|
j_ung
Oct 14, 2010, 1:41 PM
Post #27 of 52
(2471 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Of course. For the record, if I had to pick between a PAS/Chain-Reactor-type device and a daisy chain, I would chose the former every time.
|
|
|
|
|
gmggg
Oct 14, 2010, 1:46 PM
Post #28 of 52
(2467 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099
|
j_ung wrote: xtrmecat wrote: I did notice her anchored in with the rope, just like I do. And the thousands of other climbers I have encountered this year out in many destination crags. Why exactly did she need to change over to the POS? I don't know either, unless it was to earn her keep with the manufacturer. Ahhh, something going on here. I understood her use of the PAS to be limited to a multiple-rappel situation (though she never outright said it). Obviously, she needed the rope to be her constant attachment while clipping and unclipping the things she was demonstrating. Would you prefer she free-solo demonstrate?
She could have tied in with another PAS, or been at a better stance with a belay, or been locked off at an end-of-rappel type situation.
But I guess those are just marketing notes more than anything...
I just liked the similarity to the rope vs. PAS arguments that devolve here. She initially tied in with a bunny ears figure 8 that probably took all of 15 seconds to tie and she was able to build a nice little etrier into the system as well.
|
|
|
|
|
gmggg
Oct 14, 2010, 1:48 PM
Post #29 of 52
(2464 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099
|
j_ung wrote: Of course. For the record, if I had to pick between a PAS/Chain-Reactor-type device and a daisy chain, I would chose the former every time.
So would I, but I haven't aid climbed.
|
|
|
|
|
edge
Oct 14, 2010, 1:49 PM
Post #30 of 52
(2464 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
I very rarely take 9+ minutes out of my day to sit still through a web video, but today I did.
I saw absolutely nothing that would make me buy one of those.
|
|
|
|
|
gmggg
Oct 14, 2010, 2:02 PM
Post #31 of 52
(2454 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099
|
edge wrote: I very rarely take 9+ minutes out of my day to sit still through a web video, but today I did. I saw absolutely nothing that would make me buy one of those.
I humbly apologize. It's a long nine minutes and I'm sure you could have spent your time more fruitfully.
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Oct 14, 2010, 2:49 PM
Post #32 of 52
(2437 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
I did actually like the rope step trick. Hadn't seen that before. Will be using that.
|
|
|
|
|
edge
Oct 14, 2010, 3:02 PM
Post #33 of 52
(2431 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
gmggg wrote: edge wrote: I very rarely take 9+ minutes out of my day to sit still through a web video, but today I did. I saw absolutely nothing that would make me buy one of those. I humbly apologize. It's a long nine minutes and I'm sure you could have spent your time more fruitfully.
Mmmmm, fruit.
|
|
|
|
|
livinonasandbar
Oct 14, 2010, 3:07 PM
Post #34 of 52
(2427 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 356
|
Yes, you're absolutely right. An oversight on my part. (Spike, you can come back into the room now...)
|
|
|
|
|
jbro_135
Oct 14, 2010, 4:03 PM
Post #35 of 52
(2397 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2009
Posts: 662
|
spikeddem wrote: I did actually like the rope step trick. Hadn't seen that before. Will be using that.
maybe this thread wasn't a complete waste of time after all...
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Oct 14, 2010, 4:31 PM
Post #36 of 52
(2385 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
jbro_135 wrote: spikeddem wrote: I did actually like the rope step trick. Hadn't seen that before. Will be using that. maybe this thread wasn't a complete waste of time after all...
More like 99%
|
|
|
|
|
clc
Oct 14, 2010, 8:17 PM
Post #37 of 52
(2351 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 12, 2005
Posts: 495
|
what a stupid video and piece of gear.
She sure fumbles around with her gear. Isn't she suppose to be experienced?
|
|
|
|
|
potreroed
Oct 14, 2010, 9:46 PM
Post #38 of 52
(2327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2001
Posts: 1454
|
marc801 wrote: The PAS sucks and is pointless. Why do we keep having these never-ending discussions about it? Relegate it to the scrap heap of climbing and be done with it already!
I stand by my statement : I LOVE MY PAS!!! I own two of them actually. I use one when sport or trad climbing and two when aid climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
baja_java
Oct 15, 2010, 1:29 AM
Post #39 of 52
(2292 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2003
Posts: 680
|
At that 01:30 spot in the vid, after demonstrating clipping the one PAS in to the two-bolt anchor using two biners, the Metolius Ambassador said, "So this is all you need to clip into an anchor instead of having one daisy chain and another sling, or two quickdraws. You only need one piece of equipment to clip into the anchor to multiple points."
The demonstrator specifically stated and pointed and indicated by hand gestures that the one-piece system of the single PAS can replace the two-piece system consisting of one daisy chain plus one sling or another two-piece system consisting of two quickdraws.
Anchoring doesn't pertain only to the building of an equalized gear anchor.
When clipping (or tying) in to a two-bolt anchor, you are anchoring yourself onto those two anchor bolts. When you're at the top of a pitch to adjust or remove previously placed anchoring gear already on the two anchor bolts, you actually would be attached to the rock only by your clip-in's temporarily while you adjust or disassemble or remove the pre-placed anchoring gear and thread the rope through the anchor for lowering or rap. Or, when you transition from a higher rap that you had just finished to set up for the next rap down, you also would be attached to the rock only by your clip-in's temporarily while you take yourself off rappel from the previous rap and pull the rope and thread the rope through the rap anchor in front of you and put yourself on rappel for the next rap down. The two clip-in's during those times are your temporary and only anchoring system to the rock, and that's why that attachment to the rock should be redundant. Attachment by clipping in with a daisy plus a sling would be redundant. Attachment by clipping in with two quickdraws would be redundant. Attachment by clipping in with one PAS as demonstrated is not redundant.
If each of the PAS loops are indeed failproof beyond the usual need for redundancy, then hey, great, demonstrate on and watch on and praise on. But nowhere in the vid was such a supporting failproof statement made or an explanation given for why redundancy wouldn't be needed, and there isn't anything clearly stated on the product webpage to support that. And when I further searched around, instead of finding evidence or testimonies in support of how failproof the PAS is, I instead found test results of how the PAS have failed.
And, c'mon, it's not like I haven't already tried to help by suggesting a simple way the PAS could be modified if it indeed is intended to be used as a one-piece tether that would require no redundancy.
I personally have nothing against a gear company making however much or however little money by selling a however fantastic or however not so fantastic product to however many or however few people who choose to buy it for whatever reasons.
But advocating the use of a piece of gear in a way that can potentially be dangerous is questionable.
|
|
|
|
|
qwert
Oct 15, 2010, 11:00 AM
Post #40 of 52
(2255 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 2394
|
here we are again, at one of those redundant discussions about redundancy ... 
Just use a fuckin sling and a locker!
But if you want to be doubly 10000% sure, get yourself the real deal and use a via ferrat set. Two slings, with two retardedly beefy biners, plus a shock absorber.
qwert
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Oct 15, 2010, 3:44 PM
Post #41 of 52
(2229 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
baja_java wrote: But advocating the use of a piece of gear in a way that can potentially be dangerous is questionable.
OMG! Alert the Metolius lawyers! They forgot to think about this!!
|
|
|
|
|
dynosore
Oct 15, 2010, 4:02 PM
Post #42 of 52
(2220 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
Everyone is complaining about the PAS being static, but I use this system: 2 PAS, one to a leg loop the other to the belay loop, then put a screamer on both of them an voila, a redundant, adjustable, shockloadable anchor. Should I patent this?
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Oct 15, 2010, 4:10 PM
Post #43 of 52
(2216 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
dynosore wrote: Everyone is complaining about the PAS being static, but I use this system: 2 PAS, one to a leg loop the other to the belay loop, then put a screamer on both of them an voila, a redundant, adjustable, shockloadable anchor. Should I patent this?
FF2 onto it first.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Oct 15, 2010, 4:12 PM
Post #44 of 52
(2214 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
dynosore wrote: Everyone is complaining about the PAS being static, but I use this system: 2 PAS, one to a leg loop the other to the belay loop, then put a screamer on both of them an voila, a redundant, adjustable, shockloadable anchor. Should I patent this?
|
|
|
|
|
cruxstacean
Oct 15, 2010, 4:44 PM
Post #45 of 52
(2201 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 5, 2010
Posts: 174
|
In reply to: If each of the PAS loops are indeed failproof beyond the usual need for redundancy, then hey, great, demonstrate on and watch on and praise on.
Well, Metolius says the PAS is indeed failproof by advocating using it without backup. I suppose it's up to the individual climber to decide if they are comfortable with this...
Has anyone done pull tests to compare the strength of the PAS vs the strength of a belay loop?
|
|
|
|
|
shimanilami
Oct 15, 2010, 5:34 PM
Post #46 of 52
(2180 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 24, 2006
Posts: 2043
|
I don't hate them. I'll just never use one myself.
|
|
|
|
|
gmggg
Oct 15, 2010, 5:39 PM
Post #47 of 52
(2176 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099
|
shimanilami wrote: I don't hate them. I'll just never use one myself.
That's pretty much my position on the issue but I wouldn't necessarily say never.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Oct 15, 2010, 5:44 PM
Post #48 of 52
(2172 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
For big wall rapping and such, I prefer the Yates adjustable daisy for anchor-in duties.
I don't care about the static properties, nor even the buckle, for that job. Do not care. I would just use a sling anyway, so whatever.
I see no problem at all using static tie-ins for rapping.
The benefit of an adjustable daisy comes into its own when docking and undocking, and riding the pig, and even using an adj. daisy as part of an above the rap device prussik backup.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
milesenoell
Oct 15, 2010, 5:54 PM
Post #49 of 52
(2157 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2006
Posts: 1156
|
potreroed wrote: marc801 wrote: The PAS sucks and is pointless. Why do we keep having these never-ending discussions about it? Relegate it to the scrap heap of climbing and be done with it already! I stand by my statement : I LOVE MY PAS!!! I own two of them actually. I use one when sport or trad climbing and two when aid climbing.
What I'm curious about is how people feel about a PAS compared to an adjustable daisy like the one Kong makes. I still just use the rope, draws, and slings, so I haven't got a dog in this fight, but it seems to me that the adjustable style addresses all the weaknesses of a PAS or a standard daisy. They are dynamic, always full strength, capable of catching a FF2, easily adjustable, a lot less prone to snagging... am I missing something?
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Oct 15, 2010, 5:58 PM
Post #50 of 52
(2153 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
milesenoell wrote: They are dynamic, always full strength, capable of catching a FF2, easily adjustable, a lot less prone to snagging... am I missing something?
A link to the product, perhaps?
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
