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. 

Vergo manual

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

Click here for my review of the Taz Lov2

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!