RRC Archives

Hugh posted on facebook that a correct biner was used. Jkpugel also stated that in the tests done, the defective device still did not lock, whereas another did. Also, a safety feature of the SUM is that it cams when in a vertical position, which is the position it takes when the climber falls (when pulling slack, the belayer pulls the rope toward his/her body). In the test done, the rope did not cam in a vertical position, it would cam only when perpendicular to the wall.

Additionally, what we don't know is if a rubber ring (something that comes with the device) was used and how the SUM was attached to the harness. Many people run their biner through the top and bottom loop where the belay loop attaches or use the belay loop and one of the attaching loops. You cannot do this with the SUM because orientation of the device is essential for it to cam properly.

Meadows wrote: You cannot do this with the SUM because orientation of the device is essential for it to cam properly.

Thats all I need to know. This device sounds sketchy.

No kidding. Do they have a checklist of all the procedures and accessories needed to make sure the belay device will stop a fall?

Shamis wrote:only known failure case

Hey, guess what the reward is for discovering new failure cases for belay devices?

Andrew wrote:
Thats all I need to know. This device sounds sketchy.

[/quote]

You're supposed to clip your grigri to your belay loop as well for proper functioning. And the danger of it not being in the biner correctly is that the handle could catch on the belay loop, not that the cam would not work.

Kato, there is a checklist with every belay device, and while what I'm saying doesn't make it sound as simple, it it is much simpler to use than the grigri, which I've used for about 9 years now (the SUM, 2-3 years_. That was the beauty of ithe SUM along with what made it safer than the grigri. So you can imagine the disappointment that it possibly failed.

I agree with you Meadows. The gri-gri is definitely a sketchier device than the SUM. I don't like the idea of having to hold the cam down on the gri-gri to pay slack. The device is not the problem, it's the belayer... Just like almost every incident you see with any other auto-locking device. And the SUM definitely superior for top-site belaying. Don't blame the device, especiallly if you haven't even had one in your hands to see how they work...

A few years ago, I worked a rigging job for a few months with about 15 other guys for some production or other. We were all climbers with a couple decades of experience climbing trad, big walls, sport, and guiding, and the show involved using our body weight as counterweight to raise and lower performers on the other end of the rope as form of running belay on high-speed pulleys, using climbing harnesses and some sort of rope-grabbing device on our end, and a locking steel carabiner on the performer end. The lead rigger offered us all sort of devices to try out for free and keep after the show--the GriGri of course, the Petzl ID, the Stop, the Faders SUCK I mean SUM, the Edelrid Eddy, the Trango Cinch, and a few others (the budget was decidedly bloated). At that time the SUM was a new device so we were all kind of interested to check it out. To a man, all 15 of us roundly rejected the SUM for a multitude of reasons--the awkwardness of use, the ease of disengaging the cam by accident, the carabiner issue alluded to above, the lack of friction on the rope as it runs through the device, the chintzy, bulky construction and multiple cheap plastic parts. The head rigger couldn't even give the things away at the end of the show, but the GriGris, Eddy's, ID's, and Cinches went like candy on Halloween. I haven't even considered using the SUM after that initial exposure, it has so many obvious flaws and drawbacks relative to other devices it should have been pulled from the shelves years ago.

OK, end of story time... regardless of personal preferences, any device is fine provided the individual user knows how to use it properly (and in the case of the SUM, happened to choose the right carabiner, yikes!!). In this case, plain and simple, the belayer lost control of the brake strand of the rope, whether the SUM sucks donkey balls or not (which it does incidentally). All that said, Art is right about the ClickUp--it is the best incarnation of a brake-ASSISTING belay device thus far.

Above all, I am so happy the climber got by with relatively minor injuries on this one. Obviously it could have been much, much worse.

cliftongifford wrote:I agree with you Meadows. The gri-gri is definitely a sketchier device than the SUM. I don't like the idea of having to hold the cam down on the gri-gri to pay slack. The device is not the problem, it's the belayer... Just like almost every incident you see with any other auto-locking device. And the SUM definitely superior for top-site belaying. Don't blame the device, especiallly if you haven't even had one in your hands to see how they work...

Holding down a cam is really no different than coming out of the brake position with an ATC while you're feeding slack. This is especially true if you're belaying with the *easiest*, *fastest*, and *petzl-recommended* way with the gri-gri.

Top-site? You mean, like, belaying a second from above? I don't know why you wouldn't have the belay redirected from a biner above. In the case where you're belaying directly off the anchor with a gri-gri, I don't see any issues.

dustonian wrote:A few years ago, I worked a rigging job for a few months with about 15 other guys for some production or other. We were all climbers with a couple decades of experience climbing trad, big walls, sport, and guiding, and the show involved using our body weight as counterweight to raise and lower performers on the other end of the rope as form of running belay on high-speed pulleys, using climbing harnesses and some sort of rope-grabbing device on our end, and a locking steel carabiner on the performer end. The lead rigger offered us all sort of devices to try out for free and keep after the show--the GriGri of course, the Petzl ID, the Stop, the Faders SUCK I mean SUM, the Edelrid Eddy, the Trango Cinch, and a few others (the budget was decidedly bloated). At that time the SUM was a new device so we were all kind of interested to check it out. To a man, all 15 of us roundly rejected the SUM for a multitude of reasons--the awkwardness of use, the ease of disengaging the cam by accident, the carabiner issue alluded to above, the lack of friction on the rope as it runs through the device, the chintzy, bulky construction and multiple cheap plastic parts. The head rigger couldn't even give the things away at the end of the show, but the GriGris, Eddy's, ID's, and Cinches went like candy on Halloween. I haven't even considered using the SUM after that initial exposure, it has so many obvious flaws and drawbacks relative to other devices it should have been pulled from the shelves years ago.

OK, end of story time... regardless of personal preferences, any device is fine provided the individual user knows how to use it properly (and in the case of the SUM, happened to choose the right carabiner, yikes!!). In this case, plain and simple, the belayer lost control of the brake strand of the rope, whether the SUM sucks donkey balls or not (which it does incidentally). All that said, Art is right about the ClickUp--it is the best incarnation of a brake-ASSISTING belay device thus far.

Above all, I am so happy the climber got by with relatively minor injuries on this one. Obviously it could have been much, much worse.

Did this production involve U2 and Spiderman?

Kidding aside, I agree with Dustin and Art about the Click-Up. http://voices.yahoo.com/the-click-belay ... 37160.html

I don't know how to use the SUM properly, and have failed to find instructions through google. I do know that everyone I've ever watched using it were using it improperly, as they were all holding the handle down to pay out rope and did not have their break hands on. Of course that's not very many people given the rarity of the SUM.

The original version of the Cinch could jam on a small locking carabiner in a similar way as the SUM does in that youtube video, but the second generation cinch doesn't hav ethe same issue.

Meadows wrote:Hugh posted on facebook that a correct biner was used. Jkpugel also stated that in the tests done, the defective device still did not lock, whereas another did. Also, a safety feature of the SUM is that it cams when in a vertical position, which is the position it takes when the climber falls (when pulling slack, the belayer pulls the rope toward his/her body). In the test done, the rope did not cam in a vertical position, it would cam only when perpendicular to the wall.

Additionally, what we don't know is if a rubber ring (something that comes with the device) was used and how the SUM was attached to the harness. Many people run their biner through the top and bottom loop where the belay loop attaches or use the belay loop and one of the attaching loops. You cannot do this with the SUM because orientation of the device is essential for it to cam properly.

If people were aware of the necessity of using a correct biner, you have to assume that they were also aware of the necessity of ensuring that the cam would not be held open by carabiner. (Sum packaging is very clear about the rubber safety loop, but does not emphasize biner choice.) I also wonder whether experienced sport climbers would really use a weird setup like attaching the belay biner through the harness power points.

It sort of sounds like a manufacturing defect. I guess the concern is that the straight path of the rope through the Sum doesn't provide as much friction as the rope's path in other devices (such as the Grigri's U-shaped line) in the event that the cam does not engage.

RE: Wolf
It is shocking that people would use the Sum in a way that they hold the cam down. This would be much more awkward than using it properly. The cam is the trigger at the back of the device. Holding the device at the front has no effect on the cam. Are you sure that you were seeing them hold the cam down?

chooky wrote:I guess the concern is that the straight path of the rope through the Sum doesn't provide as much friction as the rope's path in other devices (such as the Grigri's U-shaped line) in the event that the cam does not engage.

That's what noids me out about the SUM. The uncompromising confidence of its proponents doesn't help, either.