|
moose_droppings
Nov 28, 2011, 5:57 PM
Post #26 of 36
(3160 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 7, 2005
Posts: 3371
|
binrat wrote: shockabuku wrote: I also prefer the Petzl Microcender. +1
+2 on the microcender and/or the recucender.
|
|
|
|
|
aprice00
Nov 28, 2011, 9:26 PM
Post #28 of 36
(3123 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2010
Posts: 167
|
Something that I noticed as I posted is my dependance on the belay loop. I'll have to figure out how to incorporate both attachments on the harness.
|
|
|
|
|
seniormoose
Nov 29, 2011, 3:49 AM
Post #29 of 36
(3090 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2011
Posts: 24
|
I guarantee that once you try the Petzl Micocender, you will never to back to Petzl Shunt for TR self belay. There's much less drag with the Microcender. Also if you attach the ascernder to your harness with a one-foot sling, you will fall two feet everytime you slip. Why would you want to do that? I attach my Microcender directly to my belay loop, and when I slip, I fall one or two inches.
|
|
|
|
|
Marylandclimber
Nov 30, 2011, 9:42 PM
Post #30 of 36
(3034 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 3, 2011
Posts: 224
|
Thanks for the pictures on your setup!
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
Dec 2, 2011, 2:45 AM
Post #31 of 36
(2987 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
aprice00 wrote: Something that I noticed as I posted is my dependance on the belay loop. I'll have to figure out how to incorporate both attachments on the harness.
Why? Assuming your belay loop is on good condition it's much more than adequate for the job.
|
|
|
|
|
aprice00
Dec 2, 2011, 5:43 PM
Post #32 of 36
(2945 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2010
Posts: 167
|
Marylandclimber wrote: Thanks for the pictures on your setup!
As a disclamer for anyone thinking about using a similar set-up. You should know that there is a lot of debate over using toothed devices. Both the MiniT and the Tibloc that I use both have teeth. There have been reports of toothed devices stripping the sheath from the rope. Iam still experimenting with mine so I cant say that ive been doing it for years and have never seen problems. I simply have not put in the time to comment on rope damage. All I can say is that I watch the rope closely and so far so good. At the same time I am very carful not to get slack in the rope.
No matter what system you use the backup line is a good Idea until you are proficient enough to decide for yourself whether or not its worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
aprice00
Dec 2, 2011, 5:49 PM
Post #33 of 36
(2944 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2010
Posts: 167
|
acorneau wrote: aprice00 wrote: Something that I noticed as I posted is my dependance on the belay loop. I'll have to figure out how to incorporate both attachments on the harness. Why? Assuming your belay loop is on good condition it's much more than adequate for the job.
Because its easily added redundancy....So why not?
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Dec 2, 2011, 6:29 PM
Post #34 of 36
(2932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
aprice00 wrote: acorneau wrote: aprice00 wrote: Something that I noticed as I posted is my dependance on the belay loop. I'll have to figure out how to incorporate both attachments on the harness. Why? Assuming your belay loop is on good condition it's much more than adequate for the job. Because its easily added redundancy....So why not?
Because it creates a bigger clusterfuck than you already have, which is sizable. Simple systems are easy to check, complex ones aren't.
|
|
|
|
|
Marylandclimber
Dec 3, 2011, 3:27 PM
Post #35 of 36
(2906 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 3, 2011
Posts: 224
|
I don't own one but I totally see what you mean Then again, if its more reliable then I'd use it.
|
|
|
|
|
aprice00
Dec 3, 2011, 6:20 PM
Post #36 of 36
(2888 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2010
Posts: 167
|
shockabuku wrote: aprice00 wrote: acorneau wrote: aprice00 wrote: Something that I noticed as I posted is my dependance on the belay loop. I'll have to figure out how to incorporate both attachments on the harness. Why? Assuming your belay loop is on good condition it's much more than adequate for the job. Because its easily added redundancy....So why not? Because it creates a bigger clusterfuck than you already have, which is sizable. Simple systems are easy to check, complex ones aren't.
Realy? big clusterfucK?? And you post about petty attachment points? Fuck that. If you want to post your set-up and show how you handle the task or have something legitimately productive to add im all ears but until then changing the position of a sling is neither more cluster-fuckish, nor more difficult to check.
Shock I'm sure you've seen people use a girth hitched slings as a PAS. This is what I use to clip the back-up line. I'd just be moving the hitch from the belay loop to both attachment points. Its an easy and elegant way to add redundancy.
Im putting myself out there by posting my set-up. I knew what I was getting into but I invite anybody else that TR solos to do the same. As in evolution, diversity is the biggest advantage to adaptation. If I see a better solution I might just convert.
There are adjustments that can be made to my system.
1. Replace the blue sling with a piece of webbing, Adds adjustability.
2. Replace the sling holding the MiniT to chest harness with something smaller. ie. small cordage or velcro (savagearic)
3. Scrap the Tibloc entirely. 1 backup is completely sufficient for the forces generated by Top Roping.
4. Use 8 on a bight at anchor opposed to stone knot. (I personally like the S.K.)
5. There are options with the primary device. Acender, microcender, Soloist, Ushba basic Acender, Grigri, Eddy, Cinch.... The back up devices are equally abundant.
IMHO a clipped back-up line and a knot on your primary line is sufficient enough for the use of ANY of these devices. With contingencies of course. (Bring on the Flames!)
6. Lastly I plan to revisit the MiniT/ATC transfer. (suggestions?)
Anticipated comments
7. Smart ass comment from some bored/drunk poster.
8. blah blah blah condescending remark.
9. YGD!!!!!!
10. Something about Overkill
11. something about microfracture-eqsue pettiness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
