|
knieveltech
Nov 17, 2008, 8:07 PM
Post #26 of 95
(8204 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431
|
majid_sabet wrote: you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear . It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up.
|
|
|
|
|
glahhg
Nov 17, 2008, 8:18 PM
Post #27 of 95
(8197 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 7, 2003
Posts: 69
|
knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear . It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up. equalette = too many unnecessary knots
|
|
|
|
|
donald949
Nov 17, 2008, 8:53 PM
Post #28 of 95
(8172 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2007
Posts: 11455
|
Would have to agree that this piece looks tippy. Looks like you could turn it as viewed CCW and get it to slot nicely. Maybe. Otherwise turn it endwise. So you pre tie that Equalette mess? Well that should work, but I noticed you had to use QD's to extend two sides. Also second the idea of gates facing away from the rock. Generally I don't like QD's on gear, too short and too stiff. Pulls out and up on gear too much while leading. I use 1 or 2 foot runners. 4 foot if the route meanders. Finally, regarding an upward pull piece. It should be seperate from the anchor, and tied directly to the harness. Avoids the multiplication of forces from outward pulls on shallow angles. D
|
|
|
|
|
coolcat83
Nov 17, 2008, 9:24 PM
Post #29 of 95
(8154 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2007
Posts: 1007
|
shoo wrote: coolcat83 wrote: your setup looks like a quad, also the recommended clip in is two lockers, one on each strand, i've used it it slides easily and should one strand fail or the biner get loaded you have the other. I say all this with the caveat that I have been told I build too much redundancy in my anchors. But better safe than sorry. One of the key points of the quad is that you don't have to use two carabiners to anchor into. You can clip 1, 2, or 3 master point cords and be fully redundant (with near-perfect redundancy if you clip into 2), except of course for the single locking carabiner. yes...sorta
|
|
|
|
|
shoo
Nov 17, 2008, 9:30 PM
Post #30 of 95
(8150 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2006
Posts: 1501
|
donald949 wrote: So you pre tie that Equalette mess? I have never pre-tied an equalette. It's actually incredibly simple to set up (although the "quad" version shown is less so). In general I can put an equalette together about as fast as a cordolette, faster even in some situations. And as for there being too many knots, I disagree. In any given direction, from the master point to the piece itself, there are only 2 (maximum) knots. I don't even really count the clove hitch as a knot, as I doubt it reduces the strength of the cord significantly (although if someone has evidence to the contrary I'd be interested). So really, you have 1 actual knot between the piece and the master point, which is the same as a cordolette.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Nov 17, 2008, 11:25 PM
Post #31 of 95
(8123 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear . It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up. I called that CFulette
|
|
|
|
|
knieveltech
Nov 18, 2008, 2:01 AM
Post #32 of 95
(8093 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431
|
majid_sabet wrote: knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear . It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up. I called that CFulette Then clearly you've never used one.
|
|
|
|
|
jollymon
Nov 18, 2008, 6:55 AM
Post #33 of 95
(8057 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 5, 2008
Posts: 55
|
1. omnidirectional pulling direction for anchor in general. 2. poor cam placement. interior side has way different extension from the outside. Easy walker. Outside edge of cam too close to outside rim of wall I think from the picture of the entire anchor rigging. 3. of course that second hex has poor size for that position. 1 up. 4. equalize all protection, not two pieces and one piece. individual pro on upper left hex looks longer then other equalized. 5. if that much is wrong then it needs a total rework...if I came upon this in place...no way i'm out on that one.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Nov 18, 2008, 7:48 AM
Post #34 of 95
(8047 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear . It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up. I called that CFulette Then clearly you've never used one. I never made one cause I do not believe they serve any purpose other than confusing climbers on building unnecessary CF anchors based on a stupid book.
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Nov 18, 2008, 12:44 PM
Post #35 of 95
(8028 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
What does this:
jollymon wrote: individual pro on upper left hex looks longer then other equalized. mean?
|
|
|
|
|
MikeSaint
Nov 18, 2008, 1:21 PM
Post #36 of 95
(8017 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2007
Posts: 426
|
I have no idea what the Equalette is or how it works. I've been doing searches on the Equalette, still not sure I know what I'm looking at.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Nov 18, 2008, 1:45 PM
Post #37 of 95
(8009 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
jollymon wrote: 2. poor cam placement. interior side has way different extension from the outside. Easy walker. Why does that make it more likely to walk than a placement with equal deployment? When it comes to cams walking, I am concerned more about rope-action, direction of pull, and cracks that widen around the point of placement. Not whether I have even cam deployment. Edit: besides, that cam's deployment looks pretty dam good to me.
jollymon wrote: 4. equalize all protection, not two pieces and one piece. There are systems to equalize odd numbers of protection although doing it redundantly and dynamically is usually not done cleanly (even with the equalette). Anyway, why always equalize between three instead of two and then one? I understand the load is not truely equalized across all pieces. But the primary in general anchor building is to place bomber individual pieces. Why always go to extremes every time if one usually has bomber individual placements and limited anchor extension upon failure. Bill L
(This post was edited by billl7 on Nov 18, 2008, 1:52 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Nov 18, 2008, 1:51 PM
Post #38 of 95
(8003 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
If you do traditional climbing then get the newer anchor book by John Long and Bob Gaines. It is a useful book even if you never use the equalette.
|
|
|
|
|
knieveltech
Nov 18, 2008, 2:05 PM
Post #39 of 95
(7996 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431
|
majid_sabet wrote: knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear . It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up. I called that CFulette Then clearly you've never used one. I never made one cause I do not believe they serve any purpose other than confusing climbers on building unnecessary CF anchors based on a stupid book. Contempt prior to investigation. End result: you have no experience with the system, ergo you don't know wtf you're talking about. Go rig one at ground level and screw around with it for a little while, you just might like it.
|
|
|
|
|
glahhg
Nov 18, 2008, 3:28 PM
Post #41 of 95
(7952 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 7, 2003
Posts: 69
|
shoo wrote: donald949 wrote: So you pre tie that Equalette mess? I have never pre-tied an equalette. It's actually incredibly simple to set up (although the "quad" version shown is less so). In general I can put an equalette together about as fast as a cordolette, faster even in some situations. And as for there being too many knots, I disagree. In any given direction, from the master point to the piece itself, there are only 2 (maximum) knots. I don't even really count the clove hitch as a knot, as I doubt it reduces the strength of the cord significantly (although if someone has evidence to the contrary I'd be interested). So really, you have 1 actual knot between the piece and the master point, which is the same as a cordolette. It's not about the strength reduction of the knots, it's about taking the time to tie them all, and then the complete mess you have when you're done. The goal is to go clip clip clip "on belay" ASAP, not spend 20 minutes tieing up a clusterfuckolette.
|
|
|
|
|
shoo
Nov 18, 2008, 3:54 PM
Post #42 of 95
(7933 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2006
Posts: 1501
|
glahhg wrote: shoo wrote: I have never pre-tied an equalette. It's actually incredibly simple to set up (although the "quad" version shown is less so). In general I can put an equalette together about as fast as a cordolette, faster even in some situations. And as for there being too many knots, I disagree. In any given direction, from the master point to the piece itself, there are only 2 (maximum) knots. I don't even really count the clove hitch as a knot, as I doubt it reduces the strength of the cord significantly (although if someone has evidence to the contrary I'd be interested). So really, you have 1 actual knot between the piece and the master point, which is the same as a cordolette. It's not about the strength reduction of the knots, it's about taking the time to tie them all, and then the complete mess you have when you're done. The goal is to go clip clip clip "on belay" ASAP, not spend 20 minutes tieing up a clusterfuckolette. I have bolded the relevant text for you. Once you have the feel for equalettes down, the difference in time between tieing a cordolette and an equalette is virtually negligible. You often end up saving time in adjustments, since the equalette by its nature doesn't need to be adjusted much, and where it does, it's extremely easy to do so. Even if it takes a second or two longer, the benefits (situation dependent, of course) more than make up for it. To take it to an extreme, it would be faster for me just to jump on a ledge and hip belay, but that's not what we're going for here. In the set up in question, Epoch is using a 4 cord setup, which I'm not a big fan of since it is a pain to tie. This kind of setup really does take a lot of time to put together, and is usually best done pre-tied. I've only found this setup to be useful for horizontally oriented bolted belays, since I can pre-tie, clip and go. The CF from an equalette is usually due to poor management of the master point cords. I generally prefer to use the original version with a single masterpoint locking carabiner in a sliding x, as seen in TradRenn's post.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Nov 18, 2008, 4:04 PM
Post #43 of 95
(7924 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
MikeSaint wrote: I have no idea what the Equalette is or how it works. I've been doing searches on the Equalette, still not sure I know what I'm looking at. You're looking at an anchor strategy designed by self-appointed open-source internet committee. Tell me THAT doesn't send shivers up your spine. Just clove it bro, and CLIMB ON! DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Nov 18, 2008, 4:07 PM
Post #44 of 95
(7922 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
epoch wrote: Then go out and buy the book referenced subsequent to the link. Finally read the second bundle of links. I tip my hat to the Master Largo. What he did with the cordellette equalette quagmire (created it, fostered it, debunked it, stimulated it, challenged it, enlisted ba legion of climbing geeks on the internet (witness this thread) to experiment and then SOLVED IT with his new book... genius!) was a THING OF MARKETING BEAUTY. Simply beautiful. I tip my hat to the Master. But I am NOT buying his book, sorry. DMT
(This post was edited by dingus on Nov 18, 2008, 4:08 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Nov 18, 2008, 4:14 PM
Post #45 of 95
(7916 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
shoo wrote: Even if it takes a second or two longer, the benefits (situation dependent, of course) more than make up for it. What benefits? For traditional free climbing I found the cordelette to be a complete waste of time. The so-called benefits were illusions. This is something I stated long before Long actually tested and debunked the MAJOR theory used to justify this time-wasting procedure. What benefits, actually real and tangible benefits, does this equalette offer? I believe modern climbers are WAY TOO CONCERNED with equalization of anchors, period. Its a bugaboo, mostly illusory and filled with anecdotal 'evidence' of those dead parties who failed to equalize? (NOT!) DMT
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Nov 18, 2008, 5:49 PM
Post #47 of 95
(7869 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear . It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up. I called that CFulette Then clearly you've never used one. I never made one cause I do not believe they serve any purpose other than confusing climbers on building unnecessary CF anchors based on a stupid book. Contempt prior to investigation. End result: you have no experience with the system, ergo you don't know wtf you're talking about. Go rig one at ground level and screw around with it for a little while, you just might like it. You guys build these sort/type anchors cause your daddy showed it to you in his so called ANCHOR BOOK and as long a head cow moves toward to barn, all the other cows follow. I am not saying you are cow but sometimes I feel people do not think why they are building an anchor but they keep following the same fu*king thing. If you’re main goals are building a safer anchor to support you in case SOL then you should ask yourself the following; 1-What am I dealing with (hole, crack, tree….) 2-What do I have with me (three cams, four knots, two cords…) 3-What is this anchor for (belay, rap, hauling, rescue…..) 4-Where is the direction of end load ( How much side to side movements the master point may see ) 5-What is the distance of my moving ropes ( rope in service to determine the maximum shock load that anchor may see….etc) 6-What is worse thing that could happen to me if one of the anchor legs fails ( master point movement, other pieces popping etc) 7-What is my backup (little bush on the side, another single old pitons..etc) 8-How much time do I want to spend to build it 9-Asking few other things I forgot to mention
|
|
|
|
|
epoch
Moderator
Nov 18, 2008, 5:55 PM
Post #48 of 95
(7863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2005
Posts: 32163
|
majid_sabet wrote: knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: knieveltech wrote: majid_sabet wrote: you also got too many unnecessary knots on every gear . It's called an equalette. You really should try to keep up. I called that CFulette Then clearly you've never used one. I never made one cause I do not believe they serve any purpose other than confusing climbers on building unnecessary CF anchors based on a stupid book. Contempt prior to investigation. End result: you have no experience with the system, ergo you don't know wtf you're talking about. Go rig one at ground level and screw around with it for a little while, you just might like it. You guys build these sort/type anchors cause your daddy showed it to you in his so called ANCHOR BOOK and as long a head cow moves toward to barn, all the other cows follow. I am not saying you are cow but sometimes I feel people do not think why they are building an anchor but they keep following the same fu*king thing. If you’re main goals are building a safer anchor to support you in case SOL then you should ask yourself the following; 1-What am I dealing with (hole, crack, tree….) 2-What do I have with me (three cams, four knots, two cords…) 3-What is this anchor for (belay, rap, hauling, rescue…..) 4-Where is the direction of end load ( How much side to side movements the master point may see ) 5-What is the distance of my moving ropes ( rope in service to determine the maximum shock load that anchor may see….etc) 6-What is worse thing that could happen to me if one of the anchor legs fails ( master point movement, other pieces popping etc) 7-What is my backup (little bush on the side, another single old pitons..etc) 8-How much time do I want to spend to build it 9-Asking few other things I forgot to mention It's a different way of looking at things.
|
|
|
|
|
epoch
Moderator
Nov 18, 2008, 6:07 PM
Post #49 of 95
(7858 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2005
Posts: 32163
|
Also, since everyone here is so inclined to be such an armchair critic (majid I'm looking at you), I invite you all to show off a creation of yours to partake in this series.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Nov 18, 2008, 6:15 PM
Post #50 of 95
(7852 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
epoch wrote: Also, since everyone here is so inclined to be such an armchair critic (majid I'm looking at you), I invite you all to show off a creation of yours to partake in this series. I show off my climbing-related creations ALL THE TIME, here and elsewhere. My anchors are simple, like me. Some pieces with the rope tied directly to the best piece. The rest are serial-clove-chained for backup. I only equalize once in a great while - by far an exception in my climbing. But many times I introduce a sling to a 2nd piece and anchor in seperately to that as well, for a little redundancy. But that depends. The two big opposites - no extension AND equalization... are not happy housemates. They really don't like each other. But I think this bedrock of SERNE anchor philosophy is rooted in nothing more substantial than opinion. DMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|