I'm genuinely surprised by the price. Very little info, does it improve on previous stiff handling of unicore ropes?
My first rope I actually owned myself was a mammut galaxy 10 dry 50m in 1992, apart from this being unicore and 70m, the TIGER seems utterly unremarkable and no better than I bought 30 years ago. What's the deal with this rope??
Why no information, is it a stub article to be expanded later?
Slightly confused by 'Dry Cover' does this mean the rope meets the UIAA test for water absorption to be classified as a water repellant or what most people call a "dry treated rope" or is this a way of sounding like you are getting a "dry treated rope" but actually you aren't and is therefore a bit misleading 🤔
That's fair enough. Some ropes the dry treatment is only in the sheath, others (less commonly as it's expensive) can be sheath and core treated. The UIAA brought out their standard of what dry means in 2014 (must absorb water >=5% of the ropes weight) but that is based on results not method. Many manufacturers offer 3 levels of treatment. For example Mammut call no treatment "classic", sheath only "protect" and sheath + core "dry". I think Beal's descriptions of "dry cover" rather than using opaque marketing terms like "protect" is a very good thing.
Well I have just bought my first "introductory" thin single rope - an 80m 9.5mm Simond one for £104. I am now left wondering what else I would have been introduced to at three times the price per metre.
> TIGER 10mm is an example of multipurpose: in climbing it's the introductory rope for those starting to use thin ropes.
No it's not! 9.5 could be regarded as that, but not 10mm.