This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
So a few months ago I noticed that my largely unused petzl corax (on it's second session out of the bag: one sport, one trad, no falls) had a section cut into the webbing on the waist band, just where the buckle grips the webbing.
A couple of months after first making a complaint to BananaFingers about my harness (see http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=510946) I finally got a response back from Lyon claiming there was accidental damage where the belt 'may have come into contact with a rough surface' (which was coincidentally *exactly* where the buckle sits).
Now I know how the harness was used and there was nothing could have abraded the strap. But quite apart from being piss-poor customer service, this does beg the question: it's bad enough that they've used a buckle that is sufficiently sharp to cut into their own material, but even if this mysterious 'accidental damage' had occurred, why the hell are Petzl / Lyon selling equipment for rock climbing that cannot stand up to, presumably, rubbing on a bit of rock?
A couple of months after first making a complaint to BananaFingers about my harness (see http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=510946) I finally got a response back from Lyon claiming there was accidental damage where the belt 'may have come into contact with a rough surface' (which was coincidentally *exactly* where the buckle sits).
Now I know how the harness was used and there was nothing could have abraded the strap. But quite apart from being piss-poor customer service, this does beg the question: it's bad enough that they've used a buckle that is sufficiently sharp to cut into their own material, but even if this mysterious 'accidental damage' had occurred, why the hell are Petzl / Lyon selling equipment for rock climbing that cannot stand up to, presumably, rubbing on a bit of rock?
In reply to 8ace:
Sounds like bad finishing on the buckle, can you get a photo of it?
Sounds like bad finishing on the buckle, can you get a photo of it?
In reply to 8ace:
I used a petzl corax for 5 years continously every weekend. Then moved onto using it as my spare harness for new seconds etc, thats for 2 years. It still looks brand new.
I agree that customer service looks like its piss poor. I seriously doubt its manufacturer error.
I used a petzl corax for 5 years continously every weekend. Then moved onto using it as my spare harness for new seconds etc, thats for 2 years. It still looks brand new.
I agree that customer service looks like its piss poor. I seriously doubt its manufacturer error.
In reply to 8ace: It's rubbish isn't it. I mean, what do Petzl know about making climbing harnesses, bloody amateurs.
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
Have you got experience of Quality Control? While Petzl make a vast number of perfectly good harnesses any manufacturing process will have a failure rate. If there is abrasion under the buckle then it is quite possibly caused by the buckle having a sharp edge on it that wasn't smoothed off properly (I think they are normally tumbled in a drum of abrasives but someone with more metal finishing experience than me can probably confirm that).
It is a fact of life that occasionally someone will make a mistake or a series of random flukes will mean that the production line that was making TVs/ pharmaceuticals/ diggers/ etc will make a small defect. How you deal with that defect when it is picked up downstream is the important but.
Have you got experience of Quality Control? While Petzl make a vast number of perfectly good harnesses any manufacturing process will have a failure rate. If there is abrasion under the buckle then it is quite possibly caused by the buckle having a sharp edge on it that wasn't smoothed off properly (I think they are normally tumbled in a drum of abrasives but someone with more metal finishing experience than me can probably confirm that).
It is a fact of life that occasionally someone will make a mistake or a series of random flukes will mean that the production line that was making TVs/ pharmaceuticals/ diggers/ etc will make a small defect. How you deal with that defect when it is picked up downstream is the important but.
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
Apparently less than they used to know. My last Corax is still going strong after five years, this one lasted two days of climbing.
It's not really a major issue with the manufacturing; maybe it was a bad batch of buckles, shit happens. But if a distributor gets a harness back with damage like this I'd expect them to apologise and replace it not blame the customer.
Apparently less than they used to know. My last Corax is still going strong after five years, this one lasted two days of climbing.
It's not really a major issue with the manufacturing; maybe it was a bad batch of buckles, shit happens. But if a distributor gets a harness back with damage like this I'd expect them to apologise and replace it not blame the customer.
In reply to Reach>Talent:
Yeah, the harness is currently with Lyon, but I'm raising a complaint with Petzl directly. I'll post a picture if it passes through my hands again.
Yeah, the harness is currently with Lyon, but I'm raising a complaint with Petzl directly. I'll post a picture if it passes through my hands again.
In reply to Reach>Talent: I do have experience of quality control thanks, I just find it a bit hard to believe that the Returns Department at Lyon Equipment received this harness back and didn't check it carefully before giving thier opinion. If they've totally checked the buckle and found no fault with it whatsover then they've put the damage to the webbing down to a factor which is not the fault of the manufacturer. The OP is not happy with this but to start saying Petzl can't make harnesses or that Lyon are 'piss poor' is ridiculous.
In reply to 8ace:
Did you check, was the buckle sharp? Any rubbing damage is quite likely to be located at the buckle. It's quite possible to ruin a piece of kit in a single use.
Two months to get a response does sound pretty poor though. Is that since they received your first complaint or the harness? Have they been communicating otherwise?
jk
Did you check, was the buckle sharp? Any rubbing damage is quite likely to be located at the buckle. It's quite possible to ruin a piece of kit in a single use.
Two months to get a response does sound pretty poor though. Is that since they received your first complaint or the harness? Have they been communicating otherwise?
jk
In reply to jkarran:
Yeah, I checked, the damage is exactly where the buckle tightens when I put the harness on. There were no burrs on the buckle, though it does have more of an edge than the one on my last harness, and the webbing seems softer (though that's possibly just because it's new).
Yeah, I checked, the damage is exactly where the buckle tightens when I put the harness on. There were no burrs on the buckle, though it does have more of an edge than the one on my last harness, and the webbing seems softer (though that's possibly just because it's new).
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
Yeah, it's in the phrase 'if they've checked the buckle'. But maybe you're party to some more information about how they do their inspections than the photograph-of-a-brief-letter I received. On the other hand maybe you're just mouthing off on the internet.
As I think I've made clear enough for everybody but you, I think it's quite possible it's a one off, the kind of thing a responsible manufacturer will replace because generally they expect their products to last more than one outing. If that doesn't happen then I reckon it's more than fair to describe the customer service as piss-poor. I think it's quite restrained if I'm honest.
Yeah, it's in the phrase 'if they've checked the buckle'. But maybe you're party to some more information about how they do their inspections than the photograph-of-a-brief-letter I received. On the other hand maybe you're just mouthing off on the internet.
As I think I've made clear enough for everybody but you, I think it's quite possible it's a one off, the kind of thing a responsible manufacturer will replace because generally they expect their products to last more than one outing. If that doesn't happen then I reckon it's more than fair to describe the customer service as piss-poor. I think it's quite restrained if I'm honest.
In reply to 8ace: You sound like a wonderful bloke. No one is mouthing off as you put it. All I've done is look at it from a perspective that is different to yours. Lyon have checked your harness and found no manufacturing fault and you're not happy with that. I however would think that Lyon Equipment and Petzl have more experience than 99.9% of people on here when it comes to inspecting climbing harnesses and therefore to me thier opinion would seem valid. Length of use does not necessarrily (Sp) have any bearing on damage to a product.
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
I however would think that Lyon Equipment and Petzl have more experience than 99.9% of people on here when it comes to inspecting climbing harnesses and therefore to me thier opinion would seem valid.
While they may have a lot of experience of inspecting climbing gear that doesn't mean they are using it. I had a very interesting interaction with another outdoor equipment distributor whose employees repeatedly lied to me until I pointed out that their staff didn't know what they were talking about; as soon as I was able to speak to someone who wasn't 'customer facing' I had a replacement sent free of charge. Just because expertise exists in an organisation doesn't mean it is on the front line
Length of use does not necessarrily (Sp) have any bearing on damage to a product.
Actually it does when the manufacturer quotes a lifespan on the product which is based on 'normal use'. 2 uses of a product that the manufacturer suggests should be replaced after a maximum 5 years of normal use is utterly exceptional!
I however would think that Lyon Equipment and Petzl have more experience than 99.9% of people on here when it comes to inspecting climbing harnesses and therefore to me thier opinion would seem valid.
While they may have a lot of experience of inspecting climbing gear that doesn't mean they are using it. I had a very interesting interaction with another outdoor equipment distributor whose employees repeatedly lied to me until I pointed out that their staff didn't know what they were talking about; as soon as I was able to speak to someone who wasn't 'customer facing' I had a replacement sent free of charge. Just because expertise exists in an organisation doesn't mean it is on the front line
Length of use does not necessarrily (Sp) have any bearing on damage to a product.
Actually it does when the manufacturer quotes a lifespan on the product which is based on 'normal use'. 2 uses of a product that the manufacturer suggests should be replaced after a maximum 5 years of normal use is utterly exceptional!
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
It's really good how you packed in both 'ad hominem' and 'appeal to authority' reasoning into half a paragraph there.
Petzl haven't actually seen the harness, of course, but don't let that stop you when you're on a roll.
It's really good how you packed in both 'ad hominem' and 'appeal to authority' reasoning into half a paragraph there.
Petzl haven't actually seen the harness, of course, but don't let that stop you when you're on a roll.
In reply to Reach>Talent: Neither you or me have seen the harness so all we have to go on is the opinion of either the OP or Lyon Equipment. In this case I'd go with Lyon Equipments.
A product can be damaged on its very first use regardless of any suggested lifespan. I've seen a rope go through to its core on its very first use because it 'whipped' across an edge when a fall was taken. It's unusual but it can happen.
Lyon may have got it wrong but the OP was a rant about how terrible Lyon are because they hadn't agreed with his opinion of the fault. I'm sorry that we haven't all called for the head of the MD of Lyon Equipment but you can't slag off a company and just expect everyone to automatically agree and go yes yes yes aren't they terrible.
A product can be damaged on its very first use regardless of any suggested lifespan. I've seen a rope go through to its core on its very first use because it 'whipped' across an edge when a fall was taken. It's unusual but it can happen.
Lyon may have got it wrong but the OP was a rant about how terrible Lyon are because they hadn't agreed with his opinion of the fault. I'm sorry that we haven't all called for the head of the MD of Lyon Equipment but you can't slag off a company and just expect everyone to automatically agree and go yes yes yes aren't they terrible.
In reply to 8ace: 'ad hominem' has nothing to do with it. It could be argued that it was you who first did this by accusing me of 'mouthing off' therefore trying to belittle what I've written intead of instead of acknowledging that there was another opinion on the subject. If you're going to try and get fancy with your English you should be certain you're using things in context. As for 'appeal to authority' then yes Lyon would definately have more authority than you on the subject.
In reply to 8ace:
my old corax harness wore out at the buckle, nothing unusual, and nothing to do with the buckle being sharp, just because it sticks out a bit there and has a solid lump behind it to focus the pressure.
When I bought my new harness (petxl adjama) I made little sleves out of cordura to protect them.
my old corax harness wore out at the buckle, nothing unusual, and nothing to do with the buckle being sharp, just because it sticks out a bit there and has a solid lump behind it to focus the pressure.
When I bought my new harness (petxl adjama) I made little sleves out of cordura to protect them.
In reply to Reach>Talent:
"Length of use does not necessarrily (Sp) have any bearing on damage to a product.
Actually it does when the manufacturer quotes a lifespan on the product which is based on 'normal use'. 2 uses of a product that the manufacturer suggests should be replaced after a maximum 5 years of normal use is utterly exceptional!"
This depends if the product is being used as suggested by the manufacturer? we only have the word of the OP to go on.
"Length of use does not necessarrily (Sp) have any bearing on damage to a product.
Actually it does when the manufacturer quotes a lifespan on the product which is based on 'normal use'. 2 uses of a product that the manufacturer suggests should be replaced after a maximum 5 years of normal use is utterly exceptional!"
This depends if the product is being used as suggested by the manufacturer? we only have the word of the OP to go on.
In reply to gethin_allen:
Fair enough Gethin, it's a possibility. All I can say is that the previous Corax lasted five years of being dragged up and down shitty gritstone chimneys and I still have complete confidence in it. That is of course why I bought the same one again; only this one lasted two outings, no gritstone, no chimneys, and no falls. If the accidental damage they're claiming was too slight for me to notice it at all, then I'd probably expect the harness to stand up to it, not to need retiring.
Fair enough Gethin, it's a possibility. All I can say is that the previous Corax lasted five years of being dragged up and down shitty gritstone chimneys and I still have complete confidence in it. That is of course why I bought the same one again; only this one lasted two outings, no gritstone, no chimneys, and no falls. If the accidental damage they're claiming was too slight for me to notice it at all, then I'd probably expect the harness to stand up to it, not to need retiring.
In reply to 8ace: – Thank's for your feedback we do value our users' opinions and are always striving to improve our level of service. We would be pleased to re-inspect your harness if you want the retailer to return it to us. We will get a member of staff from another department to inspect the harness independent of customer services.
You mentioned “the damage is exactly where the buckle tightens when I put the harness on” which may suggest that the damage occurred whilst you were wearing it. Textiles can be damaged by abrasion regardless of model or brand or age.
Mkean- makes a fair observation that no outdoor company can just employ climbers, but I can assure you that all the staff in our Customer Services team are climbers, and are also qualified to inspect and where appropriate and possible, repair PPE equipment. We also employ many staff who are very experienced Mountain Rescue, Cave Rescue, MIA, MIC, IRATA trainers, etc.
Gethin – the maximum life for Petzl textile and plastic items was increased from 5 to 10 years. http://www.petzl.com/en/page/support-frequently-asked-questions-faq#neuf
You mentioned “the damage is exactly where the buckle tightens when I put the harness on” which may suggest that the damage occurred whilst you were wearing it. Textiles can be damaged by abrasion regardless of model or brand or age.
Mkean- makes a fair observation that no outdoor company can just employ climbers, but I can assure you that all the staff in our Customer Services team are climbers, and are also qualified to inspect and where appropriate and possible, repair PPE equipment. We also employ many staff who are very experienced Mountain Rescue, Cave Rescue, MIA, MIC, IRATA trainers, etc.
Gethin – the maximum life for Petzl textile and plastic items was increased from 5 to 10 years. http://www.petzl.com/en/page/support-frequently-asked-questions-faq#neuf
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
Neither you or me have seen the harness so all we have to go on is the opinion of either the OP or Lyon Equipment.
The difference is I wasn't rude to Lyon Equipment, you were rather rude to the OP. All I did was point out that it is perfectly possible for a manufacturing defect like a sharp buckle to be missed even in an organisation with good Quality Control and that in my expereince not all companies employ their most highly trained staff in customer facing roles.
Neither you or me have seen the harness so all we have to go on is the opinion of either the OP or Lyon Equipment.
The difference is I wasn't rude to Lyon Equipment, you were rather rude to the OP. All I did was point out that it is perfectly possible for a manufacturing defect like a sharp buckle to be missed even in an organisation with good Quality Control and that in my expereince not all companies employ their most highly trained staff in customer facing roles.
In reply to Reach>Talent: Please quote where i was 'rather rude' prior to being told I was 'mouthing off'
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
> (In reply to 8ace) It's rubbish isn't it. I mean, what do Petzl know about making climbing harnesses, bloody amateurs.
there you goIn reply to Vince McNally: So sarcasm is now 'rather rude'. I offer my humblest apologies to all the delicate forum users who may have been hurt and offended by my terrible use of language.
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
Well yeah
> (In reply to Vince McNally) So sarcasm is now 'rather rude'.
Well yeah
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
So sarcasm is now 'rather rude'. I offer my humblest apologies to all the delicate forum users who may have been hurt and offended by my terrible use of language.
It isn't your use of language it is the way you decided to post something sarcastic and unhelpful. Do you just wander up to random people in the street and give them the benefits of your sage advice? I post more than my fair share of sarcastic comments but I don't just wait around to snipe at people who have a problem.
So sarcasm is now 'rather rude'. I offer my humblest apologies to all the delicate forum users who may have been hurt and offended by my terrible use of language.
It isn't your use of language it is the way you decided to post something sarcastic and unhelpful. Do you just wander up to random people in the street and give them the benefits of your sage advice? I post more than my fair share of sarcastic comments but I don't just wait around to snipe at people who have a problem.
In reply to Reach>Talent: In case you hadn't noticed this is an internet forum and not 'the street' I'm sure you're no more likely to enter 'conversations' on the street in the same way you would an internet forum than I am.
I felt that someone ranting about piss poor customer service from one of the most respected outdoor companies around along with questioning whether a company like Petzl knew how to make climbing gear warranted a sarcastic reply.
As for waiting around to 'have a snipe' that is total assumption on your behalf.
As for the piss poor performance of Lyon Equipment they have got straight on here to show the level of customer service they provide so maybe a bit of sarcasm to the OP wasn't as out of order as you're making it out to be.
I felt that someone ranting about piss poor customer service from one of the most respected outdoor companies around along with questioning whether a company like Petzl knew how to make climbing gear warranted a sarcastic reply.
As for waiting around to 'have a snipe' that is total assumption on your behalf.
As for the piss poor performance of Lyon Equipment they have got straight on here to show the level of customer service they provide so maybe a bit of sarcasm to the OP wasn't as out of order as you're making it out to be.
In reply to needvert: "Can you replicate it? Say, do it up a bit tighter."
maybe they did or they are thinking why didnt we think of that.
maybe they did or they are thinking why didnt we think of that.
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
Looks like your the only one ranting here. Ill informed ranting at that.
Looks like your the only one ranting here. Ill informed ranting at that.
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
I had apreciated the differences between the internet and 'the street'; when you are an obnoxious idiot on the street then only a few people see it and it is rapidly forgotten, when you post it on an internet forum it hangs around and is seen by a much larger audience. Maybe something you should think about.
If we look at the OP he first reported his problem at the end of June to the Vendor (BananaFingers), this has since been refered to the Distributor (Lyon) and he has just had a reply. That is pretty slow and if that is Lyons fault then the OP has reasonable grounds to be a bit miffed.
While Lyons response to this forum thread was creditable I do not think that it is proof of their "level of customer service", all it proves is that they are good at managing PR. Lyon do have an excellent reputation for customer service though.
If you'd recieved what you felt was poor customer service from a large organisation and posted something on UKC about it then you quite possibly wouldn't phrase it as the OP did (I wouldn't) but your response here wasn't exactly a shining example of constructive feedback.
I had apreciated the differences between the internet and 'the street'; when you are an obnoxious idiot on the street then only a few people see it and it is rapidly forgotten, when you post it on an internet forum it hangs around and is seen by a much larger audience. Maybe something you should think about.
If we look at the OP he first reported his problem at the end of June to the Vendor (BananaFingers), this has since been refered to the Distributor (Lyon) and he has just had a reply. That is pretty slow and if that is Lyons fault then the OP has reasonable grounds to be a bit miffed.
While Lyons response to this forum thread was creditable I do not think that it is proof of their "level of customer service", all it proves is that they are good at managing PR. Lyon do have an excellent reputation for customer service though.
If you'd recieved what you felt was poor customer service from a large organisation and posted something on UKC about it then you quite possibly wouldn't phrase it as the OP did (I wouldn't) but your response here wasn't exactly a shining example of constructive feedback.
In reply to Reach>Talent: Thanks for the insult. I may have been winding you up abit here but to resort to insults really isn't neccesary.
In reply to itsThere: i should add if they can do destructive testing. but now this thread is off topic and will soon be pulled so we might never know
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
It was a little harsh however I felt that a more measured response had failed to prove my point in the rest of the thread.
It was a little harsh however I felt that a more measured response had failed to prove my point in the rest of the thread.
In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:
http://petebrown.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/someone-is-wrong-on-internet.html
Touche, however when building a fire to burn a heretic it is accepted practice not to burn yourself as well.
http://petebrown.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/someone-is-wrong-on-internet.html
Touche, however when building a fire to burn a heretic it is accepted practice not to burn yourself as well.
In reply to Reach>Talent:
Being pernickity about accurate citations, we should note the above is originally from xkcd; http://xkcd.com/386/ as any good post-grad should know!
Being pernickity about accurate citations, we should note the above is originally from xkcd; http://xkcd.com/386/ as any good post-grad should know!
In reply to TobyA:
Cheers, I'd spotted it was an XKCD but hadn't bothered to actually look for it.
Cheers, I'd spotted it was an XKCD but hadn't bothered to actually look for it.
In reply to Reach>Talent:
You'd think by now that UKC would be set up to link to it automatically once a thread reaches a certain level of intensity.
You'd think by now that UKC would be set up to link to it automatically once a thread reaches a certain level of intensity.
In reply to nufkin:
Maybe some sort of automated filter like SingleTrackWorld turning "1/10" into "I don't have anthing interesting to add"?
Maybe some sort of automated filter like SingleTrackWorld turning "1/10" into "I don't have anthing interesting to add"?
In reply to 8ace:
few people had asked for a photo of the damage, there's one in my photo gallery which will stay there for at least the near future. http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=204081
The photo probably doesn't show it quite as clearly as IRL how the damage matches up with the buckle when it's pulled through, but that's not really in question (by me or Leon). I'll leave people to make up their own minds about the rest.
few people had asked for a photo of the damage, there's one in my photo gallery which will stay there for at least the near future. http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=204081
The photo probably doesn't show it quite as clearly as IRL how the damage matches up with the buckle when it's pulled through, but that's not really in question (by me or Leon). I'll leave people to make up their own minds about the rest.
In reply to 8ace: In that photo it doesn't look very deep - it looks more like a scuff mark where that bit of the harness has been scraped against the rock as you were moving up. I've got scrape/cut on Camalot sling that looks like that - I guess it must have been pulled against/across a crystal in the crack during a fall.
In reply to 8ace: Well, that was a very belligerent OP about not a lot!
In reply to TobyA
"it doesn't look very deep - it looks more like a scuff mark where that bit of the harness has been scraped against the rock as you were moving" up."
Exactly what I thought, the marks don't look clean enough for it to be caused by a sharp edge. I'd continue to use it.
"it doesn't look very deep - it looks more like a scuff mark where that bit of the harness has been scraped against the rock as you were moving" up."
Exactly what I thought, the marks don't look clean enough for it to be caused by a sharp edge. I'd continue to use it.
In reply to 8ace:
Like I said, it's a lot more obvious when you pull it through that the cut lines up with the buckle. Lyon agree with this, but their argument is that I must have done something to weaken the webbing beforehand.
As to hitting a crystal during a fall, that seems highly unlikely; it's been used once, on a flat wall, it's not been in any cracks, and it's not taken any falls.
Sorry if you think it's belligerent, 'rower, though I'm not quite sure why. No, it's not very deep, but the harness still needs to be retired. Next time my harness fails on it's first outing I'll try and make it more spectacular.
Like I said, it's a lot more obvious when you pull it through that the cut lines up with the buckle. Lyon agree with this, but their argument is that I must have done something to weaken the webbing beforehand.
As to hitting a crystal during a fall, that seems highly unlikely; it's been used once, on a flat wall, it's not been in any cracks, and it's not taken any falls.
Sorry if you think it's belligerent, 'rower, though I'm not quite sure why. No, it's not very deep, but the harness still needs to be retired. Next time my harness fails on it's first outing I'll try and make it more spectacular.
In reply to 8ace:
Mate, whether or not this lines up with the buckle, from the picture you've shown, this looks like a minor scuff that needn't have occurred in a fall, and I would say is quite consistent with your having used it twice.
Mate, whether or not this lines up with the buckle, from the picture you've shown, this looks like a minor scuff that needn't have occurred in a fall, and I would say is quite consistent with your having used it twice.
In reply to 8ace:
Is that what Lyon said or your own conclusion? Your picture is very good quality so I think I can see the extent damage pretty well, and I can't say it would occur to me to retire the harness - and I'm pretty conservative about safety of gear compared to some of my mates.
If you scuffed it in an upwards or downwards movement, you are going to get a vertical scratch up/down the waist belt - so of course that is going to line up with the buckle. But that doesn't actually mean it was the buckle that did it. It still seems odd that considering there must be tens of thousands of those buckles on harnesses around the world, that this has happened before to someone elses.
And new gear can get damaged - it's just really bad luck. Like I said, I need to get a Camalot reslung - it was less than a year old when I noticed the cut. My previous cams had been used loads for the best part of the decade and were still fine - so its just bad luck sometimes.
> but the harness still needs to be retired.
Is that what Lyon said or your own conclusion? Your picture is very good quality so I think I can see the extent damage pretty well, and I can't say it would occur to me to retire the harness - and I'm pretty conservative about safety of gear compared to some of my mates.
If you scuffed it in an upwards or downwards movement, you are going to get a vertical scratch up/down the waist belt - so of course that is going to line up with the buckle. But that doesn't actually mean it was the buckle that did it. It still seems odd that considering there must be tens of thousands of those buckles on harnesses around the world, that this has happened before to someone elses.
And new gear can get damaged - it's just really bad luck. Like I said, I need to get a Camalot reslung - it was less than a year old when I noticed the cut. My previous cams had been used loads for the best part of the decade and were still fine - so its just bad luck sometimes.
In reply to 8ace:
I understand how annoying this sort of thing is - I once had to chop the end off a brand new rope after its sheath got shredded the first time I used it. However, your photo doesn't look too serious or too unusual. It looks exactly like friction damage that is easily caused by rubbing against a rough surface, especially when combined with the fact that the silver metal of the buckle is also showing through the anodised layer - that only happens by contact with a rough surface (especially on the first use). I'd get a technical opinion from Lyon on the safety of the harness, and follow their advice.
I understand how annoying this sort of thing is - I once had to chop the end off a brand new rope after its sheath got shredded the first time I used it. However, your photo doesn't look too serious or too unusual. It looks exactly like friction damage that is easily caused by rubbing against a rough surface, especially when combined with the fact that the silver metal of the buckle is also showing through the anodised layer - that only happens by contact with a rough surface (especially on the first use). I'd get a technical opinion from Lyon on the safety of the harness, and follow their advice.
In reply to TobyA:
I think these type of buckles do tend to be more likely to get damage where the buckle threads - partly because there is a lot of tension where the webbing is exposed, allowing contact with the rock to nick it or scuff it.
The old type of thread back through buckle is less supseptable to this type of damage because the threaded back through part of the belt is under less tension and also wouldn't matter as much if it did scuff.
I have similar but worse damage on the leg loop of my DMM renegade with a similar buckle, and that does look like a nick (probably also done from rock pushing against the leg loop material at the buckle).
I think these type of buckles do tend to be more likely to get damage where the buckle threads - partly because there is a lot of tension where the webbing is exposed, allowing contact with the rock to nick it or scuff it.
The old type of thread back through buckle is less supseptable to this type of damage because the threaded back through part of the belt is under less tension and also wouldn't matter as much if it did scuff.
I have similar but worse damage on the leg loop of my DMM renegade with a similar buckle, and that does look like a nick (probably also done from rock pushing against the leg loop material at the buckle).
In reply to Monk:
Good point: there is an obvious scuff mark on the top corner of the buckle itself. It does look like it's been rubbed up against something rough.
As for equipment lifetimes, the user manual for the Corax states: WARNING, in extreme cases, the lifetime of the product can be reduced to one single use through exposure to for example any of the following: chemicals, extreme temperatures, sharp edges, major fall or load, etc. I suspect there is similar if not identical wording in the documentation for most other Petzl gear, and climbing gear from any other reputable manufacturer.
(I don't think I'd be looking to retire the harness based on what's visible in the photo - though I would keep an eye on it to see if was more than just a one-off incident of accidental damage - but ultimately it's the OP's neck and the OP's decision.)
> It looks exactly like friction damage that is easily caused by rubbing against a rough surface, especially when combined with the fact that the silver metal of the buckle is also showing through the anodised layer - that only happens by contact with a rough surface (especially on the first use).
Good point: there is an obvious scuff mark on the top corner of the buckle itself. It does look like it's been rubbed up against something rough.
As for equipment lifetimes, the user manual for the Corax states: WARNING, in extreme cases, the lifetime of the product can be reduced to one single use through exposure to for example any of the following: chemicals, extreme temperatures, sharp edges, major fall or load, etc. I suspect there is similar if not identical wording in the documentation for most other Petzl gear, and climbing gear from any other reputable manufacturer.
(I don't think I'd be looking to retire the harness based on what's visible in the photo - though I would keep an eye on it to see if was more than just a one-off incident of accidental damage - but ultimately it's the OP's neck and the OP's decision.)
In reply to 8ace:
Like Toby said, have Lyon confirmed that the harness needs to be retired?
The fact that the damage lines up with the buckle, and Lyon's agreement with this doesn't seem to tell us an awful lot. Lyon's response (as described by yourself) of weakening the webbing beforehand doesn't seem to help much either.
I'm not clear what the alignment of damage and buckle is supposed to show, I guess one thing would be that it demonstrates that the damage is most likely to have occured when it was being worn? (How Lyon would know how tight you wear it doesn't seem clear).
But even where the buckle is isolated as the cause of the damage, this doesn't demonstrate that the buckle alone caused the damage, rather than external forces on the buckle.
Do you think the buckle is at fault, sufficient to cause the damage on it's own? Or that the webbing is a fault, not being able to take stresses that you would expect it to take? Or some unlucky combine of both?
> (In reply to 8ace)
>
> Like I said, it's a lot more obvious when you pull it through that the cut lines up with the buckle. Lyon agree with this, but their argument is that I must have done something to weaken the webbing beforehand.
>
> Sorry if you think it's belligerent, 'rower, though I'm not quite sure why. No, it's not very deep, but the harness still needs to be retired.
>
> Like I said, it's a lot more obvious when you pull it through that the cut lines up with the buckle. Lyon agree with this, but their argument is that I must have done something to weaken the webbing beforehand.
>
> Sorry if you think it's belligerent, 'rower, though I'm not quite sure why. No, it's not very deep, but the harness still needs to be retired.
Like Toby said, have Lyon confirmed that the harness needs to be retired?
The fact that the damage lines up with the buckle, and Lyon's agreement with this doesn't seem to tell us an awful lot. Lyon's response (as described by yourself) of weakening the webbing beforehand doesn't seem to help much either.
I'm not clear what the alignment of damage and buckle is supposed to show, I guess one thing would be that it demonstrates that the damage is most likely to have occured when it was being worn? (How Lyon would know how tight you wear it doesn't seem clear).
But even where the buckle is isolated as the cause of the damage, this doesn't demonstrate that the buckle alone caused the damage, rather than external forces on the buckle.
Do you think the buckle is at fault, sufficient to cause the damage on it's own? Or that the webbing is a fault, not being able to take stresses that you would expect it to take? Or some unlucky combine of both?
In reply to winhill:
Yeah, Lyon have recommended retirement, and as the buckle backs up at the same place it's only going to get worse. I'm sure I could wear it a few more times but I don't really want to be thinking about it while I climb.
As to whether the buckle / webbing / combination is at fault. As I've said more than a few times, it's not been in a fall, or scraped up a chimney, or much of anything. It's been used on a flat wall for a single day sports climbing. So if there is an incident that's caused the webbing to be damaged, which then weakened it to the point where the buckle could cut into it (i.e. Lyon's hypothesis) then it was so slight that I was completely unaware of it. That's not really 'extreme' conditions in my opinion, but, you know... YMMV.
Yeah, Lyon have recommended retirement, and as the buckle backs up at the same place it's only going to get worse. I'm sure I could wear it a few more times but I don't really want to be thinking about it while I climb.
As to whether the buckle / webbing / combination is at fault. As I've said more than a few times, it's not been in a fall, or scraped up a chimney, or much of anything. It's been used on a flat wall for a single day sports climbing. So if there is an incident that's caused the webbing to be damaged, which then weakened it to the point where the buckle could cut into it (i.e. Lyon's hypothesis) then it was so slight that I was completely unaware of it. That's not really 'extreme' conditions in my opinion, but, you know... YMMV.
In reply to 8ace: Lyon are covering their backs IMO - I'd happily use that harness and have used harnesses much more furred up than that - feel free to post it to me
In reply to 8ace:
"Yeah, Lyon have recommended retirement"
If someone came to you and asked you to put your balls on the line for something worth £45 of someone else's money you'd tell them to retire it.
I'd repeat I'd still use it.
"Yeah, Lyon have recommended retirement"
If someone came to you and asked you to put your balls on the line for something worth £45 of someone else's money you'd tell them to retire it.
I'd repeat I'd still use it.
In reply to 8ace:
That looks like normal abrasion exactly where you'd expect it to occur. Most peoples harnesses look like that after a few uses!
jk
> few people had asked for a photo of the damage, there's one in my photo gallery which will stay there for at least the near future. http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=204081
That looks like normal abrasion exactly where you'd expect it to occur. Most peoples harnesses look like that after a few uses!
jk
In reply to jkarran: Mine looks worse than that, I still use it and think it's got plenty of life left.
In reply to 8ace:
Mmm, I can see the logic, if Lyon maintain that the webbing is the problem then as the damage has taken place so quickly, they would retire it, because they couldn't predict the rate of further damage. A harness three years old that has the same damage might well not retire because it is expected wear n tear. So unexpectedly early damage could be due to chemical or physical (mis) treatment. Or possibly some manufacturing problem with the webbing.
> (In reply to winhill)
>
> Yeah, Lyon have recommended retirement, and as the buckle backs up at the same place it's only going to get worse. I'm sure I could wear it a few more times but I don't really want to be thinking about it while I climb.
>
> As to whether the buckle / webbing / combination is at fault. As I've said more than a few times, it's not been in a fall, or scraped up a chimney, or much of anything. It's been used on a flat wall for a single day sports climbing. So if there is an incident that's caused the webbing to be damaged, which then weakened it to the point where the buckle could cut into it (i.e. Lyon's hypothesis) then it was so slight that I was completely unaware of it. That's not really 'extreme' conditions in my opinion, but, you know... YMMV.
>
> Yeah, Lyon have recommended retirement, and as the buckle backs up at the same place it's only going to get worse. I'm sure I could wear it a few more times but I don't really want to be thinking about it while I climb.
>
> As to whether the buckle / webbing / combination is at fault. As I've said more than a few times, it's not been in a fall, or scraped up a chimney, or much of anything. It's been used on a flat wall for a single day sports climbing. So if there is an incident that's caused the webbing to be damaged, which then weakened it to the point where the buckle could cut into it (i.e. Lyon's hypothesis) then it was so slight that I was completely unaware of it. That's not really 'extreme' conditions in my opinion, but, you know... YMMV.
Mmm, I can see the logic, if Lyon maintain that the webbing is the problem then as the damage has taken place so quickly, they would retire it, because they couldn't predict the rate of further damage. A harness three years old that has the same damage might well not retire because it is expected wear n tear. So unexpectedly early damage could be due to chemical or physical (mis) treatment. Or possibly some manufacturing problem with the webbing.
In reply to winhill:
disagree i think the webbing would abraid at any age if you rubbed it against rough rock.
disagree i think the webbing would abraid at any age if you rubbed it against rough rock.
In reply to CurlyStevo:
Yes, but you're assuming you know the history and the cause of the damage, from Lyon's POV, they can only speculate.
> (In reply to winhill)
> disagree i think the webbing would abraid at any age if you rubbed it against rough rock.
> disagree i think the webbing would abraid at any age if you rubbed it against rough rock.
Yes, but you're assuming you know the history and the cause of the damage, from Lyon's POV, they can only speculate.
In reply to winhill:
as can we
as can we
In reply to 8ace:
I'm with you on this 8ace.
From the photo, looks like an unreasonable amount of wear caused by the buckle from two sessions use.
I've got a six year old WC Syncro that uses ziplock buckles - the webbing in the buckle area looks almost the same as 'unused' webbing round the back/sides (just a bit of 'shine', but no fur). The harness has done sport, trad, wall and even a couple of big walls in Yosemite.
Are other peoples webbing that furry - blimey, what are you lot doing!
I'm with you on this 8ace.
From the photo, looks like an unreasonable amount of wear caused by the buckle from two sessions use.
I've got a six year old WC Syncro that uses ziplock buckles - the webbing in the buckle area looks almost the same as 'unused' webbing round the back/sides (just a bit of 'shine', but no fur). The harness has done sport, trad, wall and even a couple of big walls in Yosemite.
Are other peoples webbing that furry - blimey, what are you lot doing!
In reply to ChrisJD:
I had a synchro too and the webbing on that for some reason is unbelievably hard wearing that said it is a very heavy harness. My DMM harness is very worn on the leg loop webbing around the buckle and was so after suprisingly little use.
I had a synchro too and the webbing on that for some reason is unbelievably hard wearing that said it is a very heavy harness. My DMM harness is very worn on the leg loop webbing around the buckle and was so after suprisingly little use.
In reply to 8ace:
Given your views, why not take up Lyon's offer to reinspect? Would appear you have nothing to loose. If you are not happy with their next decision you could alway try the Sale of Goods Act route though you may have to pay for an independent inspection report to challenge the retailer under the act.
> (In reply to winhill)
> As to whether the buckle / webbing / combination is at fault. As I've said more than a few times, it's not been in a fall, or scraped up a chimney, or much of anything. It's been used on a flat wall for a single day sports climbing.
> As to whether the buckle / webbing / combination is at fault. As I've said more than a few times, it's not been in a fall, or scraped up a chimney, or much of anything. It's been used on a flat wall for a single day sports climbing.
Given your views, why not take up Lyon's offer to reinspect? Would appear you have nothing to loose. If you are not happy with their next decision you could alway try the Sale of Goods Act route though you may have to pay for an independent inspection report to challenge the retailer under the act.
In reply to Climbing Pieman:
I don't live in the UK; it cost me twenty euros to send it back the first time, wasted quite a lot of time, and still left me without a harness for weeks. I'd rather just buy a different harness in future - I guess based on the above a Syncro wouldn't be a bad bet.
I don't live in the UK; it cost me twenty euros to send it back the first time, wasted quite a lot of time, and still left me without a harness for weeks. I'd rather just buy a different harness in future - I guess based on the above a Syncro wouldn't be a bad bet.
In reply to 8ace: Ah sorry did not check your location.
For what it is worth, I have had three petzl harnesses, and none showed what you have had, even after five years use which was the longest I used one of them. I think you have been unlucky for whatever reason. Personally, I would still buy petzl again based on my experience. I have little knowledge and experience of other makes so can't suggest an alternative I'm afraid. Hope you find something to suit.
For what it is worth, I have had three petzl harnesses, and none showed what you have had, even after five years use which was the longest I used one of them. I think you have been unlucky for whatever reason. Personally, I would still buy petzl again based on my experience. I have little knowledge and experience of other makes so can't suggest an alternative I'm afraid. Hope you find something to suit.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...