Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 41 of total 41 in this topic |
Banquo
climber
Amerricka
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Nov 17, 2015 - 09:52am PT
|
I'm thinking of three cases where 1/4" anchors would be acceptable to me. Perhaps not acceptable to you of course. I also think that if there are 1/4" anchors the route description should clearly state they are there so people can make there own decisions about safety. I would also like to see more comprehensive testing of 1/4" anchors with 1/4" hangers so the gear could be marked or listed with a capacity much like chocks and cams are.
1) Temporary placements on first ascents drilled on lead. These should later be replaced with 3/8" anchors by the first ascentionist.
2) Permanent placements on non "sport climbs" that are not expected to see a greater than 1.0 fall factor. These should be SS with SS hangers and would not be intended for repeated falls.
3) Preservation of historic routes. Old 1/4" anchors that have lost their original capacity should be replaced with new 1/4" anchors. Replacements should be SS with SS hangers.
UIAA standards require minimum capacities for various gear that can be expected to catch a lead fall. As I understand it, the required capacity for anchors is based on a worst case scenario of a factor 2 fall with a rigid belay. Some of the required UIAA capacities are:
Rock Anchors 25 kN shear, 15 kN pull out.
Basic Carabiner 20 kN
Oval Carabiner 18 kN
Cams 5 kN
Chocks 2 kN
Note that as little as 2kN is considered to be adequate in some cases.
In actual testing with a standard non-rigid belay, Petzl has measured and reported 6 kN for a factor 1 fall.
http://www.petzl.com/en/Sport/Forces-at-work-in-a-real-fall?ActivityName=Rock-climbing&l=US#.VktSmb-Dpuo
I have tested various 1/4" anchors in good granite. I have not exactly followed the test methods prescribed by UIAA For one thing the UIAA test method require tests in high strength concrete not rock. My granite is much stronger than their concrete. Also, my tests are to failure so consider my numbers high.
0.25x1.25 Powers Drive
Button head Split shank)
15 kN shear
0.25x1.50 Powers Drive
Button head Split shank
15 kN shear, 8 kN direct pull out
0.25x1.50 Powers Spike
13 kN shear, 5 kN direct pull out
0.25x1.75 Simpson Wedge-All 316 SS
11 kN shear 9 kN tension
0.25x1.375 wej-it 304 SS Sleeve
9 kN shear 4 kN tension
In the above "direct pull out" means the anchor was tested without a hanger and there was no prying. "Tension" means the test was done with a hanger which prys and increases the force on the anchor. A "tension" type test with prying is what UIAA requires. The UIAA test is of the hanger and the bolt so it seem that in use you should use the tested bolt with the tested hanger.
For comparison, Black Diamond lists the following:
Camalots: [0.3] 8 kN
[0.4] 10 kN
[0.5] 12 kN
[0.75-6] 14 kN
Stoppers: [size 1-2] 2 kN
[size 3] 5 kN
[size 4-5] 6 kN
[size 6-12] 10 kN
Wired Hexes: [size 1] 6 kN
[size 2-3] 6 kN
[size 4-11] 10 kN)
It seems to me that a good 1/4" anchor is probably stronger than a small cam and most if not all chocks and that a 1/4" anchor is viable protection in the right situation. Climbing on a route with 1/4" anchors requires a different level of commitment than a route with big, fat, new 1/2" bolts does so perhaps in preserving a climb maintaining the original type of protection should be considered.
Government agencies in Europe are beginning to regulate rock anchors. I hope we never go that route but it may be inevitable. Probably end up with code approved guard rails on El Cap bivy ledges.
John Krakauer has quoted Jon Barry as saying "If climbers didn't die, climbing would." I think it is true that the risk, and the fear, are part of the true game. If you want simulated risk, go to Six Flags. The quote comes from page 185 of Barry's book The Great Climbing Game which is a very good read. On page 186 Barry writes "If we choose this game and its dangers we should not complain if we, our friends or others fall victim to 'the fell clutch of circumstances'." Barry's quote 'the fell clutch of circumstances' comes from Henley's poem Invictus which ends:
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.
Climbing is dangerous. Climb at your own risk. Know your equipment and how to use it. Accept responsibility for your own safety.
|
|
thebravecowboy
climber
The Good Places
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2015 - 10:01am PT
|
You make a solid argument for hardware in the same girth and style as the FA. I can dig it. But how does one address the presumably shorter life of 1/4"ers wrt rust, etc?
|
|
SteveW
Trad climber
The state of confusion
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2015 - 10:14am PT
|
Back in the '60's and '70's!
|
|
Vitaliy M.
Mountain climber
San Francisco
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2015 - 10:31am PT
|
Thank you for the info! Helpful stuff!
And a good question. How does the strength diminish over time? How many years have to pass for these anchors to become a real hazard vs something that is clipped for protection?
Interesting especially when there is a concern about old rivets on big walls. When they were placed they were protection. With time they become hazard. So when replaced, should they be replaced with new rivets or 3/8 bolts for the long term benefit?
|
|
JimT
climber
Munich
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2015 - 10:42am PT
|
The UIAA Standard calls for 25kN radial and 20kN axial. The European Standard requires 25kN radial and 15kN axial.
Government agencies in Europe are beginning to regulate rock anchors. I hope we never go that route but it may be inevitable. Probably end up with code approved guard rails on El Cap bivy ledges.
te Here
The sale of anchors in the member states of the European Union has been controlled by means of the standard EN959 since 1996. This is in place to ensure the manufacturing of higher quality safety equipment is not undermined by cheaper, low-quality imports. You may install any garbage you like but selling it is illegal.
1/4" bolts come under "garbage" wherever they are :-)
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2015 - 11:18am PT
|
How about for rivet ladders on aid routes?
1/4" hole, but probably not a deep hole, and something minimal that is not high strength.
Unrelated to the above -
You described SS bolts, but the Powers Drive is carbon steel.
The Powers Spike is available in both SS and carbon steel.
|
|
Banquo
climber
Amerricka
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 17, 2015 - 11:50am PT
|
1/4" bolts come under "garbage" wherever they are :-)
That go for small cams and chocks too? Yes, I understand what standards are and what their purpose is. In fact I am on a standards writing committee for ASTM that is safety related but it isn't related to climbing. I have no problem having a standards based capacity stamped on a 1/4" anchor, in fact I would support it. I'm not sure the UIAA load standards are entirely rational. 2 kN for a chock, 5 kN for a cam and 25 kN for a rock anchor seems inconsistent. I do think that regulation has the potential to kill the spirit of climbing as I know it.
Powers Drive is carbon steel
Yes, I would only use carbon steel for temporary placements even though I've depended on some pretty old ones.
How does the strength diminish over time? How many years have to pass for these anchors to become a real hazard vs something that is clipped for protection?
Like any climbing gear, it won't get stronger with time. Stainless steel should last a long time here in California but I don't think anybody can say how long.
|
|
cragnshag
Social climber
san joser
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2015 - 12:12pm PT
|
I am the master of my fate
Not for long. The government wants to be master of your fate, because it knows what's best for you. And the government gets bigger every year...
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2015 - 01:10pm PT
|
Not for long. The government wants to be master of your fate, because it knows what's best for you. And the government gets bigger every year..
I would expand that, based on personal experience and reading threads on ST -- we all know what's best for everyone else. Just ask us.
I've placed my share of 1/4" Rawl split-shaft bolts in the early 1970's, when we considered them the standard - and Leeper hangers the most reliable. Mea culpa. I certainly see no reason why long bolt ladders in Yosemite need to be a succession of 3/8" bolts, but sometimes bitter experience has caused me to beware of any ancient bolts I find that look like the ones I placed 40+ years ago. I can usually remove them with my fingers.
At least one regular angle I overdrove in 1969 is still in place, however.
John
|
|
Banquo
climber
Amerricka
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 17, 2015 - 01:26pm PT
|
we all know what's best for everyone else. Just ask us.
As far as climbing gear goes we are letting Europe tell us what's best.
|
|
Steve Grossman
Trad climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2015 - 01:35pm PT
|
Well, you certainly see CE all over gear these days and I don't believe that is originally an American standard so the answer may be "Yes".
|
|
Banquo
climber
Amerricka
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 17, 2015 - 02:07pm PT
|
Other than rusty or cracked anchor components, How many accidents involve rock anchor failure? If regulators want to reduce climbing injuries, training and education would be the route to go - or simply ban climbing like BASE jumping basically has been. Belay and rappel errors are the most common cause of climbing injuries.
Anchor failure contributed to just 2.5% of technical roped climbing victims for the RMRG. Notable anchor failures include the movement of an approximately 250-kg boulder that had been slung with webbing, the failure of a top-rope anchor as a result of the climbing rope being threaded directly through the anchor webbing, and the failure of an anchor built from webbing spliced together using masking tape, a common method used by manufactures when linking two ends of webbing together on a spool. The RMRG does not have any records of bolted anchor failures, although one incident involved the failure of rock surrounding a removable mechanical device used as an anchor. Data from both Yosemite National Park and Australia report anchor failures as the cause of climbing incidents as 1% or less.
Emphasis added.
http://www.wemjournal.org/article/S1080-6032%2812%2900109-3/fulltext
|
|
looks easy from here
climber
Ben Lomond, CA
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2015 - 04:01pm PT
|
Always love your science threads, Banquo.
the failure of a top-rope anchor as a result of the climbing rope being threaded directly through the anchor webbing, and the failure of an anchor built from webbing spliced together using masking tape
Can't ban stupid...
|
|
Banquo
climber
Amerricka
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 17, 2015 - 04:35pm PT
|
Always love your science threads, Banquo.
Thanks
The article above referenced a Yosemite specific (1987) article.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1026367/pdf/westjmed00132-0042.pdf
Mechanism of Injury
Falls suffered by the lead climber were responsible for the majority of injuries (66%, P < .05) (Table 1). Length of falls ranged from 0.6 to 244 m (2 to 800 ft; mean 13 m [43 ft], median 8 m [25 ft]). On 29% of leader falls, "protection" pulled out of the rock during a fall, resulting in a longer fall (mean fall length 17 m [55 ft]; P = .05). Only 12% of injuries occurred while "aid" climbing. Six climbers were injured (one fatally) while climbing without a rope, and seven were injured while descending without a rope. Rappelling contributed only 1 % of all injuries. There was one case of equipment failure when a protection bolt drilled previously into the rock pulled out under the force of a fall.
The paper reports 144 leader falls so that would be about 42 protection pulled out to 1 bolt failure. Generally there are multiple pieces pulled on a long fall so the number of pieces pulled might be much higher.
So, if standards writers want to improve climbing safety, perhaps chocks and cams are the place to start. The accidents occurred in the mid 1980's so gear and bolts (even 1/4" bolts) have improved since then.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2015 - 07:52pm PT
|
I've found a place for three or four of them over the years. Had three climbers hanging from one in a brutal storm thirty feet below a Patagonian summit. Given certain circumstances there is a place for everything.
|
|
bhilden
Trad climber
Mountain View, CA/Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2015 - 08:43pm PT
|
Feel the love!
|
|
Steve Grossman
Trad climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2015 - 08:57pm PT
|
Not for those pups...
WHY?
The responsible thing to do is clear. Phat stainless on freeclimbs.
|
|
JimT
climber
Munich
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2015 - 01:19am PT
|
That go for small cams and chocks too? Yes, I understand what standards are and what their purpose is. In fact I am on a standards writing committee for ASTM that is safety related but it isn't related to climbing. I have no problem having a standards based capacity stamped on a 1/4" anchor, in fact I would support it. I'm not sure the UIAA load standards are entirely rational. 2 kN for a chock, 5 kN for a cam and 25 kN for a rock anchor seems inconsistent. I do think that regulation has the potential to kill the spirit of climbing as I know it.
The difference is a 2kN nut is your personal equipment and you know it may be of marginal use when you place it. A bolt is just a bolt and for the average climber they are all the same. Marking the strength assumes climbers can read, will read and are capable of understanding what they read, all of which seem optimistic considering some of the people out there.
The standards are rational though the numbers may not appear to be, they are based on what works most of the time from our experience.
Obviously rivet ladders and aid climbing are different but then they are no longer rock anchors anyway under the normal definition, personally I think rivet ladders are just aid-lite and would prefer they were replaced by hooking but thatīs just me.
Since the standard was introduced in Europe rock climbing has exploded in popularity, as it has in the USA since 1/4" bolts were no longer popular and replaced with something more substantial, some part of the "spirit" of climbing may have suffered but clearly as a sport it is moving on to new levels and appears to be alive and kicking.
From my experience of climbing in the USA compared with Europe Iīd say the spirit of climbing is more under threat from the land resource managers like the BLM, your grasping legal system and so on rather than a few useful standards regarding the strength of safety equipment which were anyway introduced by the climbing community rather than the regulators.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2015 - 06:15am PT
|
Placing 1/4" bolts gives future generations service projects to make them feel useful and important. They are a gift to tomorrow's climbers.
|
|
Banquo
climber
Amerricka
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 18, 2015 - 07:24am PT
|
The difference is a 2kN nut is your personal equipment and you know it may be of marginal use when you place it. A bolt is just a bolt and for the average climber they are all the same. Marking the strength assumes climbers can read, will read and are capable of understanding what they read, all of which seem optimistic considering some of the people out there.
I think that anybody who is too stupid to see the difference between a 3/8" bolt and 1/4" bolt is probably too stupid to understand what a 2 kN chock is good for.
JimT knows what 2 kN is but for the rest of you dum-dums, 2 kN is about 450 pounds. I can bounce test 450 lbs. 450 lbs is so small that it won't catch any realistic leader fall. Fall factor and anchor force are not directly related but 2 kN probably wouldn't be reliable for a fall factor greater than 0.01.
Anyway, if the concept behind any climbing gear is to protect the stupid, all lead protection should catch any imaginable fall. And we should have guard rails on belay ledges.
DMT-
If you ever want to do some remote FA's and set a few 1/4" bolts, I have lots of projects to do.
|
|
rick d
climber
ol pueblo, az
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2015 - 07:25am PT
|
As an avid hand driller, 1/4" x 1.5" button heads make great bolt ladders but not belays. For my sandstone belays I use baby's first, then 3/8" x 2.5"+ anchors. On granite, for free climbing I still have a stash of rawl 5/16" buttonheads which are far and away the best size (bang for buck) for the climbing I do.
The 3/8" x 3" or larger and longer 1/2" is far beyond reasonable spec for anything that realistically would be generated in a climbing scenario. All bolts have a lifespan- the rule should be don't trust fixed anchors unless you placed them. Maybe that was the good thing about climbing on old hardware- you thought about it.
In 20 years, i will bet a majority of hardware circa 2000 will be suspect but by then I will be drinking on the beach and wont care.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
Nothing creative to say
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2015 - 08:57am PT
|
No one else ever needs to clip them nor complain about them, in terms of the climb itself. They were placed for the benefit of the party doing the climb, nothing more.
If its community service the FA wants to deliver, then by all means hammer out the bigger holes. But its not necessary.
DMT
The crux of the issue.
Whether I am my brothers keeper, not the government, but more over am I my future-brothers keeper?
Analog? My 6cylinders are my FA choice, since I'm not my future brothers keeper I may buy a V8 and not worry about climate change at all.
|
|
Banquo
climber
Amerricka
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 18, 2015 - 10:02am PT
|
3 lb drill and recharge and reuse batteries
But not in national parks or wilderness areas.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2015 - 10:32am PT
|
Bolting is for sport climbing and big walls and I am thankful that there are plenty of people around for those tasks.
How about the concept of leaving bolts behind when establishing trad and alpine climbs. We brought 1/4 inch bolts to Torre Egger in 1976 and placed three, one for a climbing move and two for anchors. I'll bet if we hadn't brought the bolts with us we would have been able to proceed without them.
I haven't placed a bolt on a trad or alpine climb since and that covers many hundreds of pitches. I have found that if you don't bring bolts you will find a way. I have failed on many alpine routes but never because I didn't have bolts.
Greg Crouch and I did a beautiful 2000 ft. Rosk climb on Cerro Pollone in Patagonia. The line had previously been tried by the Swiss climber Piola. His team got half way and place two hunker bolts at each belay, obviously using a power drill.
We brought no bolts and we completed the climb and had no difficulty getting adequate pro, belays and rap anchors sans bolts.
We didn't bring bolts on Latok 1. 80 plus piches and raps later we found ourselves safely back on terra firma.....and that was a climb with consequences.
I suppose that strategy would leave out pioneering new slab routes but friends don't let their friends do slabs.
|
|
Steve Grossman
Trad climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2015 - 11:24am PT
|
Jim- Thanks for chiming in.
Knowing what you know now would you choose to leave behind stainless steel bolts in larger diameter holes or would you make the same decision to use 1/4" mild steel split shaft bolts?
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2015 - 11:30am PT
|
I suppose that strategy would leave out pioneering new slab routes but friends don't let their friends do slabs.
Is this a Jim thing (i.e. you and Bridwell)? Too funny!
My answer about being my brother's keeper in bolting is simple. When I place a bolt, I make a permanent alteration to the rock. For that reason alone, I need to consider future climbers in my actions.
John
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2015 - 12:49pm PT
|
Steve....John has a good point about bolts leaving permanent scars therefore more permanent ones are preferable.
Knowing what I know now, I wouldn't have brought any bolts on TE. It would have created some problems on the crux pitch and on the last belay but they could have been overcome.
The minimialists credo:
If you THINK you need something, you don't.
If you KNOW you need something, you do.
|
|
Steve Grossman
Trad climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2015 - 05:08pm PT
|
Straight from the George Lowe Playbook...
|
|
Banquo
climber
Amerricka
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 18, 2015 - 05:59pm PT
|
friends don't let their friends do slabs.
Aww, geez, Jim, I was going to invite to go stink bugging up some slabs with a bunch of my geezer friends but now I can't after you said that.
|
|
thebravecowboy
climber
The Good Places
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2015 - 06:10pm PT
|
damn, Donini, slabs is ok in mah book
quarter inchers on FAs too, seem raisonable
edit for the below: so no hamemers above treeline, right? because yeah, no one cares, eh?
|
|
aldude
climber
Monument Manor
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2015 - 06:14pm PT
|
I agree with Donini. A fair compromise for me is no bolts above treeline.
|
|
nature
climber
Boulder, CO
|
|
|
Nov 18, 2015 - 06:14pm PT
|
On the fifth belay on Nosferatu on the Vampire Spire I put in a 3/8" bolt and a 1/4" titanium bolt for the raps. Turns out our route is looked at as the best way to rap the spire now. Except for that 1/4" titanium. Pat and Hank were/are not fans.
I've seen 1/4" used on FA ground up with the intent to replace immediately after the route is up. I find it a curious tactic but not one that bugs me. Just different.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
Nothing creative to say
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2015 - 11:05pm PT
|
Each team is on its own. None hold rights to a route, ever. Not for any reason.
I think you mean in the legalistic sense of 'rights' rather than the 'historical' effect of territoriality (first in time) as ensconced in the climbing mythology. It exists, and is real. But it's neither absolute, nor relativistic, but a 'norm' in between.
|
|
bvb
Social climber
flagstaff arizona
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2015 - 11:14pm PT
|
I'm confused. What exactly is this thread about?
|
|
Lorenzo
Trad climber
Portland Oregon
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2015 - 12:01am PT
|
The discussion is a place for 1/4" anchors.
Great for holding up suspended ceilings in reinforced concrete buildings.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2015 - 06:58am PT
|
I agree with Clint. Use them for rivets on aid routes. You can pull them rather easily, as opposed to machine heads. Do any routes still have the old aluminum dowels?
BITD, rivets weren't just used because they were quicker to drill. They were used BECAUSE they wouldn't hold a fall, therefore making the route harder and scarier.
The dowels were fine, actually, until people started bending them upwards to better hold a wire rivet hanger. Then they would spin in the hole and point down. I remember them when they were good. It really wasn't that big of a deal.
On the other hand, 1/4 inch bolts have been shown repeatedly able to stop big falls, so putting one in the middle of a pitch could totally change the difficulty.
I realized that attitudes have changed, but the routes aren't as scary as they used to be if you put 1/4 inch bolts in. Even one.
|
|
Texplorer
Trad climber
Sacramento
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2015 - 09:35am PT
|
Mute discussion.
Sloan will replace it all with 3/4" or larger.
|
|
cragnshag
Social climber
san joser
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2015 - 10:21am PT
|
MOOT
WOOT
Or WUTE?
|
|
Vitaliy M.
Mountain climber
San Francisco
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2015 - 11:59am PT
|
Greg Crouch and I did a beautiful 2000 ft. Rosk climb on Cerro Pollone in Patagonia. The line had previously been tried by the Swiss climber Piola. His team got half way and place two hunker bolts at each belay, obviously using a power drill.
We brought no bolts and we completed the climb and had no difficulty getting adequate pro, belays and rap anchors sans bolts.
Team A: Uses bolts with rings to equip the rap route. Pros: will be safe enough to use as a rap anchor for the next 100 years or so. Clean. Organized. Cheaper than using nuts, camming units and a ton of webbing. Cons: takes time. Power Drill (in this case) is a lot of weight. Can't brag about it on the climbing forums.
Team B: Uses passive gear, slings horns and leaves an occasional camming unit to rap the route. Pros: bragging rights about not using bolts. No need to carry the extra weight of a drill. Cons: leaving a lot of trash in the backcountry. Not very long lasting. Clutter/mess. Subsequent teams will add on to the trash in the environment by leaving more webbing and other crap that will be chewed on by rats, birds and sooner than later blow out to the glacier.
Not sure I see why equipping the rap route with bolts vs webbing/leaver gear is looked down?
Do backcountry routes need to be bolted? NO. Especially if you are going to the mountains and climbing a peak that had little activity. Pick one of the continuous crack system you scoped with binoculars and go up. There is not much of a mystery if you spot a continuous system. Or system from which you can penji to another system.
Can BC routes be bolted? Yes. Is one better than the other? For me personally it is a question that has no YES or NO answer. Too much gray area. Slab routes tend to be a lot more heady and bald. But you won't do long slab routes in BIG mountains. So there is a disconnect when Jim is talking about BIG alpine style routes in real mountains and most of the posters talk about routes 200-800 ft in length in Toulumne Meadowns. I personally have done ascents in different style. Ascents of long routes in a day where I placed no bolts, down-climbed a different route and left no trace at all. On alpine objectives I rarely bring anything else but a rack of doubles (tiny to BD#2 with one 3 and offset cams in the 4 smaller sizes - great for flaring cracks + tiny to med nuts). If it is a big, steep and intimidating objective I will add a #4 and #6 camalot to the rack. Different routes require different approach.
Have done one long route that required significant bolting and took me longer to complete than if I added up 15 other FAs. It is more of an in a day big wall by modern standards than a free climb though. Can't get on a 7000M peak and climb something like that alpine style without a portaledge. It was much more satisfying in the end than any of the in a day long routes.
On the way down from many formations I have used webbing/fixed gear and left a bolt to get down. On mountains with ice, it is easy to make a V thread, thread the rope through it directly, and not leave ANYTHING behind - should be common practice on peaks with ice.
At this point, if I put my ego aside, put aside all the internet bolt bashing etc, I would have to say a bolted rap anchor is much better for the environment, subsequent ascents etc. However, in most cases, I would not put in the work that creating the hole is required because it is much easier to sling some sh#t or leave a bomber nut. Most won't make bolted anchors because that would require much more time and energy. If you are not in a wilderness area/NP and have a power drill, I'd say do everyone a favor and make good anchors.
|
|
Vitaliy M.
Mountain climber
San Francisco
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2015 - 12:02pm PT
|
I lean more towards what DMT said. FA party gets to decide what gear they use and how heavy or light, lazy or involved they want to be with the route. Different climbers do things differently. I don't see the superiority of style when you leave gear behind. Bolt or a fixed piece (pin, nut, cam, webbing), it is all the same, if left behind.
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Nov 23, 2015 - 12:17pm PT
|
Nuts? Natural gear? What is that?
The real question is will you put red tape on off route holds.
|
|
| Messages 1 - 41 of total 41 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!