wdietsch Posted December 29, 2004 Posted December 29, 2004 Saw these on ebay ... interesting concept Quote
Blake Posted December 29, 2004 Posted December 29, 2004 I think in a small space where youd be taking advantage of the smallest of the three pieces, the back two pieces would be bulky and useless and might make the chock itself too large to fit into a slot. If there was a way to remove/re-arrange these 3 pieces on the wire, it might make sense. If you can fit the largest cylinder back in the crack behind the constriction, and it wont come out with a pull, the two smaller pieces are useless anyway. Quote
OlympicMtnBoy Posted December 29, 2004 Posted December 29, 2004 Kinda makes one wish they were arranged the other way with the little one on top so you could just slide the bigger pieces down the wire to reach the smaller cracks. An argument could also be made that the extra weight isn't worth the extra versatility cause you still need the same number of pieces to protect the route. Of course I don't know what these guys weight. I've got a couple of Viamont's wired tricams that are kinda neat, don't use em too much still though. Quote
shapp Posted January 2, 2005 Posted January 2, 2005 Back in the day, I new some old dudes that would sling two sizes of camble wedges or chinard stoppers on the same cord for apine climbs so one sling could be used for a wider range of placements. and indead the smaller nut was on top. The large nut would be slid down near the biner when using the smaller nut. Using two nuts in this manner also allowed for a third wider placement where the nuts could be stacked with the upper small nut bent over in the upside down stacked position. Quote
nalo Posted January 2, 2005 Posted January 2, 2005 I'm trying to imagine a situation where those things would be useful, but my hangedovered brain isn't working well enough 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.