Bolt/Anchor issues on Altered Scale & Trouble Clef

Post by **Wes** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 9:13 pm

Tom, you can feel free to leave a nice, new locker if it makes you feel better. I mean, your life is worth $12.00, right? Although, my life isn't, so I will proabably booty it, to add to the collection.

The whole "single point of failure" mantra is way over hyped. So many other things can and do go wrong, and, there are plenty of single points of failure in just about any climbing system.

Wes

Post by **Eagleman** » Wed Mar 17, 2004 10:44 pm

If you add the quick links and chains you can put a little glue of some sorts on the threads (like the glue for glue in bolts). It will make the chains impossible to take as booty, but could still be gotten off by crankin on it with a wrench when they wear down and need to be replaced.

Post by **Johnny** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 10:10 pm

I agree that the single point anchor danger is minimal if the hardware is good quality. I don't mind rapping off a single non-locking biner attached to a good nalgene bottle. I really think that construction quality quicklinks have no place in an anchor system. There are some made by Mallion (sp?) that are suitable for climbing that are fine. I just know that construction grade has no guarantee that it will hold any weight, much less a "rated" weight. That's why they put on the link "Not intended for climbing" and they're cheap. You can see wear of a link or ring and judge its relative safety, you just can't tell how strong the materials are in the first place when it isn't tested like climbing gear is.

The solution is to have Mallion links available and used as the standard. Anybody got connections?

Post by **Eagleman** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 10:44 pm

Maillon is the correct spelling.

Post by **tomdarch** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 12:37 am

Sandy wrote:so do you you use two ropes for rapping, and two seperate belay loops on your harness, two biners and two rap devices? Redundancy is a good thing, don't get me wrong, but if a quicklink is solid, you aren't doing anything more foolish by relying on it than you are by trusting only one rope, one belay loop and one ATC with one biner...

Have I shown you my aluminum-foil hat? It both keeps out the CIA mind control beams, and blocks the cosmic rays that might cause brain cancer!

But seriously - I know that my worries about single quick links are a bit paranoid. Regarding ropes and the belay loop - they are made up of thousands of fibers, most of which could be cut, and the rope/loop would still be strong enough to hold. They have the capacity to 'fail soft'. As for redundant belay biners/devices - I do have worries in the back of my mind about them. But the big difference between them and an anchor link is that I purchased my biner/device, so I know that they are good quality to start and I know that they haven't been dropped or whatever. That single link on an anchor has been sitting out in the weather for years and who knows what has happened to it (e.g. lighning strike). When you add to that what Johnny was saying about 'hardware store links' as opposed to quality controlled climbing specific links, I am just not entirely happy with those setups. But, yes, I lower off them all the time, and no, I don't leave lockers behind.

My point in all of this was just to voice the opinion that I don't like that aspect of some anchors. If an equipper would like some Maillon links for routes that I am likely to do, let me know and I'll happily buy the 'doubles'. At a few bucks each, it's well worth the peace of mind.

Post by **Eagleman** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 4:09 am

Im perfectly fine with lowering off a single point. Like many of you have said, the chances of failure are amazingly small, plus its only a static load. Hardware store screw links should be fine, construction companys and such trust them to hold massive amounts of weight...weights that we would never put on them climbing. If your worried about the hardware links, make sure that if you get them, they are made of a higher grade stainless or galvanized steel. Some of the maillons have a stronger max load (the ones made by climbing companys), but they are still made of stainless steel and just as succeptable to the elements as regular screw links.

Post by **Wes** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 5:02 am

Here is something fun to do: Next time you are sport climbing, look at some of the falls you could take going to the 3rd or 4th bolt on many routes. Nearly (or maybe all the way??) to the ground. Now think about all those "single points" of failure that are keeping you off the ground in the event of a dynamic fall. One bolt, one hanger, one biner on the hanger, one runner, one biner on the rope side, one belay device, one belay biner, etc. Biners break. The rope comes unclipped. Those are the things that I think about, not weather something that is rated to 5,000 pounds is going to hold 350 pounds.

Wes

Post by **Eagleman** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 5:11 am

Yeah, If you think about it, almost everything in climbing that saves you ass from hitting the ground is based on a single point failure. And if you thing more, most of is takes much more force than the anchors do (every time you whip you put alot more stress on gear than static lowering off the anchors). That is why im fine with a single point when coming off the anchors. Chances are if gear is gonna fail, it will happen before the anchors.

Post by **the lurkist** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 1:07 pm

also, stainless steel is softer than non stainless. It wears much faster.

Post by **Johnny** » Fri Mar 19, 2004 4:21 pm

Do you really believe a construction hardward manufacturer's claim of "working load = 2350 lbs" is the same as Fixe's claim of a ring's strength? I don't.