Mammut “core protect” double ropes

Looks like they copied Edelrid’s use of Aramid for improved resistance to cutting. Anyone used it yet? I like Mammut ropes generally so it’s def intriguing, though seemingly not widely available yet and a bit pricey where I can find it online:

https://www.mammut.com/us/en/products/2010-04590/8-0-alpine-core-protect-dry-rope

With the Core Protect Rope, it's all in the name: there is an extra aramid sheath between the polyamide outer sheath and core to protect the rope better from sharp crag and metal edges. In the event of a fall, this aramid sheath unfolds owing to its extra-long construction, and the rope performs just as dynamically as any other Mammut rope. Handling and abrasion resistance remain the same, but cut resistance is increased.

Looks different than Edelrid’s solution— none of the characteristic fuzzing, but the aramid doesn’t contribute to durability until the nylon sheath is damaged. Sounds great for high commitment objectives where a damaged rope would really suck, but part of the value proposition of the edelrid protect ropes is that they last longer and it’s not clear if that’s true with the mammut version. (I’m assuming that with a sheath cut you can keep climbing on the mammut, but still replace ASAP)

https://www.mammut.com/us/en/products/2010-04590/8-0-alpine-core-protect-dry-rope

First of all, I’m glad to see brands coming out with this tech.

Over the  25 years that I have been climbing, dry treatments have gotten better, and ropes have gotten super thin and light ( if you want).
So cut resistance is really the big area for improvement, especially as it (probably) has the biggest benefit for safety.

I too will be interested to see what various users experiences and more controlled tests, will tell us about the differences in these technologies.

Here is a video discussing ropes being cut with several drops of the mammut single version of this rope.  

hard is easy video of mammut ropes.

climber pat wrote:

Here is a video discussing ropes being cut with several drops of the mammut single version of this rope.  

hard is easy video of mammut ropes.

The edge test was very interesting. I was amazed at the difference of the 2.3kn vs 3kn fall on a standard rope. 

Cool to see new innovations in rope design. I wonder how far they can push this concept. 

So typically ropes have a recommended manufacturer retirement points, one such is when the core shows anywhere.

With this having two sheaths, I wonder if the recommended retirement point would be when the aramid core is showing, as it would suggest that the rope has been compromised?

Obviously YMMMV, YGD, the core is where all the strength is yadda yadda, but I'm curious when/what the manufacturer considers too much wear and you should replace their dual sheath rope.

EDIT 5/17/24 - I asked Mammut and just like expected the inner sheath should cause instant retirement. 

I’ve been using the Edelrid Protect as a workhorse for the last few years. The peace of mind is really nice and I really like how it’s dynamic elongation is a little different that normal ropes, but oh my gosh, these ropes kink like no other. It is a true nuisance.

I pre-ordered the Mammut one. Hoping for an end to my suffering! 

Jake Neem wrote:

With this having two sheaths, I wonder if the recommended retirement point would be when the aramid core is showing, as it would suggest that the rope has been compromised?

Obviously YMMMV, YGD, the core is where all the strength is yadda yadda, but I'm curious when/what the manufacturer considers too much wear and you should replace their dual sheath rope.

If the outer sheath is cut, you'd want to retire the rope immediately. The inner sheath is very thin, likely doesn't have much abrasion resistance, and certainly isn't designed to take the same abuses that the outer sheath is designed for. It is there as an extra margin of safety in the event of an otherwise catastrophic rope cut. 

Not sure what mammuts official position is, but I'd be shocked if it wasn't "retire immediately".

I ordered the Mammut rope from the company website (15% off if you sign up for their newsletter). I’ll report back once I’ve put some pitches on it. Probably won’t attempt to whip over an arete though.

Jake Neem wrote:

So typically ropes have a recommended manufacturer retirement points, one such is when the core shows anywhere.

With this having two sheaths, I wonder if the recommended retirement point would be when the aramid core is showing, as it would suggest that the rope has been compromised?

Obviously YMMMV, YGD, the core is where all the strength is yadda yadda, but I'm curious when/what the manufacturer considers too much wear and you should replace their dual sheath rope.

like @Israel Mentioned,
I am sure if you damage the regular sheath, you replace it. As they show in the video, the inner hybrid aramid/pa sheath is very loose. And if the regular, outer sheath, was cut, you run into issue with that slipping, certainly with teethed ascenders/tibloc, but probably even with Prussiks and certain belay devices. 

These tests do make me reconsider twin ropes, since it seems that the tension on the rope is such a big factor, and a twin would have half the tension of a single rope. Not very practical for top roping though, which is a lot of my family’s climbing.

@Chris C, bummer to hear about the twisting. I was strongly considering the Edelrid ropes, on the (unproven) assumption that they would be more durable than the Mammut version, due to the thicker sheath, and aramid in the outer sheath. We climb easy, so a lot of very featured terrain, leading to lots of rope on rock contact.

I  was just debating whether to get a 60 or 70m. Our local climbs are short, and so are lots of others, but still, it only takes a couple climbs set up for 70m ropes, to really make you wish you’d bought the 70m!

But having 10m extra to deal with is already a pain with a well behaved rope, a twist prone one would really make that annoying,

Most of us will have seen the statement from Edelrid, that their 8.9 Protect is more cut resistant than a 10mm rope, at 30cm on their test. That turns out to not be quite the whole truth.

When I looked a bit further, at the ones they have tested, I actually see that their most cut resistant rope (in their test) is the Boa gym 9.9mm, at 32 cm. Which is more than the Eagle Protect 9.5mm at 28.5 cm. The Python 10mm is the thicker rope with lower cut resistance, at 21cm.

Interesting — do you have a link for that? There’s different info here: “With an 80kg load applied the Swift Protect Pro Dry cut after 100cm, whilst the 10mm rope cut at 66cm, and the standard Swift cut at 54cm.” https://www.ukclimbing.com/gear/climbing/ropes/edelrid_swift_protect_pro_dry_triple-rated_rope-13054

I did find a table with three of the “cutting length” values you cite ( ukclimbing.com/gear/climbin…), and I can also see them on the individual Edelrid website pages for each rope, but none of that matches the above or what’s in this video from Edelrid: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=g3JGe6OKKkk

Quite confusing.

Tjaard Breeuwer wrote:

Most of us will have seen the statement from Edelrid, that their 8.9 Protect is more cut resistant than a 10mm rope, at 30cm on their test. That turns out to not be quite the whole truth.

When I looked a bit further, at the ones they have tested, I actually see that their most cut resistant rope (in their test) is the Boa gym 9.9mm, at 32 cm. Which is more than the Eagle Protect 9.5mm at 28.5 cm. The Python 10mm is the thicker rope with lower cut resistance, at 21cm.

I recall edelrid saying that diameter was a poor indicator of cut resistance.  I think they went further to say the weave and other construction options had a greater impact.

Israel R wrote:

If the outer sheath is cut, you'd want to retire the rope immediately. The inner sheath is very thin, likely doesn't have much abrasion resistance, and certainly isn't designed to take the same abuses that the outer sheath is designed for. It is there as an extra margin of safety in the event of an otherwise catastrophic rope cut. 

Not sure what mammuts official position is, but I'd be shocked if it wasn't "retire immediately".

Fair point that it isn't designed to take the same abuse. Aramid is tough stuff, but it probably isn't designed to take consistent wear.

I would expect the official position to be retire immediately, but I did have the thought that it may not be as catastrophic to see the color of the inner sheath, as compared to seeing the inner white goodness of a standard rope. Either way I sent a message to Mammut to ask them their retiring criteria on these just out of curiosity. 

Jake Neem wrote:

Fair point that it isn't designed to take the same abuse. Aramid is tough stuff, but it probably isn't designed to take consistent wear.

I would expect the official position to be retire immediately, but I did have the thought that it may not be as catastrophic to see the color of the inner sheath, as compared to seeing the inner white goodness of a standard rope. Either way I sent a message to Mammut to ask them their retiring criteria on these just out of curiosity. 

Specifically, I’d be really curious to see if the inner aramid sheath is good enough that it’s a better option than bypassing the damaged section with a butterfly knot. 

Eli W wrote:

Specifically, I’d be really curious to see if the inner aramid sheath is good enough that it’s a better option than bypassing the damaged section with a butterfly knot. 

I think these kind of questions depend on what kind of outer sheath damage we are talking about. if the outer sheath is fully cut, you would certainly want to still use a butterfly, otherwise the lower section of the sheath would bunch and behave in an unideal manner in your belay device. If the outer sheath is cut enough that you can see the inner sheath but not fully detached from itself, you could probably get away with not tying a butterfly depending on how much of the outer sheath is still connected and if there is no risk of the outer sheath cutting further.

Based on my understanding of the design, it is probably unwise to think of the inner sheath as a fully separate entity from the outer sheath but rather a component of the overall sheath. If someone handed you a rope with 50-70% of the sheath cut through or missing in one spot, would you still use it without isolating that spot? Is the inconvenience of passing a knot worth the safety risk? The answer will probably always be "it depends" in practice. I personally wouldn't cut that corner unless I thought time very much wasn't on my side.

Israel R wrote:

I think these kind of questions depend on what kind of outer sheath damage we are talking about. if the outer sheath is fully cut, you would certainly want to still use a butterfly, otherwise the lower section of the sheath would bunch and behave in an unideal manner in your belay device. If the outer sheath is cut enough that you can see the inner sheath but not fully detached from itself, you could probably get away with not tying a butterfly depending on how much of the outer sheath is still connected and if there is no risk of the outer sheath cutting further.

Based on my understanding of the design, it is probably unwise to think of the inner sheath as a fully separate entity from the outer sheath but rather a component of the overall sheath. If someone handed you a rope with 50-70% of the sheath cut through or missing in one spot, would you still use it without isolating that spot? Is the inconvenience of passing a knot worth the safety risk? The answer will probably always be "it depends" in practice. I personally wouldn't cut that corner unless I thought time very much wasn't on my side.

It’s less about cutting corners, and more that isolating rope damage with a butterfly 1. significantly weakens the rope, and 2. introduces quite a bit of stuck rope potential

Mammut’s double, the 8.0 mm, at 43g/m, is a hair thinner and lighter than Edelrid’s Starling at 8.2 and 44 g/m.

It will be interesting to see if Mammut comes out with a triple rated version as well. 

Alex C wrote:

Interesting — do you have a link for that? There’s different info here: “With an 80kg load applied the Swift Protect Pro Dry cut after 100cm, whilst the 10mm rope cut at 66cm, and the standard Swift cut at 54cm.” https://www.ukclimbing.com/gear/climbing/ropes/edelrid_swift_protect_pro_dry_triple-rated_rope-13054

I did find a table with three of the “cutting length” values you cite ( ukclimbing.com/gear/climbin…), and I can also see them on the individual Edelrid website pages for each rope, but none of that matches the above or what’s in this video from Edelrid: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=g3JGe6OKKkk

Quite confusing.

Exactly, I got the numbers from Edelrids website specs for each rope.