on my part, so there's no specific error I could correct. 

The grigri has error modes, they are known and predictable. I can live with that. I can avoid those errors. 

But exactly what's causing my cinch/vergo problems...I just don't know.

On another subject-

The cinch and the vergo have the lowering handle in different places, but I don't think this has any effect on the function of the devices. 

It does make it more of a pia to load the rope into the vergo.

Mark,

My comment wasn't directed at you; I was noting that there are people that like the Vergo and people that don't (or even think it's dangerous). 

I wasn't focusing on you! People have preferences on all sorts of climbing gear and there's nothing wrong with that.

Mark E Dixon wrote:

I stopped using the cinch when I experienced a minor, but worrisome, unexplained drop.

I switched to the vergo...I again had a minor drop episode, so I went back to the grigri.

But I was there. I couldn't pinpoint a specific error on my part, so there's no specific error I could correct. 

Might be too distance for you to remember. I know mine happened in "short fall" (waist close to draw height) situations w/ tight belay. I think this is related to the Grigri "slab fall", where the cam won't engage on its own w/o a brake hand, or if you grab the climber end too hard (but not the brake side). The Cinch/Vergo are different in that if you grab both sides of the rope equally hard, there isn't enough friction differential to engage the cam.

Regardless, as you said, it's an inferior dogging belay device. And w/ skinnier ropes, I don't miss it at all.

RRR wrote:

"Large number". Was this an issue specifically with the Cinch?

Also, not @ you Jim, but whoever brought up the name change, it's pretty obvious these are two different devices.

It came up disproportionally often in the DAV statistics, something like 6 times the GriGri if I remember rightly. All this was discussed ad-nauseum on the extensive threads at the time, either here or on RCcom.

The Vergo may have another name but it's function is the same.

I've been using the vergo here and there since it dropped (never sent in for recall) and I loved it for a month or so, then after more and more use, It started to sketch me out. Just too quirky. Feels cheaply made particularly the handle, rope doesn't always catch as quickly as the grigri, and the orientation only helps in paying slack and makes everything else awkward.

The grigri is an infinitely better device IMO. Especially the newest model 

Jim Titt wrote:

It came up disproportionally often in the DAV statistics, something like 6 times the GriGri if I remember rightly. 

I assume this was either by unit sales or more likely simply # of incidents.  I wonder how all this would look if normalized by # of falls.  My perception is the GriGri would lead any device by any measure of safety by 1000x.  30 yrs of being the leading sport and gym climbing device - where people actually fall.

I am a very big fan of the Trango Vergo.  I have been using one for the last two or so years after it came back from the recall.   It's really awesome especially for multi-pitch or tight belays where you can't move around much.  I personally found it to be much much nicer than the GriGri 2 and the Mad Rock Lifeguard for quickly feeding out rope but that's just my experience.  I also had chance to play with my friends top rope soloing rig and used the Vergo with a Petzl MicroTraxion, was pretty surprised with how well the Vergo worked.  I just ordered one for Christmas now that I can't bum my climbing partners Vergo.  It's a very underrated piece of gear.  Is it better than a GriGri? Depends on what you are using it for.  For belaying at the crag, I think so.  For route development, route setting or some other specific use, I can't say.  

Edit: I forgot to mention that I am over 80kg and same for my climbing partner.  Never had any issues of it not locking or being sketched out when belaying or been belayed but 90% of that is dealing with climbers over 80kg so YMMV.

I have used the Cinch since it first came out. I replaced the soft-as-butter pin on my cinch with a molding pin, but otherwise same as bought. I have not had the chance to use a Vergo yet.

I have caught countless people with the Cinch but I don't use the device like Trango suggests. I hold the device in my hand and actively pinch it when not pulling slack. This also allows me to pry it open slightly when pulling slack. This gives me full control of the device largely with one hand and you naturally cause the device to grip the rope if you tighten your hand (a must for any belay device IMHO). 

Things I like about the Cinch (when using the device as I do):

* Never short rope people, even with ropes that are stiff, twisted, or a bit gnar

* Easy to escape belay or pass a knot as you can clip/unclip a weighted rope. Generally easier to clip to a rope, too.

* Trivial to make a 3 on 1 using a tibloc. 

* Light enough for long climbs in the back country. 

Pity Trango never sold the titanium version.

Not sure if the Vergo works the same YMMV

Edit: have also met at least four people who have been dropped on grigri. Don't pinch&pull, guys.

Glad to see some similarly positive experiences too. This thing is clutch for TR Soloing for sure. Trango should be pushing the "Install on a weighted rope" selling point super hard. It's actually why I bought it, then discovered how great it feels as a belay device. I think the TR Solo gang will find this to be an invaluable tool. And thanks for the points on Multipitch usage. Definitely something to consider.

Mark E Dixon wrote:

I used a cinch for a long time, then switched to a vergo.

I have switched back to a grigri.

Both the cinch and vergo feed more smoothly than the grigri and feeding out rope to the side rather than up is easier on the shoulder.

But I had a couple of episodes where my climber fell 10 feet further than expected.

I think it's because my instinctive reaction to a fall is to bring my brake hand back to my hip.

This puts the rope directly in line with the slot on the vergo which then provides essentially no friction.

If your climber is away from obstacles and you are wearing gloves and won't burn your hand, then this may be OK.

But a little too sketch for me.

YMMV

Your rope is probably on the slim side. Allows for some slippage before fully enaged. Same happens with the GriGir on smaller ropes.

I use the Vergo, and don’t see many of them out there. It’s the best for TR soloing, though for rope solo it’s awful, stick to the upside down grigri. It’s safer to hand to newbs, since there’s no override. Haven’t belayed from above with it. I can switch between this and grigri easily, but prefer the Vergo if people high clip regularly. For people TRing it doesn’t matter. 

The single contact point to the locking carabiner and it looking like it’s pulling at an angle instead of straight on with the rope always bothers me a little, but that could just be that mine got shuffled onto a D shaped locker, I’ll have to look at it on another locker. 

I basically only keep mine for the purpose of TR solo’ing. Hands down the best self feeding device that also lets you lower and reherse a move.

Question for Jim

Frictional hysterises: does this happen to a rope that is already moving, or a static rope just before it starts moving.

I ask because it is significantly easier to lock off a Vergo when you see the climber fall compared to a GriGri. The Vergo locks when you pull it away from your harness/belay loop. (Compare this to Mark Dixon’s comment of “instinctively putting his braking hand by his hip”, which would keep the Vergo close to the harness and keeping it unlocked).  I found it very intuitive to sort of flick your wrist away to lock it off. I don’t really understand why this was never written in the instructions because it gave me so much more confidence in the device.

If frictional hysterises as a failure mode only occurs to a rope that is moving through the device and needs to be locked off, this would mean you have locked off before the rope has had a chance to resist braking, and it would be possible to avoid the failure mode. 

Max R wrote:

I basically only keep mine for the purpose of TR solo’ing. Hands down the best self feeding device that also lets you lower and reherse a move.

Except for the Taz Lov2

https://sicgrips.blogspot.com/2020/08/vergo-for-top-rope-soloing.html?m=1

Jon Rhoderick wrote:

Question for Jim

Frictional hysterises: does this happen to a rope that is already moving, or a static rope just before it starts moving.

I ask because it is significantly easier to lock off a Vergo when you see the climber fall compared to a GriGri. The Vergo locks when you pull it away from your harness/belay loop. (Compare this to Mark Dixon’s comment of “instinctively putting his braking hand by his hip”, which would keep the Vergo close to the harness and keeping it unlocked).  I found it very intuitive to sort of flick your wrist away to lock it off. I don’t really understand why this was never written in the instructions because it gave me so much more confidence in the device.

If frictional hysterises as a failure mode only occurs to a rope that is moving through the device and needs to be locked off, this would mean you have locked off before the rope has had a chance to resist braking, and it would be possible to avoid the failure mode. 

If you've already locked the device it shouldn't occur in theory. Nobody tests with them this way so it's purely theory though.