kurthicks Posted April 14, 2004 Posted April 14, 2004 Since it seems like people are getting excited about prussiks and z-systems and stuff... what is everyone's pulley of choice? prussik minding or not? weight? other ideas (Guarda, etc)? Quote
fenderfour Posted April 14, 2004 Posted April 14, 2004 I use what Second Ascent had (cheap) after all my gear was stolen last year. Petzl Oscilante Quote
mike_m Posted April 14, 2004 Posted April 14, 2004 Petzl Mini PMP. A little spendy, but works great Quote
ken4ord Posted April 14, 2004 Posted April 14, 2004 I love my little mini-traxion, it is a little heavy and spendy, but man I can use in all sort of application it's great. Quote
lancegranite Posted April 16, 2004 Posted April 16, 2004 The maxi traction. A good large frame hauler, but the wheel is slightly too small for the loads sometimes. CMI are the pulley masters! they get all rescue freakout.. Â A good rule of thumb is the heavier the load, the bigger the wheel. ( this is true to a point ) ...when the wheel gets too big, it causes more friction, but climbers specific wheels aren't that big anyway. Â whatever...Big Wall?...Big wheel! Quote
Rodchester Posted April 16, 2004 Posted April 16, 2004 Since it seems like people are getting excited about prussiks and z-systems and stuff... what is everyone's pulley of choice? prussik minding or not? weight? other ideas (Guarda, etc)? Â For basic glacier travel, light and fast (OK I'm too old and fat to move fast , but light anyway), I serioulsy think a combination of the Petzel ULTRALEGERE with the Omega JC Wire Gate is the way to go. Â At a combined total weight of 51 gms (that's 1.8 ounces ) it is hard to beat for weight. The JC Wire gate happens to be built perfectly to allow the wheel to turn without hitting the side of the biner. Keep in mind that you have to have a biner anyway. Â If you are worried about strength, I agree it isn't the strongest thing out there. But this way the biner acts as the pulley's axle, instead of some weak ass axle like on the Petzl OSCILLANTE Further, this set up elimniates the weak ass housing connecting hte axel to the biner. Tell me that is stronger than a biner... Â Maybe I'm wrong, you engineer type feel free to chime in and tell me I'm high on crack. But it certainly seems to be to be the best "lightweight" system out there. Â Quote
Dru Posted April 16, 2004 Posted April 16, 2004 yup.  Glaciers:   Rock: minitraxion.  On the same subject (crevasse rescue) you people who carry mechanical ascenders on glaciers should reread your Twight. You think that's "light and fast"??? WTF.  The best system for crevasse rescue is to not fall in in the first place. Note the super technical rope system Kurt and I are using here  Quote
Ryan Posted April 16, 2004 Posted April 16, 2004 I use a Petzl Fixe pulley, works well enough and is fairly light- pair it with a wiregate oval and you're set! Quote
kurthicks Posted April 16, 2004 Author Posted April 16, 2004 Just for reference, i use the Petzl ULTRALEGERE w/a BD oval. it's super light, but i was just soliciting opinions. anyone rely solely on a tibloc setup? Quote
Squid Posted April 17, 2004 Posted April 17, 2004 wazzu- Have you hauled anything with that set-up? I would be afraid that it might generate more friction- maybe enough to negate the benefits of its light weight. Â What have you experienced? Quote
kurthicks Posted April 17, 2004 Author Posted April 17, 2004 i haven't hauled anything all that heavy with it actually. it's more like peace of mind when i head out. but i like to follow rule no. 1...don't fall in. you can always drop the pulleys out of the system and just use biners. that's why i was asking in the first place. Quote
mountaineer38 Posted April 18, 2004 Posted April 18, 2004 Seattle Manufacturing (SMC) makes a nice little prussik minding pulley for about $11. I bought 3 from The Summit Haus which allows me to set up a Z x C (6:1) crevasse rescue system. Quote
willstrickland Posted April 18, 2004 Posted April 18, 2004 Z x C (where you add a C to the pull end of the Z by threading a sling or cord through the locking prussik and then run the pull-end of the rope through that) is a 5:1, not 6:1. Â I say, don't fall in. If you do, prussik out. If you can't prussik out, use a 5:1 with garda. If that's not enough, use a 7:1 which is actually a pretty simple set-up. Â Wilderness Search and Rescue by Setnicka has tons of this shizzle in it and a look at the physics involved in the systems. It's a fun read if you're interested in the technical/scientific end of it. Quote
Mark_Husbands Posted April 19, 2004 Posted April 19, 2004 http://www.mtntools.com/cat/rclimb/biners/dmmrevolvercarabiners.htm  pulley biner Quote
ketch Posted April 19, 2004 Posted April 19, 2004 http://www.mtntools.com/cat/rclimb/biners/dmmrevolvercarabiners.htm pulley biner  I'd want to look into this a little more. I havn't seen a number in climbing related lits anywhere, but, from my work rigging 3 line diameters is the minimum size for pulleys before you start adding to the friction of the system. I'm sure it is better that a plain biner though. Quote
Alpinfox Posted April 19, 2004 Posted April 19, 2004 (edited) anyone rely solely on a tibloc setup?  I do.  My crevasse rescue gear: One small basic pulley two tiblocs one locking oval biner one regular oval biner texas prusik foot loop (with smaller top loop cuz when using tibloc instead of prusik knot, you don't need as much rope) regular prusik loop for harness  This gear allows me to climb the rope and setup a basic 3:1 "Z" pulley. If I need to add on a "C" I'll use slings and biners (higher friction, but it'll work).    p.s. I don't use these: because in my brief experience with them, the rope can slip off the side of the wheel and jam up in between the side of the wheel and the biner. I prefer something like this:  Edited April 19, 2004 by Alpinfox Quote
iain Posted April 19, 2004 Posted April 19, 2004 Z x C (where you add a C to the pull end of the Z by threading a sling or cord through the locking prussik and then run the pull-end of the rope through that) is a 5:1, not 6:1. I'm not quite sure what you are saying here at the end, but a "C" 2:1 acting on a "Z" 3:1 is a 6:1 compound system. ^2 Quote
iain Posted April 19, 2004 Posted April 19, 2004 If someone told me to build a "batwing" I'd picture a 3:1 on 3:1 with a change of direction to make a 9:1. Maybe the term can be used for other systems? The batwing term I think comes from reed thorne's ropes that rescue course (and its graduates who are addicted to aztec kits afterwards ) Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.