|
knowsam
Oct 25, 2005, 7:12 PM
Post #1 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: 56
|
I just read the screamer review in which it listed zipper screamers as lowering the shock by 4-8 kN. Then it listed the ice screamer which has a nifty little neck tie deal for tying off to screws sticking out of the ice. This ice screamer has a shock reduction of 3-4 kN. It seems to me that as the main concern in ice pro is it's ripping out of the ice or taking the ice down with it you'd rather have more absorption in the ice screamer. Am I missing something? I understand the levering issues with screws that are too long but this isn't that common and can be fixed a different way. In my screamer purchases for ice should I be looking for the zipper or the ice screamer?
Sean
|
|
|
|
|
slacklinejoe
Oct 25, 2005, 7:18 PM
Post #2 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 5, 2003
Posts: 1423
|
Pay attention to the activation levels, aid and ice screams will activate lower and get used up faster. It's not just how much they absorb, but when they start doing so.
|
|
|
|
|
tradklime
Oct 25, 2005, 7:24 PM
Post #3 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 1235
|
I carry three types of screamers. I tend to use the zippers earlier in a pitch, when the fall factor is highest. The only thing I like about the ice screamers is that they are longer, so I tend to use them when I want a longer sling. I have never used the "tie-off" feature, I use a shorter screw. I don't think that the tie-off mechanism is that practical or necessary, especially if you have a variety of screw lengths. The other times I use regular screamers.
If I had to choose just one type, I would choose the zipper screamers. However, based on cost and versatility, a variety works out well.
|
|
|
|
|
tradklime
Oct 25, 2005, 7:26 PM
Post #4 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 1235
|
In reply to: Pay attention to the activation levels, aid and ice screams will activate lower and get used up faster. It's not just how much they absorb, but when they start doing so.
Not so with the ice screamers, same as standard or zipper.
|
|
|
|
|
alpine_monk
Oct 26, 2005, 12:05 AM
Post #5 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 9, 2005
Posts: 268
|
If you're in the market for screamers take a look at the petzles. I can't think of the KN rip stats off the top of my head, but I use them alot because they are a bit more lo-profile than the yates.
|
|
|
|
|
bmapple
Oct 26, 2005, 1:43 PM
Post #6 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 52
|
I'm glad you brought up the petzl "screamers". I've also recently seen a version made by mamut- those look awesome and are really low profile, I think they're made from their 10 mm spectre webbing. half the bulk, but $30 each! damn, thats pricy.
But back to the point... isn't the aid screamer not a full strength runner once deployed, whereas the others are the full 22kn or so?
What about placing screamers in series? Could this effectively double the shock load reduction?
|
|
|
|
|
euroford
Oct 26, 2005, 2:03 PM
Post #7 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 2913
|
In reply to: I'm glad you brought up the petzl "screamers". I've also recently seen a version made by mamut- those look awesome and are really low profile, I think they're made from their 10 mm spectre webbing. half the bulk, but $30 each! damn, thats pricy.
those things do look uber awsome. though they are pricey, i would certainly buy a couple; if i could find them! i havn't seen them for sale online or in a store. if anybody spots them please post up.
In reply to: But back to the point... isn't the aid screamer not a full strength runner once deployed, whereas the others are the full 22kn or so?
thats correct. the aid screams are not full strength. they serve only for the purpose of taking a super sketchy A3+ piece and making it a standard sketchy A3 piece.
In reply to: What about placing screamers in series? Could this effectively double the shock load reduction?
you can do that. however it will double not just the total load reduction but it will also double the activation force.
|
|
|
|
|
tradklime
Oct 26, 2005, 2:28 PM
Post #8 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 1235
|
In reply to: In reply to: What about placing screamers in series? Could this effectively double the shock load reduction? you can do that. however it will double not just the total load reduction but it will also double the activation force.
I don't believe that is true regarding doubling the activation force. That would be true if they were placed in parallel. A zipper screamer is essentially a standard screamer with double the stitching. You would get a very similar effect if you clipped 2 standard screamers in series.
I don't know if it takes more force to "activate" screamers than it does to keep the stitches ripping. If it does, than there may be some subtle difference in the actual force reduction characteristics.
|
|
|
|
|
cfnubbler
Oct 26, 2005, 4:11 PM
Post #11 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2003
Posts: 628
|
The ice screamers are useless.
They are so long that they must be racked by clipping the rope end biner back to the top biner on your racking loops. Otherwise, they hang down to knee-level, and tend to snag on things, especially crampon points when high stepping or postholing. NOT GOOD.
The tie-off loop is also next to useless. Buy some stubbies for thin ice-far more effective than any tie-off. In the very few instances when a tie off is your best option, use a sling and clip a standard screamer to it. Then find more gear in a hurry...
-Nubbler
|
|
|
|
|
bmapple
Oct 26, 2005, 5:14 PM
Post #12 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 52
|
For the person who asked about the mamut units- I saw them at the Gendarme climbing shop at seneca rocks in West Virginia. Their phone number is 800-548-0108 Give them a call, I'm sure they'd ship em out to you.
|
|
|
|
|
tcsatl
Oct 27, 2005, 4:09 PM
Post #13 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2005
Posts: 20
|
I can ship them as well.
they are 29.95.
give me a call or email.
404-292-8834
or tim_hovey@hotmail.com
tim
Tim Hovey
The Climbing Store
3032 North Decatur Rd
Atlanta, GA 30079
|
|
|
|
|
pazer0
Oct 27, 2005, 5:24 PM
Post #14 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 18, 2005
Posts: 16
|
http://www.yatesgear.com/climbing/screamer/use.htm
Check out this page.
|
|
|
|
|
knowsam
Oct 29, 2005, 12:21 AM
Post #15 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: 56
|
So, end result: Should I be looking for screamers with a higher shock absorbtion or go with one that starts taking the shock at a lower load?
Sean
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Oct 29, 2005, 6:25 PM
Post #16 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
In reply to: So, end result: Should I be looking for screamers with a higher shock absorbtion or go with one that starts taking the shock at a lower load? Sean
Depends (not the undergarments, but the situation).
Scream aid
Pros: activates at less than 2 kN, absorbes up to 4kN (?) Easy activation means it will begin absorbing the impact force BEFORE the sketch pulls
Cons: the small sling end will fail at approximately 1800lbs, as evidenced in kate's gear review. When you girth hitch this smaller sling end, you will reduce this number even further. WATCH OUT!
Zipper
Pros: activates at loads greater than 2kN, absorbing up to 7kN from the system. At full extension this sling is rated to 22kN, or full strength.
Cons: rather bulky, but then so is a helmet and we wear those for safety too, right? Suck it up and carry AT LEAST one of the full strength load limiters on your rack.
Ice Scream
Pros: custom made to be easily attached to the barrel of an ice screw, WITHOUT girth hitching, which reduces strength of a sling by 30% or more, depending on the application.
Cons: It's a little long, necessitating some other racking styles. To the poster who aired this complaint, i say this: Don't you carry double length slings to hitch pillars with? How do you rack these monstrosities?
...and to the poster who says "use a shorter screw rather than trying off a screw":
Ever hear of the thing of beauty in Maple Canyon called "Tied Off Stubbies"? Uh, I think on this route I might even stoop so low as to use scream-aids, and frequently.
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Oct 29, 2005, 7:01 PM
Post #17 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
...But then, here's another thought for those sketch-fests. See if you can follow me on this one.
In this theoretical situation I've just placed a 10cm screw in a thin sheet of ice, achieving a depth of approximately 6cm. I place an ice-scream around the barrel of the screw, which has an activation of >2kN. To this, I clip a biner, a scream-aid (activation between 1.5-2kN) AND a standard 60 cm sling. The end of the scream-aid gets a biner, and within the basket of this biner i will clip the same 60cm sling AND my rope. What Have I achieved?
1)By mounting the ice-scream on the barrel of the screw I have reduced the ammount of leverage placed on the screw (over clipping the screw hanger).
2)By utilizing the scream-aid I have lowered the activation point of the load limiting system.
3)By placing it in parallel with a 60cm sling I have eliminated the possibility of the scream-aid failing (with disastrous results) while still allowing it to achieve full extension under a shock load.
The successful use of a system such as this would hinge upon the quality of the ice surrounding the screw placement, still requiring the ability to identify the best possible placement where there may be few options. Provided the ice will support 500lbs of shear (approx. 2.2kN) one SHOULD be able to expect this system to catch a fall. The limiting devices should absorb between 7-9kn of impact force (not even taking into account the absorption of your rope), forces nearly unattainable in dynamically protected falls.
If in your ice experience you DO NOT expect the ice to be able to support such loads, you might as well solo it.
...Or walk away to climb another day.
|
|
|
|
|
pacific_mtn
Oct 29, 2005, 7:38 PM
Post #18 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 28, 2004
Posts: 10
|
Does anyone know the length of a zipper screamer once it's fully deployed? Is it longer than a shoulder length runner? I'm wondering if using one on the first placements would be a bad idea when starting a pitch on a ledge or the ground, because the extra elongation might cause you to deck.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Oct 29, 2005, 7:41 PM
Post #19 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
If you want a lower activation force you can also pre-slice the screamer stitching at an angle - steeper the angle the lower the activation force. This was typically done on old, horizontally stitched 'Air Voyagers' to allow 'nests' of small pieces to load and equalize prior to solidly engaging as a group and would work just as well on today's vertically stitched units.
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Oct 29, 2005, 8:44 PM
Post #20 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
I'm kind of more philosophically opposed to modifying gear of this type. It has been designed and tested to work in the way it was manufactured, and I'm just not willing to fudge with it. Leaving it as originally designed makes it more predictable.
To each their own though. It's really what you can live with. No one has ever come back from the dead to complain, have they? So it must not be all THAT bad.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Oct 30, 2005, 7:54 AM
Post #21 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: I'm kind of more philosophically opposed to modifying gear of this type. It has been designed and tested to work in the way it was manufactured, and I'm just not willing to fudge with it.
I tend to be a gear butcher when gear is designed close, but not exactly, for what I intend to do with it. In this case the activation forces in the various screamers are designed for use with single pieces on the whole. The initial activation force represents a significant 'hump' in most cases, particularly when it comes to loading and equalizing a 'nest' of small pieces. Pre-slicing in a steep diagonal allows for a very low activation force and a much smoother load curve.
In reply to: Leaving it as originally designed makes it more predictable.
Yes, and unsuitable for some usage scenarios. Gear is designed by humans and there is nothing particularly magical or sacrosanct about gear designs.
In reply to: To each their own though. It's really what you can live with. No one has ever come back from the dead to complain, have they? So it must not be all THAT bad.
Yep, to each his own and my mods are all about increasing the odds of living in sketch situations. The best way to do that is to take nothing for granted and have a thorough understanding of the capabilities, limitations, and opportunities presented by any given piece of gear in the context you plan to use it.
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Oct 30, 2005, 3:02 PM
Post #22 of 22
(3402 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599
|
In reply to: Cons: It's a little long, necessitating some other racking styles. To the poster who aired this complaint, i say this: Don't you carry double length slings to hitch pillars with? How do you rack these monstrosities? ...and to the poster who says "use a shorter screw rather than trying off a screw":
Just on these points...
I carry double slings either over my shoulder or tied (cordolette style) and clipped to my harness. Either way, they don't get in my way when high stepping or postholing. Either method doesn't work with the Ice scream.
Second, he's saying where feasible use a shorter screw in lieu of tying off, especially since a tied off screw is significantly weaker than a stubby. If you're in a position where you're consistently tieing off short screws, you already know the answer to the question.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
