UKC

In reply to UKC Gear: re: the pictures. I think that the health and safety section should point out the danger of building climbing walls without a belt to hold up your trousers! If your troos fall down to your knees you could trip and have a nasty fall.

In reply to TobyA:

I learnt the other day where saggy beltless trousers originated.

It' was started by prisoners in the USA, so I read.... where belts are not permitted so many wear their trouser waistband down round their hips, showing off their boxers and continue to do so when released as a sign that they have done time. Saying, 'don't mess with me, I've done time and I'm hard.'

It caught on

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

yes....and that is where the "look" should stay ;p

In reply to UKC Gear: Jack, I'm not entirely convinced by the health and safety advantage. I'd need to look into it a bit more but a very quick search turned up a risk phrase45 (May cause cancer) for Urethane. The vapour pressure is not all that high but isn't tiny which should mean full masks and suits just the same as for polyester resins.

Talking about the plastic being nicer is probably a red hering in any case because it is likely to be the initiator (or hardener) that is the real nasty.

Iain

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

i've since heard of a similarly inspired 'trend' to roll one's trouser legs up the better to demonstrate the lack of any concealed weapons and that

In reply to rich:

Also the trouser tucked into sock thing apparently comes from the same place - to stop your stash falling out the bottom of your trousers.

In reply to UKC Gear: One problem with urethane though is that you can just tighten and tighten and tighten until you snap your T-nut. I would rather lose the odd hold to over tightening than have my (T)nuts snapped.

In reply to UKC Gear: The Holdz Christmas Pudding sloper is one of the best holds ever made. Not sure it would work at 50 degrees though, wads only for that.

In reply to The Climbing Works:

So you are saying that urethane is stronger than your t-nuts?

T-nuts in steel rather than the cheap alloy ones don't snap imho, plus t-nuts are only 5p each at the most, even z-nuts that are front mounted are cheaper than new holds

In reply to UKC Gear: sorry to bump an old thread, but couldn't post earlier - I really like Holdz, they are very finger friendly & you have to work them to find the best grip. They are not overly featured, so they're good for setters trying to force sequences. They also clean up well compared to some other makes of 'normal' holds.

Polyurethane holds (so ill, slap etc.) are good & seem to be the way forward among hold manufacturers, but may have more advantage on roped routes where weight is at a premium for the setter. I agree that I would rather break an occasional hold than snap a t-nut (of which i have snapped quite a few now with the polyurethane ones), as it is just way more work exactly when you are usually rushing to finish setting.

Also, a couple of minor things - the polyurethane holds are much warmer to the touch than 'normal' holds, meaning they sweat up a bit easier & have a less pleasing feel to the grip & they also have a bit of flex to them which again just feels slightly odd & definitely disturbing on the smaller crimps.

My 2 cents thrown in anyway.
Cheers
F