/ Zero G Ropes
I own a pair (60m dry-treated). Seem alright to me though I've never lobbed onto one! They handle fine. I haven't owned any other ropes and have rarely climbed on thinner than 9mm before getting these so I can't make that sort of comparison.
I am in the same situation of you (well nearly - I start uni in 2weeks...) and was having a look at the Zero G ropes, they dont seem to cope with as many falls according to the website but part of me thinks that I dont plan on doing that very often and that you can't sell bad kit in this country so Im am quite tempted by them...
A friend got his here:
he likes them. Doesn't climb much now, but used them for two years or so of very regular climbing, and also quite a few falls. Still going strong. You can do a lot worse.
Well said, I've often wondered why someone would buy a rope rated to a few more high-factor falls than another rope, unless they were really going for some bold exposed sparsely protected multipitch routes full of overhangs etc.
I think I'd be retiring well before my ropes i.e. I am rated to about 0 factor 2 falls :-)
Not used the G-strings but someone I climb with used the single rope they do and the sheath slipped alarmingly afrter quite a short time of use.
Well the ropes are actually rated for 1.7 factor fall, not 2.
And the more the falls a rope is rated for, the longer it will last. Short lobs onto the rope will slowly eat away the elasticity. And if a rope is rated for a high number of "normal" falls (ie. the factor 1.7 mentioned earlier, it will also remain elastic much longer.
And yes, even small lobs onto the rope will "kill" the elasticity... Slowly but certainly.
Really? And you have conducted extensive testing to prove that I assume.
It is a very common asumption but has almost no basis in real use. Most ropes get worn out through simple wear and tear. Very few people fall off enough to have a serious imapct on the ropes life. A better indicator of wear for most normal people is the proportion of sheath.
Our club has been using the 10mm Tangas for a couple of years now, and my initial concerns that they would wear quickly have proven to be unfounded. They seem to be decent ropes.
> Really? And you have conducted extensive testing to prove that I assume.
Yes, sort of. See below.
Funnily enough, my climbing club has retired a few lead-ropes since they were not elastic anymore. The sheath was fine as was the core, but lead-falls onto those ropes started to get painful. Not really a good thing for lead-climbing course participants.
And as those ropes were mostly used for lead climbing (practice), quite a few small falls were made on to the rope. Interestingly enough, as some of the ropes were a different brand (and also rated for different number of nominal falls), the ropes with more falls have proven to last a lot longer (and yes, they were bought during the same time and used about the same amount).
So, at least from my practical and tested opinion, the higher the fall number, the longer the rope lasts.
Naturally, if you climb on really rough medium and generally fŚckup building anchors, extending your QD's and whatnot, the sheath is going to wear out faster than you have time to fall on it.
Should be noted, that those that mainly clip bolts actually notice how the elasticity dissappears after numerous falls. And you're adventure-climber very rarely falls, where as it's really common with bolt clippers.
I've got one and use it with a Genesis. Genesis has the edge for handling and wear but not a great deal in it. The Genesis is the best 8.5mm half rope I have had. You can find the standard for around £65-£70
It's not actually how the sheath looks though. Basically the Sheath is simply the cover which protects the core. The core is the strong bit made up of dozens and dozens of tiny tiny fibres. The sheath percentage does give a good general guideline to how long the rope will survive. Higher percentage, longer it will protect the core (even if it doesn't show any signs of wear, the core can be severely weakened - i.e. ropes last about 7-10 years if not used at all, then should be retired), lower the percentage, the lighter and thinner the ropes can be etc etc. There is a helluva lot more to it than that, but you really don't want to know all about it. You'd be sat there for quite some time.
> Funnily enough, my climbing club has retired a few lead-ropes since they were not elastic anymore.
Funnily enough I have seen a more than just a few ropes retired in my four years as a manager of a climbing wall and shop.
You are right that repeated falls will eventually wear out ropes but I'm pretty sure nobody has done any testing to show that a rope rated for more factor 1.77 falls will be more resilient to this. It is an obvious but flawed assumption. As I said, most of the worn out ropes I have seen have gone from abrasion and wear, in which case the fall rating is meaningless.
If you don't fall off much sheath proportion is a better indicator and if you do then frankly impact force is a much more important factor in rope choice.
They are cheap for a reason.
Elsewhere on the site
On Sunday 12th October the Depot Climbing Centre Leeds held its 5th annual Battle of Britain competition. The competition has... Read more
Climbing as a discipline offers plentiful metaphors for tackling life's obstacles - bravery, courage, climbing to... Read more
The B.D.V. — short for Black Diamond Vertical — jacket and pants are Black Diamond’s most versatile climbing... Read more
Aiming at designing and producing the best belay glasses to protect climbers’ necks, Y&Y focuses on every detail to... Read more
Pete Whittaker has flashed the 32 pitch route Freerider 5.12d on El Capitan in Yosemite Valley over three days,... Read more