Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - *Mucci*

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 15
61
Big Wall Forum / Re: suggestions for 3rd big wall route?
« on: September 04, 2014, 09:19:49 pm »
Got sum.

Nice

62
Big Wall Forum / Re: Route Shopping
« on: August 12, 2014, 05:44:25 pm »
Pretty sure that's a memorial, there was a thread on the taco about it.

"locals" or heroes doing the same all over the valley for decades is the real shame.  Lots of examples.


63
Big Wall Forum / Re: El Capitan Geologic Map Published!
« on: August 07, 2014, 03:18:28 pm »
Awesome!

Man, what a project.

That's like a Grade VII 5.11R A5 Geological FA!

Hahah  Proud work Roger et al

64
Big Wall Forum / Re: Replacement Fly for A5 double
« on: August 04, 2014, 08:26:39 pm »
Man I have one of those Expedition flys for the Alpine double.
 
Fits my fish double perfect, fully bomber.

Aaron, grab that up, they are very rare to find!

65
Big Wall Forum / Re: Big Agnes Sleeping Bag Sysyem
« on: August 04, 2014, 12:39:37 am »
I have a BA bag, light duty with no hood or bottom insulation.  The bottom is just the sleeve that accepts foam, or the blow up.

Pretty sweet, I just roll it up and smash it into the haul bag.  Never lose the foam. Unless you bumble the bag then your hosed.

Hard to beat BA bags.

66
Big Wall Forum / Re: Weekly Favorite Big Wall Pics Thread
« on: July 30, 2014, 11:04:34 pm »



67
Big Wall Forum / Re: Weekly Favorite Big Wall Pics Thread
« on: July 29, 2014, 11:29:42 pm »



Man, with El Portal on fire, it brings back some shaky memories from last year around this time with the Rim Fire.

We spent 3 days without seeing the ground, or any other formations.

Pretty crazy.




68
Big Wall Forum / Re: Dear Bigwall forum members...
« on: July 24, 2014, 02:00:10 pm »
Even better!

Woohoo!

69
Big Wall Forum / Re: Dear Bigwall forum members...
« on: July 24, 2014, 01:20:27 pm »
Alien hater! I did place the smallest X4 offset, as one of 2 cams total on a pitch.  It worked. 


I like to peruse the Taco for funny stuff, and there is a lot of that right now.

Pretty much waiting for Hudon's Reticent TR and I should be good for the rest of the summer.



70
Big Wall Forum / Re: Rivet Hangers breaking?
« on: July 14, 2014, 09:41:37 pm »
Skot,

I can make a set of all types of hangers up to #3 for you to test if you would like?

Let me know.

Maybe make some with aluminum ovals, to show the major difference in strength achieved with the right/wrong combinations.

Will you be able to test them on a 5/16 rod or bolt with the load cell?  I have seen different numbers when cables are pulled on fat shackles.

71
Big Wall Forum / Re: Rivet Hangers breaking?
« on: June 29, 2014, 10:07:54 pm »
It is a craft.


72
Big Wall Forum / Re: Rivet Hangers breaking?
« on: June 29, 2014, 05:11:18 pm »
Here is Kate's recollection of her fall. 

http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=109179&tn=80

Breaking under body weight, sounds like #1 size cinch hangers.

Vermin hangers purchased at the mountain shop. 

You may have to read a bit through it for clarity, kinda 2 topics Rollin.

73
Big Wall Forum / Re: Rivet Hangers breaking?
« on: June 27, 2014, 03:55:53 pm »
According to slot Richards test, 1/16th cinch hanger failed at 480 lbs.  #1=1/16, #2=3/32, #3=1/18"etc.

Hard to argue the screamer had no effect on a 2kn peice holding the fall described. I garnered higher breaking strength on the ones I made, which says nothing of the actual real world translation.

One of my hangers held a really hard fall on a machine head, 210lbs of leader and gear, no screamer.

Once again, a proper 3/32" cinch will most certainly hold hard falls.  BS that you get hand me down style should never be trusted.

Also, when I place a rivet, it is never considered "suspect" .  However that junk you find on traveled routes, I would agree, unless that have been replaced with button heads.

I just thought it odd to make that statement in the guidebook which has no factual evidence, yet reads as so.

Well if you want shit that will hold falls, let me know.

http://www.wwewirerope.com/aircraftcable/

Minimum breaking strength noted in link.

74
Very cool Kev!  Nice and steep.  Beaking to freedom!

Sweet topo

75
Big Wall Forum / Re: Rivet Hangers breaking?
« on: June 23, 2014, 03:28:00 pm »
Thanks for the response Erik.

I have pretty much all available hangers at home, I will post up a shot of them so we have samples to work with.

The PDF hangers, which have a 40 degree bend are one of the worst imo, second to that would be the pika hangers which Moses sort of modeled his thin hanger from, they are bent @ 30 degrees.

The Vermin and RP are the best, as they keep the biner parallel/flat to the rock, but are really only made for 5/16ths or 3/8ths studs, a 1/4" button head is pretty sloppy inside the channel.


Well, the problem with examples of hangers breaking is there is not a clear line to the manufacturer.  Fish, Yates, and anybody who works with proper equipment can testify to the quality, and strength of what is produced.  If a aluminum oval is placed in the middle rather than a copper one, you have a reduced rating in the unit.  Not everybody with a swage tool knows what material works best, strongest cable and oval combo etc... Even the way you crip, as in where you start the process has an effect on the overall strength rating.

I Pull tested a few of my heads, hangers etc..  All of the breaking strengths were above what we thought.

I believe my #2 cinch pulled through the copper sleeve @ 1,450lbs or so (going on memory).  Static, not dynamic load, so once you introduce a rope into the mix, even 20 feet or so, that number is hard to attain in a standard fall.


Here is an example of using Aluminum ovals in place of the proper copper swage for maximum strength. 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/3-Nicopress-Rivet-Hangers-Circle-Head-Aid-Big-Wall-Rock-Climbing-Gear-/161296753786?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item258e09247a

76
Big Wall Forum / Re: Rivet Hangers breaking?
« on: June 23, 2014, 02:00:55 pm »
Yup, the hanger pulls the rivet out of the hole when a large force is placed on the system.

Obviously, the placement, quality of rock, depth, and orientation of the hanger during the fall all contribute.

77
Big Wall Forum / Re: Rivet Hangers breaking?
« on: June 23, 2014, 01:33:55 pm »


I recall the issue with Kate's hangers were 2 fold:

The one that sent her on that monster winger failed due to a bad swage, then after pulling rivets/dowels out of the wall she was stopped by a similar rivet hanger on a dowel.  She made mention of the failed hanger saying that she should have bounce tested them on the deck.


The ones I show in the photo are of a #2 cable size, 3/32nds and are strong enough to stop 200+ pounder falls, on machine heads that were just placed, and a few other falls on in-situ rivets that were 25 years old.

I make #3 size too, but they are really overkill, and many times will not fit on a well placed machine head, buttonheads typically stick out a bit more and can accept a multitude of hanger options.

One issue with keyhole hangers (moses, RP, vermin) is that they can "torque" the rivet out of the hole in a long fall.  This I have seen first hand while bounce testing, fortunately not in a fall.

If using improper material, with a hardware store crimper, I can see that there would be a large margin of failure in certain runs of product.  Using only tools that are specified for rigging and high angle work is a sure way to meet specs and ensure that you have a sound product.  Nicopress is one of those tools.


So any other examples that would lead one to claim that cinch's do not hold falls? 





78
Big Wall Forum / Rivet Hangers breaking?
« on: June 23, 2014, 11:58:27 am »
In the new Yo Big walls book, under the gear pages in the beginning, it states that "cinch" style rivet hangers "do not hold falls".

Has this been the case in the past?  Any stories that would back up this statement?

Personally, I only use butterfly, or commonly called "cinch" hangers, and occasionally use keyhole and or regular wired hangers.

I make my own hardware with a nicopress tool, nicopress material, and the 7x19 wire.

More than a few falls on my cinch hangers, never a cause for concern, of course they do not last forever, and repetitive use wears down the slide oval eventually.


What was the reasoning behind this statement in the book?  In many cases, a cinch is the only thing that will stay on a dowel, button head, broken rivet etc...

The Cinch has been a long deployed tool of the rivet ladder, just wondering why they were painted in a bad light?

Cheers!

79
Big Wall Forum / Re: Ethical grey area in chiseling heads?
« on: June 17, 2014, 12:32:25 pm »
Shallow decomposing seam, only the very tip ofthe beak catches and you blow it out testing it.  Repeat to try another beak placement, same thing.

That's where I would clean up the seam and find a a good bottoming placement for a permanant head placement.


You know it when you see it.  Prob not applicable to traveled routes, but if you get it right on the FA, you can add stability to a section that would prob get drilled if there weren't a head in situ.

I am not talking placing a head in a beak placement, rather finding a good head placement to prevent the section from getting blown out and rendered unusable.  2 ascents on a crumbly seam and the beaks are gone forever. 

80
Big Wall Forum / Re: Ethical grey area in chiseling heads?
« on: June 17, 2014, 11:22:36 am »
I have left a few sections that I did on beaks barely repeatable without heads on a few of my routes.

When the beaks were cleaned, the placement blew out.  No time to stop and deal with the section I.e drill a rivet, or paste a head as a second cleans.

I was very upset by this, but there is a crack/seam and you have to use it, or you rivet.

In hindsight, the placements were not the crux of the route, rather on a routine section, so If I had placed a few heads instead of beaks, the longevity could be maintained.

I am a firm believer that if you can place a very good head, in a sustainable placement, I would rather do that then blow it out with beaks on an FA.


Mark, on the crux of Albatross, that seam can take beaks for how many more ascents?   Would the next team decide to drill rather than copperhead?  Probably not.  That is the inherent problem with route maintenence.

The FA used what was presented to him on lead.

Of course it is up to the FA on how they choose to leave the route.  But there is a time and place for copperheads, and they do not always "steal the thunder" of a pitch.

Most of what everybody sees on trade routes is BS head placements, so the bias is always going to be there.  But on FA's there are mandatory spots, or you are drilling.

81
Big Wall Forum / Re: Blue Collar V A3 - Hourglass Wall - Yosemite
« on: June 17, 2014, 09:10:52 am »
Finishing up the topo this week.

82
That's a great way to look at it Mark. 

Hard is hard.


83
Big Wall Forum / Re: Re: Anybody else forming a plan?
« on: June 16, 2014, 06:42:38 pm »
Yeah, like how technical.

I mean plenty of letter grades get assigned to pitches , but how many are "real" would you guys say?

One guy I know says if he sees a3 heads on the topo, it's a clip up/ not worried.

So are the cruxes real or does it all fall into NTB for a seasoned wall climber?

84
I don't know,  Jim Reynolds is sending the rarely done "Cosmos" Solo right now.  That is a big bastard.

Pretty sure that could be considered "Hard Aid", as it almost never gets done.

Do you El cap climbers see a pattern with the supposed A3/A4 routes you have done?

Everything fixed, multiple placement options, cruxes that seem easy while the sneaky A2 pitch turns out to be the crux of the route? 

Are there any pitches that make you REALLY work?









85
Big Wall Forum / Re: Totem Cams
« on: June 10, 2014, 09:53:35 am »
I hate you munge.

86
That looks like the old LS trango's.

I will be looking in to these..

Thanks for the link!

87
Big Wall Forum / Re: Totem Cams
« on: May 29, 2014, 10:34:01 pm »
Skullbro they will be your go to cam.

Yeah Kev, we had a good laugh over that huh :-D

Brand new!  Haha

88
Big Wall Forum / Re: Totem Cams
« on: May 29, 2014, 12:02:50 pm »
Ha! 

I had to replace Cobblediks Big pink totem after I threw it off the rack from a thousand feet up.

It is a starter on the rack now, little tweaked but still bomber.

LOL.

89
Big Wall Forum / Re: Totem Cams
« on: May 29, 2014, 11:11:31 am »

90
Big Wall Forum / Re: Totem Cams
« on: May 27, 2014, 11:20:52 am »
I just bought a yellow from rock and snow via the link posted above, they were discounted to $63

I am limiting myself to one per paycheck until I am satisfied I have enough.

3 sets should do it.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 15