Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2009 - 10:25pm PT
|
What if the locker is connected to LOCKER?
Yer gonna die!
|
|
rgold
Trad climber
Poughkeepsie, NY
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2009 - 11:12pm PT
|
Here ya go, the harness hard-point clipper's essential companion:
Use it to tow a semi, hold factor 2's gate open or cross-loaded, and all this safety for only 10 oz of weight. Better yet, use two with gates reversed.
They make dandy quickdraws too.
|
|
aguacaliente
climber
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2009 - 11:17pm PT
|
Brian said
Interesting that Arc'teryx (and Mountain Gear) sponsered a harness testing program. Seem to recall the results were reported in a climbing magazine, but, can't quickly find them online.
It was done by Rock and Ice. They tested worn harnesses. The article isn't online, I haven't read it and was sort of curious, but don't have access to back issues. Somewhere on rc.com forum it says which issue it was.
|
|
jtanzman
climber
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 12:07am PT
|
For the last 20 years I've always chopped the belay loop off my new harnesses. (That sewn loop that holds the leg loops to the waist belt.)
I use a large locking 'biner instead. It makes the harness much easier to use and feels safer to me. My logic is:
1. Less links in the safety chain, less to go wrong.
2. Under stress and torque, fabric on fabric is more abrasive than polished metal against fabric.
Does anyone else do this?
I hope not.
Does anyone care to argue in favor of keeping the belay loop?
Well, um, yeah.
By substituting a biner for the belay loop you've clearly made things worse. First of all, you have obviously not reduced the number of links in the belay chain. You have substituted one link for another. That's a wash, for heaven's sake.
Secondly, you've substituted a more failure-prone device for a less failure-prone one. You've eliminated a sewn double loop of nylon (the strongest part of the harness), for a mechanical device that can (1) come unscrewed; (2) can cut the rope; and (3) can be loaded along its minor axis, in which chase it will have something on the order of one-third the strength of the belay loop.
Are you nuts?
Do you keep it but bypass it?
Or just a troll?
Jay
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 12:25am PT
|
jtanzman
He's been doing it for 20 years.
He's not dead yet, nor any of his partners. Are you a worry wort?
A few of us here have even done tons of free climbs and Walls with just plain old hip/waist belays for years.
Did you get lost somewhere on the internet and end up over here?
|
|
Brian in SLC
Social climber
Salt Lake City, UT
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 12:31am PT
|
How's that? "Rec.newb called and they want Jay back."
Ha ha.
-Brian in SLC
|
|
jtanzman
climber
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 12:33am PT
|
He's been doing it for 20 years.
He's not dead yet,
Werner,
Your logic, as usual, is impeccable.
Jay
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 12:38am PT
|
So you're still implying he's gonna die sooner or later with that setup.
|
|
jtanzman
climber
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 12:53am PT
|
So you're still implying he's gonna die sooner or later with that setup.
Are you serious? I'm not implying he's going to die from using that set up. I'm simply asserting that it is dumber and more dangerous than using the belay loop. But, geeze, this must be a troll. Surely nobody is so stupid that they would substitute a carabiner for a sewn belay loop.
Jay
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 12:56am PT
|
LOL Hahaha
|
|
Ferretlegger
Trad climber
san Jose, CA
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 01:05am PT
|
Eliminating the belay loop and substituting it with a locking carabiner does not, as asserted above replace a strong thing (the loop) with a weak thing (the carabiner). You would have a carabiner connected to your harness in any case, so the tradeoff is whether or not you want the carabiner attached to the leg loops and waist strap or to the belay loop. My personal feeling is that the triaxial argument is theoretical bullsh#t- it looks nice on a force diagram, but if you look at one loaded with the leg loops and waist strap, gravity and the soft nature of the body and nylon forces the loops to the bottom of the biner and there is no triaxial load. Using a big pear biner here is a good idea though. The previous argument that one could crossload the gate during a transient event is worth consideration though.
In 40 years of climbing I have never used the belay loop for a rappel or belay device, and do not expect to. I do use it on aid for attaching short term things like a sling for a quick hook onto an aider or something similar, although I girth hitch daisys around the harness and leg loops.
|
|
apogee
climber
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 01:28am PT
|
"By substituting a biner for the belay loop you've clearly made things worse."
Worse? I'd say it's a little silly to cut off the belay loop, but I'd say it's a stretch to call it worse. Yes, it would reduce the links in the chain, but given current harness manufacturing standards, and assuming one uses the harness properly and inspects it for wear, 'reducing the links' is kind of a moot point.
"Secondly, you've substituted a more failure-prone device for a less failure-prone one."
Huh? Then how do you connect your belay device to your belay loop? You must use a so-called 'failure-prone device'.
"a mechanical device that can (1) come unscrewed; (2) can cut the rope;"
Again, what would you ever connect your belay device with, belay loop or no?
"...can be loaded along its minor axis, in which chase it will have something on the order of one-third the strength of the belay loop."
True, and cross-loading is something to avoid, to be sure. Fact is, though, I've seen it happen just as much (myself and others) with a 'biner-loop connection as a 'biner-harness connection. No matter which method, you've gotta keep an eye on that 'biner, esp. when you've got a lot of junk attached down there.
That said, even if the 'biner is cross-loaded and loses 2/3 of it's strength, on a typical Pear or large locking 'D, there is still theoretically about 8-9 kn of strength left, and you just ain't gonna break that when it's attached to a soft, spongy human body in the midst of a dynamic belay chain where everything is absorbing the forces. As I posted earlier, if you were able to transmit all 8 kn's of force directly and solely to a human pelvis, it would rip the pelvis completely out of the body...can't remember the last time I've heard of that happening.
edit:
Until someone can show me a clear trend, hell, even one case of a belay 'biner failure due to clipping directly into the harness, I have to consider the opinion that the belay loop should always and only be used as dogmatic, with a less-than-complete understanding of forces as they impact the elements in the belay chain.
|
|
jtanzman
climber
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 01:34am PT
|
Eliminating the belay loop and substituting it with a locking carabiner does not, as asserted above replace a strong thing (the loop) with a weak thing (the carabiner). You would have a carabiner connected to your harness in any case...
You're right. I misinterpreted the OP's post.
Jay
|
|
Spider Savage
Mountain climber
SoCal
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 21, 2009 - 01:58am PT
|
Thanks for all the answers. It is good to occasionally re-examine the way we do things.
I climbed today using my newest harness that still has the belay loop on it. I thought I'd try keeping it on this one to see if it comes in handy.
I always tie into the leg loops/waist belt directly as do most people.
I belay and rappel with a locking 'biner directly through the same.
The belay loop is nice for clipping directly in to an anchor with a short runner attached to it. As when hitting the anchors on at the top of a sport climb. I'll try belaying with it sometime soon and see how that goes.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 05:10am PT
|
So ends the exciting 'Yer all gonna die...!' episode of "As the World Churns" where veteran rock dodgers throw technique and opinions around like so many crumpled OE cans. Be sure and tune in next week for the always educational 'Old stoners pass knotts and gas...' episode - sure to be a real nailbiter.
|
|
gavinshmavin
Trad climber
Winooski, VT
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 08:34am PT
|
Someone above referred to an old-harness belay-loop test, the results of which were published in a magazine a while back.
I was sitting in the gyms between pathetic attempts on a not-hard boulder problem and idly paging through an old mag I came across it. They tested dozens of old harnesses, and of those with belay loops the average loop breaking strength was between 5,100 and 5,900 pounds (they broke the test down further by age of harness).
|
|
Nate Ricklin
climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 09:25am PT
|
welcome to rc.clusterf*#k: the old generation
|
|
GhoulweJ
Trad climber
Sacramento, CA
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 09:48am PT
|
This is a waste of time and hard drive space...
Speaking to both sides of the issue:
Do you really believe the opposing side is in danger???? Really?
Ugh.
|
|
Ray Olson
Trad climber
Imperial Beach, California
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 11:24am PT
|
^^^
hard drive space?
|
|
Ray Olson
Trad climber
Imperial Beach, California
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2009 - 11:37am PT
|
yes it really is a waste of time and
"hard drive space" to discuss the
configuration, construction, and
usership of the modern climbing
harness, can't think of much less
relevant on a site like this; after all
the outdoor bingedusty has provided
the automatons with the "ultimate"
way, no need to look further, no need
to re-examine and gain concensus...
that might mean there's room for
improvement...
Spider Savage, you are right to cut
that thing off your harness if you
don't use it.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!