Saturday, August 29, 2020

Roll'nLock as TR-solo Back-Up Device

The Roll’nLock is one of the best pieces of kit IMO. It can be used as a primary device, but it’s use as a secondary backup device is where it really shines. While most people use the Microtrax as a back-up according to my recent survey, I feel that the RnL has one main advantage. While both devices run freely on the rope; both lock-up immediately because of the teeth/ribs; and both have the ability to be locked open when you’re ready to rap so that it will freely run down the rope....the Microtrax has a nasty flaw IMO.


It has the habit of slipping from the lock-open position to locking on the rope in the middle of a rap causing you to come to an abrupt halt. Jarring to say the least and a PITA. You then have to unweight the device (which may take some doing if you’re on a overhung pitch), lock it open again and resume your rap. This can happen multiple times on a single rap and is just a big CF. The solution when using a Microtrax for backup is to completely remove the device from the rope then put it back on for climbing. To me this just interrupts the whole flow of TRSing and introduces the possibility of dropping it at the top of the pitch. (As a side note I’ve also had the Microtrax unexpectedly go from being locked on the rope to a lock-open position also - potentially dangerous. This was after checking and making sure that it was locked on the rope. That’s why some people file/grind off the lock-open tab). With the RnL I’ve never had either of these situations happen.


The lock-open mode of the RnL is much more positive and has never slipped back into the lock-on-rope mode while rapping. Depending upon one’s setup, that means that at the top of the route (or anywhere in-between) it’s simple to hang on the primary device, lock open the RnL and rap. What could be easier? Well actually there is one way to make it easier. Normally locking it open is a two-handed operation. With the addition of a finger loop pull-cord it is a much more manageable one-handed operation.


A fellow TRSer turned me on to the idea from the following video (https://youtu.be/At3m_DDP2fA at the 7:32 mark). The solution in the video is kind of bulky and could get in the way. I’ve adapted the idea and attached the cord a bit differently and made it into an index finger loop. I used a 1.5mm diameter piece of accessory cord that is looped around the center post of the lock mechanism (see photo). It’s easiest to use a piece that’s several inches longer than what you’ll need to allow you to play around with what size of loop works best for you. I use a simple overhand knot that’s easy to undo and move to get the right sized loop. Hint: to make it as efficient as possible and keep it out of the way, make the loop as small as possible. Once you work out the best size for your hands/fingers, tighten knot, trim the ends short and burn them, then pull on the loop and the knot will tuck against the post out of the way. My experience is that it stays completely out of the way and doesn’t interfere with the action of the cam when climbing or rapping.


To lock-out the cam, insert index finger in the loop, press thumb against the pulley and pull out and up to rotate the cam ~90 deg. until the lock tab slips over the lock pin. To unlock. insert index finger, press thumb against pulley and pull up to release and allow cam to rotate back onto the rope.
For me, using the RnL an a backup to either the TAZ Lov2 or the Trango Vergo offers the most seamless TR climbing possible. Climb, hang on primary device, lock-open the RnL, and rap.






If the loop bothers you because you're afraid it might catch on something (I'm not), then you can alway pull the loop from the knotted end so that it becomes a knotted pull-cord.


Thursday, August 20, 2020

Vergo for Top Rope Soloing


I’ll never forget about 15 years ago climbing in the Gunks and sitting on a belay ledge watching a young buck top-rope-soloing working on a 5.13 roof. He was constantly hucking off it with nothing but a Cinch. I’d hear this yell and then look up and see him go flying out into space. Because the route was so radically overhung he’d have to lower way back down past us to get back on the rock and then climb back up another 75’ to give it another go. I wasn't new to rope soloing - I’d been doing it for years - but I WAS totally freaked out to see that he was doing it without a backup - not even a knot (unless it was way down below where I could see). However I was also totally impressed that it was catching him every time and didn’t seem to be too much hassle managing the rope while climbing. That’s when I decided maybe I should give the device a try instead of using a GG. 

Long story short: I used it for a while and then got rid of it. I didn’t like it’s design and had difficulty in smoothly controlling the descent. Also, about the time I’d tried it, accident reports started cropping up on various climbing boards in relation to normal usage. Some claimed it was the design of the device, others claimed that it was user error. I’d also read and participated in a number of threads on RockClimbing.com and SuperTopo where Mal Daly (former Trango owner), was super emphatic about NEVER, EVER, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE using the Cinch for soloing of any kind. He said his comments were based on testing and experience. (Of course that’d probably be the response of any business owner in relation to using a device outside of its intended use and wanting to legally cover their butt.) 

Fast forward many years and Trango came out with the Vergo - similar to the Cinch but newly designed from the ground up. After several false starts and recalls, they finally got everything sorted out. I read about a couple of people who were using it for TRS but I immediately dismissed it because of my less than ideal experience with the Cinch. However I started thinking that I probably shouldn’t trash it without first hand info and experience. I started thinking that maybe the design changes had improved it and I should give it an in-depth look trying to not let my previous experience prejudice my view, 

So that’s the back story. 

For the last year+ I’ve been using the Taz Lov2 as my main TRS device and consider it the best all-in-one device available. So this review will compare it to that standard. 

Additional info: Trango Blog

Specs - weight: 196gm (201gm actual); rope range: 8.9 - 10.7; cost $99; size: 100mm x 68mm x 33mm Materials: steel, aluminum, and plastic 

Design
The Vergo is similar in design to the Cinch and though Trango says that it has been totally redesigned from the ground up, the principles by how it operates are the same but it has been improved in several ways: the handle attachment point has been moved from the aluminum half to the steel half and has been lengthened; the geometry of the release action for lowering has been refined; the geometry of the rope path has been refined and narrowed to handle smaller diameter ropes; the pinch pin which was reported to wear quickly on the Cinch has been hardened to increase wear resistance; and the locking/pinching rope geometry of the pivoting halves has been modified. It is also slightly bigger and heavier overall. 

There are three main types of active all-in-one ABDs (assisted belay device) based on rope path: straight-through (Lov2/Faders SUM/Vergo) those where the rope wraps around a cam (Grigri/Eddy/Birdie/Lifeguard); and those that have the rope wrapping around a wheel (Revo/Silent Partner). It’s only the wheeled and straight through devices that can reduce feed resistance to a reasonable level for TRS in my opinion. The Vergo uses a semi-straight through rope path that has a sight dogleg in order to introduce a certain amount of friction which helps the device itself pivot on the ‘biner and both halves pivot in relation to each other and lock on the rope. 

The Vergo uses a unique design where both halves of the device freely pivot in relation to each other which allows the rope to be pinched between the pinch pin on the aluminum half, and the pinch plate on the steel half, to lock the rope when it is weighted. A very unique design. (The Lov2 use a rocker-arm inside the device to pinch and lock the rope.) Because both halves are pivoting in relation to each other it means the ‘biner can only be attached to one half (one side) of the device. Most other ABDs have the ‘biner connecting to both halves of the device which is inherently stronger. While the materials are sound, the design bothers my intuitive sense of design (see below). 

While I’m not an engineer, I have designed rock climbing equipment and these issues bother my design intuitions. However, I’m sure the Trango designers/engineers/testers have proven that the design and materials are strong enough and up to the task intended (lead belaying). However the quirky design and thinness of the materials creep me out a bit because I’m using it for an unintended purpose - top rope soloing. The stresses experienced during TRS in normal situation should be well below catching a lead fall. However, the orientation of the device in TRSing and lack of a hand holding the free end of the rope definitely are outside the scope of it’s design parameters. Having said that, after using it i’m comfortable with it based on my testing and experience. However, I would NEVER, EVER under any circumstances want to use this as a LRS device, period!!! 

Now onto the it’s actual use and how it compares to the Lov2 

Feeding 
Because of the dog-leg/kink (see photo) in the “straight-through” rope path, there is more resistance when it is being pulled up the rope than devices that have a true straight through path such as the Lov2 or Goblin. This dogleg in the rope path means that it needs to have a bit more weight on the bottom of the rope to start with. 

With the Lov2 I use a approach shoe or two clove hitched to the bottom of the rope. With the Vergo I needed both shoes a medium sized rock or two inside my shoes. However, it still feeds fairly well but I could sense a slight bit more drag on the rope while moving than with the Lov2. So while the device actually weighs half of what the Lov2 does, it feels a bit heavier while climbing because of the additional drag. I'm not talking about a huge difference though, and it certainly feeds better than any other ABD on the market. As the weight of the rope beneath the device increases as you climb, the feed resistance also increases. Feeding on low angle slab is also less than ideal and one is probably better off with a microtrax or Roll’nLock as the primary device for those types of routes. On the slab I ended up pulling rope on the first 30+’ until the route started getting vertical. This is because the weight of the shoes on the bottom of the rope are not “felt” by the Vergo because of the low-angle. 

Feed is an interplay between the size of the rope, the suppleness and how much weight is on the bottom. It takes a bit of experimentation to get these things right to maximize the feed.

Lock up 
Lock-up on the Vergo is fairly immediate. It has to pivot to lock like the Lov2 but because it’s a bit smaller, the pivot arc/distance is less than the Lov2. My estimate is it takes 2”-5” at most to lock up compared to the estimated 4-10” of the Lov2. Probably the only devices that lock quicker are the Microtrax and Roll’nlock because of their small size and the toothed/ribbed cam which initiates immediate engagement. Caution: forward falls, like on less than vertical slab, may not lock up because pressure on the rope/device doesn’t allow it to pivot and lock-up and your body pressing against the device will also hinder that. For it to lock, it needs a takes a straight down or a slightly outward fall. This is a characteristic of any straight through type device. However most falls are backwards/outwards away from wall so that shouldn’t be an issue. (And that’s also why you should always use a backup, right?!) 

Rapping 
Rapping is the function that lacks in many good TR devices (MicroTrax, Lift, Goblin, etc.) and is what sets apart many of the ABDs. The rapping function of the Vergo in general is pretty good and has been greatly improved over the Cinch due to the increase in handle size and device geometry changes. The sweet spot for control of rapping is fairly small like the Lov2 but i never felt like I was going to loose control of the decent and was able to fairly easily modulate the speed with one hand on the handle and other hand below on the rope. I think it’s just slightly smoother and easier to use for rapping than the Lov2 because the ergonomics are a bit better on the Vergo and the "sweet spot” might be ever so slightly greater. You still don’t want to yank the handle wide open, but then you don’t want to do that on any brake assisted belay device. With a bit of experience, it’s pretty easy to control though slightly more sensitive than a Grigri. I’d liken the Vergo to the steering sensitivity on a sports car versus a Grigri which would be more analogous to the steering on a normal car. I’m sure that going up or down in rope size from what I use (9.4/9.5) would affect these characteristics somewhat. 

Rope Size 
Trango says 8.9 to 10.7. I would say that is really stretching it and possibly an outright fabrication re the upper range limit. For regular belaying it might work since the rope is being pulled through the device. However in relation to TRS I tried various ropes at home to see how the feed would be. Using well used ropes in the 9.9 and 10.2 range - it was not pleasant because the narrow, dog-legged rope path. There was just too much friction. In fact for TRSing, with ropes larger than 9.6, I’m sure you’d end up having to pull rope a significant amount of the time, much like a Grigri, or end up having to put an inordinate amount of weight on the bottom of the rope. As mentioned under feed, supple ropes tend to feed better than stiffer ropes (ropes with a high percentage of sheath)

For testing I used a well used and slightly fuzzy BD 9.4 and aa fairly new Edelweiss Energy 9.5 Unicore. It seemed like the more flexible and used BD fed just slightly better. I personally would never use the Vergo with anything bigger than a 9.5 It would be interesting to try a rope in the 9.0-9.3 range and see how that worked. My guess is that it would feed even better. HOWEVER, if you have safety concerns using a small diameter rope for TRS, then I’d recommend that you not use the Vergo - the Lov2 would be a better choice. I’m totally comfortable using a rope in the 9.5 range making sure I’m not working a route over sharp edges, or if I am, taking the appropriate precautions. 

Down-Climbing 
Down climbing with the Vergo is really hit and miss…and probably mostly a miss. Since it’s not something I regularly do, I think it would need more investigation but my initial observation and experiences are not favorable. It tends to lock-up with any downward motion. To even approach being able to down-climb, I had to remove the backup device beneath it (used knots for a back-up) and I needed to be on a vertical route where I could slightly press my body against the vergo and rope. With any backward/outward movement, it locks. A smaller rope might aid in this but I haven’t tested that. 

The Lov2 fares slightly better because of the rope path through the device is totally straight and because of it being heavier. If down-climbing were an important function to me, I’d probably go with a Goblin or Revo. Both the Vergo and Lov2 leave much to be desired for this function. Having said that more investigation might yield a set-up/rope combo that would allow one to down-climb. 

Set-Up 
For the most efficient feed and minimum lock-up distance of the Vergo, it needs to be held upright in a vertical position with a necklace or chest strap. With other devices used for TRS, it is common to make the connection to the device via the ‘biner hole or to the ‘biner itself in order to hold it up. However on the Vergo this does not work well because it causes the device to hang at an angle that puts more kink in the rope path. In order to orient it for the straightest rope path through the device, I use a loop of 1.5 mm accessory cord slipped over the release handle and around the handle’s axle shaft housing. Anything with a larger diameter could get in the way of the rotation of the two halves of the device which is essential for the proper functioning


You could also use 5 lb.-10 lb. test monofilament fishing line which would be small enough in diameter to work well and also allow for it to break free from the necklace/harness at a given force in the event of a weird fall. 

After trying various looking ‘biners, I ended up liking the Edelrid Slider auto-locking ‘biner with a Petzl Tanga keepers sliced in half to act as rubber grommets. This keeps the Vergo centered on the ‘biner but still allows it to freely rotate. This is the same setup that I use with the Lov2. A small rated maillon also works.







Backing-up the Vergo Backing-up the Vergo
For a back up, I started off using a minitrax. The feed worked well but multiple times after locking it open for rapping, it slipped back to the unlocked position then jammed suddenly on the rope and up against the Vergo. When this happened, in order to unlock the minitrax I had to climb back up to a stance or where I could unweight it so I could unlock it. After several bouts I ended up completely taking it off the rope for rapping which is a PIA for hanging top-outs. I’m done with the minitrax as a back-up device unless I’m on a route that allows me to top out and take it off! Part of the reason for using an ABD is to make the climbing and rapping as seamless as possible. That’s not possible when using the microtrax as a backup in my experience. The lock-out feature is a total scourge. 



The best device IMO for backing up any primary device is the CT Roll’nLock because it’s lock-open feature is positive and never slips into the lock mode…and, it flows up the rope easily and unnoticed and slides down freely when locked out for rapping. It works really well for difficult hanging top outs - which are most of the routes I TRS. The sequence is: hang on the Vergo; unlock the Roll’nLock; and rap - just like the Lov2. Easy, peasy! Can’t be much simpler. 

Note: Since I originally wrote this, there have been some potential issues found by users when using the RollnLock below another device. Until I can do extensive testing, I've switched back to the MicroTrax with the mods listed here: Microtrax use and mods

For working a section of a route, these days I usually hang when I get to the start of the section I’m working and tie a backup knot below the RnL and then and unlock the RnL Then while working the section all I have to do is rap to the start of the crux again because the RnL is locked-out and freely sliding on the rope. Alternatively, sometimes I don’t use the RnL and just put a maillon on the belay loop and use knots as a back-up making sure that I tie one at the start of the crux section. That also allows quick up-and-down mini laps for repeating a section. (This is probably safer in light of the clam shell construction of the Vergo and the possibility of it exploding apart from jamming against a back-up knot.)

Routes 
The type of routes that I tested the Vergo on ranged from lower angle highly featured slab, to steep and ledgy, to fairly overhung. I don’t think it is suitable for lower angle slab or pure fiction slab because it’s hard to get enough weight on the bottom of the rope to keep it feeding freely. On these type routes I ended pulling rope till it got much steeper, behaving much more like a Grigri. On these type routes it’s better to use a MicroTrax along with the RnL.



Conclusion 
So there you have it. In summary, if you don’t mind using a rope less than 9.6; don’t need or want to down-climb; don’t mind giving up a slight bit in feed performance; and are OK with the design quirks/quality realizing you’re using it outside of specified parameters...the Vergo is a good all-in-one device at a reasonable size/weight and price point. It is certainly much better than any other handled ABDs (GG, Eddy, Lifeguard, Birdie) for TRS. I now understand why people are using it for an all-in-one TRS solution - it’s not a bad choice IMO, in fact if I didn’t have the Lov2 I’d probably settle on this. However, I will probably stick to my first love (Lov2) because of the quality and slightly better feed. 

Device Summary Chart


My quick summary in the other post has now been changed to: 


The Vergo can be summed up as: half the weight; half the bulk; half the cost; half the quality, and if you don’t mind using 9.5 or smaller ropes you’ll get most of the performance of the Taz Lov2.   



FINE PRINT
This review is my experience and opinions based on the equipment/methods specified and on the types of routes I climb. YMMV. The Trango Vergo is not designed or made for TRS and using for that purpose could be dangerous and life threatening. The info contained here is for informational purposes only and if you choose to follow or implement any of the suggestions and methods above, you do so knowing full well that using a device outside of its intended purpose could result in injury or death.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Postscript - for regular lead belaying, I’ll never go back to a Grigri unless I’m using a really fat rope. I like the Vergo that much!





Thursday, June 18, 2020

Taz Lov2 for Top Rope Soloing - A Review


The holy grail of TRS devices would be a device that allows me to freely climb with no slack build-up; be able to quickly lock-up when needed; and be able to rap whenever I desire without having to switch devices. Well that device is now here - it’s the TAZ Lov2. It’s not perfect in all these functions but good enough for me that it’s “the answer” for most situations. With the Lov2 the "sum" is greater than the "parts" (individual functions) and yields a device without peers.

I’m well into my second season of using the Lov2 and am quite happy with it’s performance in most situations. I’ll summarize my experience up front and then get more into the details. The Lov2 is the only all-in-one-dedicated-device that ticks all the boxes for TRSing for me. There are other devices that outperform it in a specific function. However there is no other device that combines all the TRS functions into one device and performs at the level of the Lov2 without having to switch devices for rapping.  

I think an apt analogy is that it can be considered the Silent Partner of the TRS world. It's high quality and bomber construction inspires confidence. What's the "price" one has to pay for this?! It's big, heavy, and expensive - though none of these prohibitively so.  It is specifically  designed and tested for doing all the functions required for TRS (ascending, fall arresting, and descending) and does all of these functions at a fairly high level. None of the other devices that I know of meet all these criteria. I’ve used the Revo, various GGs, and the Eddy hoping that they (either in stock or modified form) might be the all-in-one-device of my dreams - but they all have major downsides. I dare say, I'm going out on a limb here, that even as the Silent Partner has developed a cult following in the LRS world, the Lov2 could have the same potential in the TRS world. However, just like the SP, it probably won't happen till it’s no longer available and people are scrambling to try and get one. The caveat here is the remote possibility that a newer device is designed and marketed that will outperform it - however I wouldn’t hold my breath.

PROS: Does it all (feeds well/locks-up relatively quick/decent rapping); great for doing laps; repeatedly working a section of a route; hanging top-outs; down-climbing; high quality/bomb proof construction that inspires confidence

CONS: Weight; size; price, rapping takes a bit of practice to master

So, that’s the summary of my experience…but the devil is in the details. Read on for all the salacious details of how I set it up; when I would and wouldn't use it; and some tricks I've learned.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The following information is provided based on my experience which is continually evolving. This is not a "how-to" manual. If you use or rely on any of this info, you do so at your own risk. I encourage you to test and retest before committing to a course of action. You may find better set-ups for your own situation (route/rope/experience/degree of risk tolerance). Please let me know of your experiences and share on social media.

The Lov2 is not designed as a TRS device per se but more as a work and recreational device in the rope access and arborist's worlds - which is probably why most climbers have not heard of it. However, it IS designed and tested to fulfill all the three main functions required for TRSing - ascending, fall arresting, and descending. As I discuss it’s various characteristics and function, I’ll try to do so in relation to some of the other major devices on the market that I've used.

Specs: dynamic ropes: 9.5-11 Static 10-11 (see comparison chart at the end below)
Construction: stainless steel (all rope wear and structural parts), heavy duty aluminum side pates, and plastic handle and rope tension cleat
type of device: Straight through rope path with a tension cleat and pivoting rope pinch lever/arm

 

 

Setup
Review is based on using a 9.5 Black Diamond rope moderately worn and slightly fuzzy. 130 lb. climber

The Lov2 works best when held in a vertical position as per user guide. It should be connected to the belay loop with an auto- locking pear or oval 'biner. While the Lov2 could be used without a neck strap/chest harness, it would hang too low  on the belay loop and then travel up to the top and through a ~90 deg. pivot when locking up. By using a sling/neck strap/or chest harness it can be held in a vertical position just above my navel which reduces the amount of travel when locking up. The device will still pivot upwards during a fall, but is still low enough to keep it away from my face and neck.

The Lov2 and 'biner can be held vertically by a small 2mm dia. piece of cord threaded through the cover plate and clipped to a neck strap/over the should sling or chest harness. I've tried other cord loop and arrangements for holding the device and 'biner up but saw no advantages. By using this small cord loop permanently attached, I never have to worry about loosing it and it's super easy to clip and unclip.

There are a lot of options to hold the Lov2 vertically: anything from a breakable or elastic neck cord, crossed slings, a double twisted sling, Petzl Torse, or full chest harness. I prefer the Torse because it’s fairly minimal, the length is quickly and easily adjustable, and it places the minimal weight felt on the tops of your shoulders. It does not go around your neck even though it may look like it in the photos. It also doesn't constrict one's chest like some set-ups and is never too loose because of it's adjustability.
  
Another option for holding the Lov2 and 'biner up is to use this method for improvising a minimalist harness with a sling that won't get pulled up around one's neck. https://www.instagram.com/p/B92bbBPpqPl/

I also use (though not always) a Petzl Tanga rubber "keeper" cut in half to keep the Lov2 centered on the 'biner. Also, I sometimes use a 6mm cord loop girth hitched around the 'biner and harness waist belt keeper loop. This keeps the Lov2/'biner combo held at the top of the belay loop and keeps it from moving around when climbing, bending over, leaning down, etc.

Feed: This is usually the prime concern for people who TRS. We all want something that will feeds more or less without friction and without having to attend to it - to get as close as possible to the "free-solo" feeling. This is where the Grigri and Eddy fail as they need constant attention until well up the route and even then I can feel the friction of the feed. The best in class are the Gremlin and Microtrax. Not too far behind those is the Lov2. I use 9.5 dynamic ropes which is the smallest diameter within the specs and allows it to flow freely. With the 9.5 ropes I can get by with with minimal amount of weight attached to the bottom of the rope. usually on clove hitch a shoe or two.

Lock-up:  It’s certainly not the quickest in locking up when weighting the rope or "falling", though it’s not bad either - usually a max of around 4"-10” because the Lov2 needs to pivot up to cause the lever /arm to pinch the rope. I would say it’s on the order of the Rescucender, Roll’nLock and Goblin in it's ability to lock. The best in class is the Microtraxion of course but that’s because of it’s small size and aggressive teeth. However thus far, I’ve never had an issue with the Lov2 locking and after getting use to it’s operation, it inspires confidence. 

Rapping: Again, not the best in class (Grigri) but it isn’t bad. It DOES take a bit of getting use to because the “sweet spot” in the handle movement is smaller than the Grigri. However, it doesn't have the annoying anti-panic feature like the Grigri+ and Eddy. I find those to be a PITA and of dubious value for someone experienced with the device. At the top of a route with 100’ of rope weight below me, it takes significant pressure on the handle to initiate the rapping process. The pressure on the handle lessens the further down the route I rap. Fortunately the handle is fairly large which helps in the initiation and control. Unfortunately the ergonomics of the handle leaves something to be desired. For me it puts my hand and wrist in an uncomfortable position. I would love to see that tweaked in a future version. There’s a couple of techniques that I've used that can be helpful and increase the safety while learning to rap with the Lov2. I’ll cover those a bit further down.

Note: as stated on the TAZ website and video instructions - when using the Lov2 for rappelling, one hand should always be on the handle and one hand below the device on the rope to provide extra friction.  NO EXCEPTIONS! (some of the photos below don't show both hands because they are posed and my one hand is holding the camera or remote control).

Down climbing: With the setup and rope I use, I'm able to down climb when I want or need to. If it has locked up (I've sat on the rope or "fallen") it may take unweighting it and moving it slightly with my hand or to first make a slight upward movement and then slowly down-climb. This may not be possible with a large diameter rope. I've not tested that.

Back-up: Having a back-up for all soloing devices is highly recommended. I have used two methods:
   
1) A fall rated maillon/quick link attached to the belay loop underneath the Lov2 can be used with back-up knots. As I climb I add back-up slip knots occasionally below the million/quick link. If a fall should result and the Lov2 fails for some reason, the knot will jam against the quick link and save my bacon. It’s simple, cheap, and doesn't cause additional friction and is a surefire way to add back-up protection. However there are two main disadvantages. First, is that I have to interrupt my upward progress and find a no-stress stance to tie the back-up knot. Secondly when descending I need to stop and untie each knot. This seems to me to to defeat one of the main purposes for having the Lov2 in the first place: seamless uninterrupted climbing flow. The next method solves that and I virtually never use this method any more. However if I'm going to be working a crux section of climb I use this method. It's super easy to hang before the crux, tie a knot and then proceed to climb and lower as many times as necessary.


2) A Roll’nLock can be connected below the Lov2 on the belay loop. The RnL flows extremely well up the rope as I climb and I really don’t notice any more friction than without it. Should the Lov2 fail, the RnL will lock. The great advantage of the RnL is that at the top of the route it’s easy to lock open so that it slides freely down the rope as I rap. These two devices together provide the smoothest and safest TRSing experience that I know of.  A Microtrax also works as a backup, however I've found that the lock-out mechanism often slips while rapping and unexpectedly locks on the rop and interrupts the decent. This is extremely annoying . I'll never use the Microtrax as a backup for any of my setups.

Note: Since I originally wrote this, there have been some potential issues found by users when using the RollnLock below another device. Until I can do extensive testing, I've switched back to the MicroTrax with the mods listed here: Microtrax use and mods




Update note: even though I show various possible methods below to add friction to the descent, in the long run I feel that it's best to learn how to use the Lov2 the way it is intended: one hand on the handle and the other hand grabbing the rope below and supplying friction. With practice, it's the easiest and best.

1) Several rope wraps and can be put around a leg to add more friction though it might twist the rope. I've only done this a couple times and don't remember if it twisted the rope or not but it's a good simple trick to remember.



2)  If I use a million/quick link and knots for back up, the rope can be left through the quick link and the lower brake hand can pull out and down to add a bit more friction.  


3)  The rope can be rethreaded back through the 'biner that is used to attache the Lov2. This has to be done on the side where the gate is. A more elegant solution would be to use a Petzl Freino ‘biner ($$) that allows the rope to be quickly inserted and doubled back on itself to add friction. If either of these methods are used long term, it could cause the rope wear the aluminum side plate of the Lov2 because it travels a slightly diagonal path. 



4)  An oval 'biner can be clipped beneath the Lov2 on the belay loop and a bight of rope pushed through a small maillon/quick link as shown. This will also add friction to the system and help add control.  


5)  The lower brake hand can squeeze the rope back against the device pinching it and causing it to bend at a more acute angle and increase the friction. The hand is used to modulate the decent in conjunction with the brake handle. This method is probably best for short descents and/or reworking a section of the route. (Brake lever not shown in action here and I would normally use my right hand for the squeezing function and left hand on the brake handle. However, for clarity I show it here with my left hand). Note: if using this method to rap very far, a leather glove would be necessary! 







Replaceable parts: the plastic tension cleat that helps provide a slight amount of friction on the rope so that the Lov2 pivots and locks-up, will wear over time However it's replaceable and the TAZ website has instructions for how do that. 

When do I NOT use the Lov2?
  • On a route where the crux is low on the route (first 15’) and the route is over 50' I don't use the Lov2 because of rope stretch (I use dynamics ropes) and fear of hitting the ground. I also wouldn't use this set-up if I'm climbing friction slab of 60 deg. or less. In both of these situations you want immediate lock up and minimal rope stretch. For these situations, I use a Microtrax and a Spoc (or two of either) on parallel rope strands with both devices mounted together on a wide pear ‘biner. I tie and weight the two strands together. This provides smooth feed and immediate lock up with the least amount of rope stretch whether using a static or dynamic rope. 



  • I also would not use the Lov2:  if I wanted the very best climbing experience (the most like free soloing); AND if I have a no-hands top-out (seldom) where I can easily switch devices for rapping; AND if I'm not concerned about getting back down quickly to do another lap working on endurance. In that situation, I use a Camp Goblin (or Kong Backup) on top with a Roll’nLock or Microtrax underneath as a back-up. It is the freest running set-up  with the quickest possible lock-up  IMO.

For a similar set-up using the Trango Vergo see my blog post: Cheap Love?! The Vergo vs Lov2 for TRS








Wednesday, May 6, 2020

FlipStik v.1 - Part 1

FlipStik v.1 - Part One 



A fairly easy to make hangbar that has some unique properties. This blog post probably won't answer every question that one might have, but hopefully will give enough info re the design and building process that the average woodworker can make their own custom version of it.

GOAL - create a hang bar project that:
  1. takes up minimal space - both when mounted and when stored
  2. rigidly mounted (vs hanging/suspended types of bars)
  3. aesthetically pleasing
  4. functional
  5. doorway mounted on expandable pull-up bar (see discussion in Part 2)
  6. can be left up and not interfere with the function of the door or can be easily removed and stored behind the door
  7. is 'universal' in that it isn't dependent upon doorway size
  8. mounts as high as possible for a doorway type pull-up bar
PARTS NEEDED:

The bar is created out of three pieces of wood obtained at my local Lowes.com. It could also be routed or CNC machined out of a single piece of 1.5” x 3.75” x 36” piece of poplar (or other hardwood) if you have the tools and know-how.

2 pcs- 1.5” x 36” square hardwood pcs
1 pcs - .75” x 1.5 x 36” hardwood piece
2 pcs - 1/2" x 3-14" x 4-1/4" hardwood plywood for J-hook backing/spacer plate (or 1 pcs 1/2" x 3-1/4" x 30" (see discussion in Part 2)
3 - 3” #10 wood screws
backing plate screws
     1-3/4” wood screws
     1-1/4” wood screws
closed cell foam padding: 1/8”-1/4” depending upon doorway and doorway trim profile (craftstore foam)
expandable doorway pull-up bar (ones with end-cups is recommended if you are heavier than 150 lb)

TOOLS USED: can be created with a wide variety of tools from simple hand tools to router and jig. Tools I used in the project: drill press, router table and various router bits, belt sander, hand sand stick

DESIGN: 
  • based on my LipStik design without the folding legs - BUT - it is flippable which gives twice as many edges (8 instead of 4) for the same number of pockets/steps and space (it’s a whole other discussion whether more edges are necessary or better for effective training)
  • It is designed to be mounted on expandable doorway pull-up bar. Bar can be left up and door is still functional. 
  • 3-piece design that allows working on individual pieces before being assembled
  • uses a “stepped finger stop" design that allows user to easily customize for their particular needs

MAJOR STEPS IN MAKING THE FLIPSTIK






1) cut boards to correct dimensions (I was able to buy the correct dimensioned boards at Lowes.com)











2) layout and cut the “steps” in the center board









3) layout cut lines and remove the cutaway on bottom board 






4) put radius on pocket edges of both top and bottom rails (easier to do this before assembled (see discussion below)












5) glue/clamp/screw the three boards together (no photo)



6) radius the top top rail to 1.5”  diameter for warm-up/pull-up bar.









7) round front edge of bottom rail


8) monos - if desired - drill  3/4” hole 30mm deep (or 13/16” - 7/8” depending upon how fat your fingers are and how much side support you want for your fingers). Generously chamfer the edge of mono. Notice the screws holding the three pieces together when I glued it that didn't show up in the other photos.









~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

See Part 2 for finishing the bar including mounting the J-hooks, what pull-up bar is best, and other finishing details.
See Part 3 for a suggested French cleat version of this bar.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NOTES AND DISCUSSION

Edge radius discussion - some boards have a constant edge radius no matter size the edge depth (Eva Perez’s Transgression and Progression boards). While others, use a progressive edge radius (the larger the edge, the larger the edge radius) that generally yields more comfort but less accuracy when comparing edge sizes across boards. In this board I've used progressive radius using round-over router bits - which needs to be done before the board is assembled. If I were to do it over again, I'd use one constant radius for the top rail, and a smaller radius one for the bottom rails (smaller edges)

How many edges/pockets on a hangboard? Edge depths: often the general consensus is the more edges/pockets the better but it depends upon your preference in relation to how you train and your general finger fitness.  I think training can be done effectively with as little as three. However for some training protocols it is helpful to have more edges.

Pockets vs non-pockets: true pockets are unnecessary in my opinion. Just limit the number of fingers on any particular edge to achieve the same thing. Sides of pockets just help you "cheat" and take up space. I find it mildly humorous to see all the different pockets on some commercial boards. The one exception might be the mono. It can put a lot of stress on the single finger/joint on a normal edge -especially when first starting to train monos. So it can be important to provide as much support as possible through the sidewalls of a mono if you intend to train monos..

Flippable vs non-flippable: this same basic design could be used in a non-flippable board (like my LipStik) that would have only 4 edge sizes and could be permanently mounted above a doorway resting on the doorway trim with several screws into studs, OR, if using a pull-up bar,  just use one set of J-hooks.

Asymmetrical vs symmetrical edge spacing: Many hang boards in the past were symmetrical - that is - have the same edge spacing mirrored from the center line of the board. However that causes unnatural hand spacing in relation to your shoulders - from scrunched to uncomfortably wide. More functional and comfortable in my option is the asymmetrical spacing that allows constant spacing between the hands and shoulders. This bar is designed to have a constant spacing of 18”.

The following are some suggested alternative edge sequences. This is the versatility of using a method like this for creating a hang bar.

Bar shown above is a super wide ratio bar for beginning climbers to moderately advanced climbers 
[12mm top/bottom rail difference with 3mm steps]  
normal: 30 / 27 / 24 / 21
flipped: 18 / 15 / 12 /  9   

general wide ratio for beginning to hard-core
[10mm top/bottom rail difference with 2.5mm steps] 
normal: 25 / 22.5 / 20 / 17.5
flipped: 15 / 12.5 / 10 / 7.5  

beginning to moderate climbers (this is the same as Eva Perez’s Progression board)
[8mm top/bottom rail difference. 2mm steps] 
normal: 24 / 22 / 20 / 18
flipped: 16 / 14 / 12 / 10     

moderate to hard-core climbers, close ratio
[8mm top/bottom rail difference. 2mm steps]
normal: 20 / 18 / 16 / 14
flipped: 12 / 10 / 8 / 6      

FlipStik v.1 - Part 2


The FlipStik is based on a standard expandable doorway pull-up bar. They can be had from $19-$60.

Caution: this whole system depends upon your doorway framing being solid. If your doorway does not have structural integrity, then it would probably be better to not use this method of mounting but adapt it to the other major type of doorway pull-up bar where it hangs on the trip lip and then cams against the front of the doorway. I have not adapted this bar yet for that type of pull-up bar so you are on your own...

The main thing is that if you way over 140 lb, I'd recommend getting one that comes with steel cups that can be screwed into the doorway and help hold the bar in place. This makes it more secure. Mine is rated to 300 lb. if mounted with the steel cups. I didn't use them because I weigh 130 lb. and the doorway is strong enough that I could just expand the bar into place and it was enough. The disadvantage of using the steel cups on the ends to hold the bar is that there will be 3-4 small screw holes on either side that you'll have to fill if you want to permanently take it down.

Bar without mounting cups



Steps for adding the pull-up bar mounts

1)  Cut J-hook backing plates out of 1/2" ply or 1/2" poplar stock

2)  glue and screw on backing plate(s) for hooks on back of bar

3)  screw on hooks - I spaced the hooks so they would be on the outer smaller diameter part of the bar and space the hooks about 1/2" a part to give more strength to the screws in the wood. You'll need to use a shorter screw than the ones that come with it for the circled location. The board is thinner at that location because of the "cut" on the other side of that board.

4)  add doorway padding and adjust for doorway/bar fit. You want bar to lie flat again the molding and not tilt out or in.