New Petzl belay device

I did away with using a grigri for the past few years, after I switched to using a gigajul. I used the gigajul for everything - single pitch, multipitch, sport, trad, etc. That is, until I started climbing as part of a group that has members of different climbing skills. After a couple times having to lower climbers (belaying from above) that couldn't complete a climb, I went back to using a grigri to make that process easier for myself and boy, had I forgotten about the ease with which it is so smooth to reel in that rope slack, as the climber climbs up. As much as I have great things to say about the gigajule; I believe it will be relegated to multipich climbing using double ropes. Taking an extra belay device, such as an ATC with me on climbs is no big deal, especially when trad climbing (can't tell the difference amongs the heavier load anyway), and if I forget to take the ATC with me; I'm comfortable using a carabiner block, munter, super munter, etc. to get myself down.

Anyone know where to buy an orange one right now or are they already out of stock?

Karl Henize wrote:

Watch this video. Cut to the 5:50 mark for the discussion of how the friction on the cam results in a torque that helps overcome the spring tension on the cam.

The spinning wheel of the Neox reduces the torque on the cam due to friction (until the wheel stops spinning).

Seb nails it.
The device has to make the standard, and yes, the neox feeds easier than a gri gri as by design, and because of it, locks up differently than a gri gri (but still within associated standard). Kinda like the lifeguard locks slightly different, or the pinch, or the.... list goes on. They all have different feel, how quick it wants to lock, etc, but anyone worried about it not locking up because they are not holding the brake strand is literally doing it wrong so I struggle to see the point of argument some are making.
"why didn't this seat belt work as intended when I didn't buckle it"

I ordered mine early Monday morning and shipping info says it should show up tomorrow.  Just in time for a sunny weekend!

Mr Rogers wrote:

Seb nails it.
The device has to make the standard, and yes, the neox feeds easier than a gri gri as by design, and because of it, locks up differently than a gri gri (but still within associated standard). Kinda like the lifeguard locks slightly different, or the pinch, or the.... list goes on. They all have different feel, how quick it wants to lock, etc, but anyone worried about it not locking up because they are not holding the brake strand is literally doing it wrong so I struggle to see the point of argument some are making.
"why didn't this seat belt work as intended when I didn't buckle it"

People want a device that simultaneously feeds effortlessly and locks immediately, without a single failure point, relying on absolutely zero operator intervention or skill, in every circumstance they can imagine. They want this impossible device so badly that they begin to oscillate at high frequency between only two opinions, expressed virulently, which are: (1) “the piece of gear before me is the Impossible Device and I’m positive that it is perfect and failproof in every way,” and (2) “the piece of gear before me is not the Impossible Device and could never be the Impossible Device; instead, its existence is a vicious insult to me personally, and anyone who uses it is dumber than a bag of hammers”

postscript: heaven forbid the actual Impossible Device comes out but it doesn’t come in their favorite color and it’s $189.95 

that guy named seb wrote:

If you look at the actual standards they both have to be able to catch a fall unattended.

Right, but even though a Grigri passes that standard, we all are aware that there are circumstances where it can fail to catch a fall (rare circumstances, but they do exist).

Additionally, the passive devices (Giga Jul, etc.) also pass this standard, yet in this very thread you pointed out that they may not have sufficient braking force for particular scenarios.

The same way that these devices pass the test but have some small gaps in actual use, the Neox may also.  TBD!

Kyle Tarry wrote:

Additionally, the passive devices (Giga Jul, etc.) also pass this standard, yet in this very thread you pointed out that they may not have sufficient braking force for particular scenarios.

You'll find these devices only pass EN 15151-2, where as real assisted braking devices are designed to pass EN 15151-1.

As far as I remember from past threads the CT alpine up has the highest braking power of the geometry assisted belay devices. It is still only able to hold a fall unassisted with two ropes and as such is still just EN 15151-2. 

I ordered first thing Sunday morning before church. When I entered the confessional to confess my lust for new climbing gear, the little screen opened and my priest handed me the orange Neox I ordered. He said God forgives me but I should say 5 Hail Marys before tying in, and 2 more before the crux. Heavenly customer service from Petzl, 10 out of 10.

Looks like not able to purchase on Petzl at the moment. 

David Schwartz wrote:

68 + shipping on petzl.com with a pro-deal. Just saying

the first rule of pro deal and fight club are the same...

bearded sam wrote:

the first rule of pro deal and fight club are the same...

Yeah, it literally is in the rules for most discount programs.

that guy named seb wrote:

You'll find these devices only pass EN 15151-2, where as real assisted braking devices are designed EN 15151-1.

As far as I remember from past threads the CT alpine up has the highest braking power of the geometry assisted belay devices. It is still only able to hold a fall unassisted with two ropes and as such is still just EN 15151-2. 

Hey this is Mountain Project! You're not allowed to quote factual evidence, certification criteria, or well established pieces of information and testing procedures!

Harping on the "hands free" testing requirements for certification is really missing the point.  The Petzl Video demonstrates quite clearly a realistic scenario where the Neox fails to lockup, when the brake strand is not controlled.  I don't see how anyone could watch that video and somehow come to the conclusion that you can safely use the Neox for a hands free belay, in all circumstances.  

UIAA 129 defines "Locking assisted breaking device" as follows:

Device which acts as a manual breaking device at low rope velocities, but at higher velocities, combined with hand control of the free end of the rope, produces a change in device geometry or rope geometry or rope geometry, such that the rope movement slows down until arrested.  

The UIAA 129 Dynamic performance test (for locking assisted breaking devices only) states the following:

The dynamic performance test may not represent appropriate use of the breaking device.  The device must always be used according to the manufacturer's instructions, which may proscribe the necessity to always keep a hand on the free end of the rope and forbid the use of the device without a runner between the belayer and the climber.

IMO, it is pretty clear that the UIAA recognizes that passing this standardized test is not sufficient to ensure hands free lockup in all circumstances.  

Karl Henize wrote:

Harping on the "hands free" testing requirements for certification is really missing the point.  The Petzl Video demonstrates quite clearly a realistic scenario where the Neox fails to lockup, when the brake strand is not controlled.  I don't see how anyone could watch that video and somehow come to the conclusion that you can safely use the Neox for a hands free belay, in all circumstances.  

UIAA 129 defines "Locking assisted breaking device" as follows:

The UIAA 129 Dynamic performance test (for locking assisted breaking devices only) states the following:

No one uses a grigri for its intended use when rope soloing, this wording means little in this context. 

IMO, it is pretty clear that the UIAA recognizes that passing this standardized test is not sufficient to ensure hands free lockup in all circumstances.  

This is actually quite funny as I had only looked at the actual test method and not the wording, this whole standard used to be called "automatic breaking device" or something along those lines, I'm sure brands had quite a bit of input on how the wording and name were changed in later iterations. 

The actual testing method still remains virtually the same thing as before, which is still holding an unattended lead fall. 

For folks who already have one to play with: Does the Neox grab quickly enough to work with an ascender in a RADS setup? I was thinking it might be a lower friction replacement for a grigri.

Update: I got one and gave ascending a try and didn’t see much improvement, if any, over the Grigri. The wheel stays locked, not spinning, for pretty much the whole motion.

Just pre ordered mine from HowNot2 not the fastest way to get it but love supporting them when I can. 

Karl Henize wrote:

Harping on the "hands free" testing requirements for certification is really missing the point.  The Petzl Video demonstrates quite clearly a realistic scenario where the Neox fails to lockup, when the brake strand is not controlled.  I don't see how anyone could watch that video and somehow come to the conclusion that you can safely use the Neox for a hands free belay, in all circumstances.  

UIAA 129 defines "Locking assisted breaking device" as follows:

The UIAA 129 Dynamic performance test (for locking assisted breaking devices only) states the following:

Is anyone here saying to go hands free while belaying?  
Seb is pointing out to you the testing standard requires the device to hold a fall without assistance as is the same for all the other ABDs that fall into the same standard. So it factually can hold a unattended fall. Like the gri gri and other ABDs, you can put a certain set of conditions where that may not happen. But the device can lock up unattended, not always lock up.

IMO, it is pretty clear that the UIAA recognizes that passing this standardized test is not sufficient to ensure hands free lockup in all circumstances.  

I think most of us understood this to be true the entire time....
So what are you really getting at?
Literally every device says you're doing it wrong if you let go of the brake strand.
For those if us that will use this thing off label for rope soloing etc, aren't gonna blame petzl if it goes tits up.

Had a quick look at the Neox in the gym. The feeding out part is super smooth and it grabs pretty quickly with little effort. Trusting it for roped solo purposes is a leap of faith I’m not ready for. Despite the price tag, it’s going to be popular. Maybe pour one out for the Edelrid Pinch getting released at the same time?

Rock n Rolls Sports in Gunnison just posted that they received what looks like a hearty shipment of them. rockandrollsports.com/

Quest Outdoors in Kentucky got some in as well.  Quest Outdoors