This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Hi are there many sport climbs around uk that have in situ beiners I.e (indoor wall style) at the lower off points on the routes ? Just interested as all the ones I have come across tend to be just bolts
Thanks guys
Lee
Thanks guys
Lee
In reply to leewil86:
Don't Fear the Bleater (5c)
Hug the Jug (5a)
Off the top of my head.
Don't Fear the Bleater (5c)
Hug the Jug (5a)
Off the top of my head.
Post edited at 06:58
1
4
In reply to leewil86:
Some routes have clever little logic problem-style lower offs that let you thread the rope without untying, google pigs tail lower off for some examples.
The problem with putting biners in place is that anything with moving parts will jam up pretty quickly if left outdoors.
Some routes have clever little logic problem-style lower offs that let you thread the rope without untying, google pigs tail lower off for some examples.
The problem with putting biners in place is that anything with moving parts will jam up pretty quickly if left outdoors.
3
In reply to Dandan:
I came across some of those "pigs tails" in Sicily but I'm not a fan. I really struggled to get the ropes in correctly and I'm not comfortable with having only single points of attachment. The "rams horn" ones were much better but still single points.
Al
I came across some of those "pigs tails" in Sicily but I'm not a fan. I really struggled to get the ropes in correctly and I'm not comfortable with having only single points of attachment. The "rams horn" ones were much better but still single points.
Al
1
In reply to GridNorth:
They are like that to match the single rope you clip in with, the single harness you are wearing and the single belayer below!
Feel free to send your donation to me so I can equip the routes to your specifications
They are like that to match the single rope you clip in with, the single harness you are wearing and the single belayer below!
Feel free to send your donation to me so I can equip the routes to your specifications
9
1
In reply to leewil86:
Tirpentwys
has double clip carabiners at the top, nice to avoid re-threading but they aren't that easy to clip so it's best to quickdraw the top ring first.
Tirpentwys
has double clip carabiners at the top, nice to avoid re-threading but they aren't that easy to clip so it's best to quickdraw the top ring first.
Post edited at 19:02
1
In reply to jimtitt:
I have in the past seen people sling a large oak at the top of a climb, then go in search of a dodgy wire to 'back it up'!
> They are like that to match the single rope you clip in with, the single harness you are wearing and the single belayer below!
> Feel free to send your donation to me so I can equip the routes to your specifications
I have in the past seen people sling a large oak at the top of a climb, then go in search of a dodgy wire to 'back it up'!
6
In reply to jimtitt:
Point taken but I still dislike them I'm happy to donate to bolt funds and frequently do. Where is yours?
Al
Point taken but I still dislike them I'm happy to donate to bolt funds and frequently do. Where is yours?
Al
2
In reply to john arran:
The difference being that you can see and judge the tree. You cannot judge the quality of the hole that has been drilled or the glue or the workmanship. All the other components, rope, krabs, harness etc. and I assume the pigs tail itself have been tested and certified but the quality of the workmanship has not. Please don't take that as a criticism Jim, I'm sure you are thorough, in fact I know you and your brother are, but we are talking about the general not the specific.
Al
The difference being that you can see and judge the tree. You cannot judge the quality of the hole that has been drilled or the glue or the workmanship. All the other components, rope, krabs, harness etc. and I assume the pigs tail itself have been tested and certified but the quality of the workmanship has not. Please don't take that as a criticism Jim, I'm sure you are thorough, in fact I know you and your brother are, but we are talking about the general not the specific.
Al
Post edited at 22:10
7
In reply to GridNorth:
But you trusted all the bolts below to stop you in a fall so what´s suddenly so worrying about the one which only has to take the weight of lowering. You can test it, inspect it and back it up if you want.
As to workmanship it´s quite likely that the installer was better educated, had more skills and had a greater awareness of their responsibilities than the average Indonesian wage-slave that makes most of your climbing gear
But you trusted all the bolts below to stop you in a fall so what´s suddenly so worrying about the one which only has to take the weight of lowering. You can test it, inspect it and back it up if you want.
As to workmanship it´s quite likely that the installer was better educated, had more skills and had a greater awareness of their responsibilities than the average Indonesian wage-slave that makes most of your climbing gear
11
3
In reply to jimtitt:
Key word there being ALL, it's unlikely they would all fail. The fact still remains, the gear is tested and certified, the quality of the drilling is not. Being better educated is no guarantee that the work has been carried out safely. I'm not one of those climbers who wants backups or 3 anchor points on every belay, if there is a sound anchor I am happy to use it on it's own as a single point. The thing with bolts is that you are putting your trust in someone else and I have seen some dreadful bolting in the UK. I am sure that when placed correctly they are fine, it's just that I am used to seeing 2 attachment points so they came as a bit of a culture shock.
Key word there being ALL, it's unlikely they would all fail. The fact still remains, the gear is tested and certified, the quality of the drilling is not. Being better educated is no guarantee that the work has been carried out safely. I'm not one of those climbers who wants backups or 3 anchor points on every belay, if there is a sound anchor I am happy to use it on it's own as a single point. The thing with bolts is that you are putting your trust in someone else and I have seen some dreadful bolting in the UK. I am sure that when placed correctly they are fine, it's just that I am used to seeing 2 attachment points so they came as a bit of a culture shock.
7
1
In reply to john arran:
I've never heard of a big oak tree failing Are you sure the wire was for backup, sometimes if the angle between the tree and the belay means the belayer might swing out after a climber fall then placing a wire as well might be a good idea.
I have heard of the odd bolt failing, it's quite possible and hence why you never lower off a single bolt if you can avoid it.
I've never heard of a big oak tree failing Are you sure the wire was for backup, sometimes if the angle between the tree and the belay means the belayer might swing out after a climber fall then placing a wire as well might be a good idea.
I have heard of the odd bolt failing, it's quite possible and hence why you never lower off a single bolt if you can avoid it.
1
In reply to jimtitt:
Twin bolt lower-offs are very common; standard procedure on most of the sport crags I climb at. Just to be clear: are you suggesting that one of those bolts is redundant, and route equippers might as well install just the one, saving time and money?
Twin bolt lower-offs are very common; standard procedure on most of the sport crags I climb at. Just to be clear: are you suggesting that one of those bolts is redundant, and route equippers might as well install just the one, saving time and money?
3
1
In reply to GridNorth:
I am with you all the way.
In RAMS at work the risk of a danger is multiplied by the consequences and the likely hood.
The variables in a lower off are as you say quality of the drilling/driller but also the the rock. This is a natural material and so inconsistent. It cannot be guaranteed 100% and the consequences of a single lower off failure usually fatal.
Safety in numbers is quite a simple concept.
I am with you all the way.
In RAMS at work the risk of a danger is multiplied by the consequences and the likely hood.
The variables in a lower off are as you say quality of the drilling/driller but also the the rock. This is a natural material and so inconsistent. It cannot be guaranteed 100% and the consequences of a single lower off failure usually fatal.
Safety in numbers is quite a simple concept.
5
In reply to Rick Graham:
"The likely hood" sounds like the name of a villain from Thunderbirds or Batman?!
> In RAMS at work the risk of a danger is multiplied by the consequences and the likely hood.
"The likely hood" sounds like the name of a villain from Thunderbirds or Batman?!
3
In reply to bpmclimb:
Single-bolt lower-offs are standard where I climb, not sure where I could find a route with two in the Frankenjura where the bolting is done by the DAV and IG Klettern. What installers install is their affair, the only place two-bolt belays are recommended by the UIAA is on multi-pitch routes.
However the discussion has wandered from Grid North´ s "single point" to single bolts. The belays in Sicily have two bolts and a chain joining the ramshorns to both. The pigtail ones have an additional bolt beside for the climber to use as they think fit. As the pigtail itself is 120mm deep 12mm dia stainless bar it is unlikely they will fail but the climber has every opportunity to test it´´ s security before commiting to a single point, alternatively they may utilise the second bolt to provide the level of safety they desire at their own expense.
The only belay-related accident in Sicily was caused by rock failure involving BOTH bolts and we know from elsewhere this can also occur.
Grid North´´ doesn´ t trust single bolt lower-offs because of the bolting he has seen in the UK;- " The thing with bolts is that you are putting your trust in someone else and I have seen some dreadful bolting in the UK. I am sure that when placed correctly they are fine, it's just that I am used to seeing 2 attachment points so they came as a bit of a culture shock."
It´s hard to see why the rest of the world should adjust it´´´ s practices to make up for the shortcomings of others.
> Twin bolt lower-offs are very common; standard procedure on most of the sport crags I climb at. Just to be clear: are you suggesting that one of those bolts is redundant, and route equippers might as well install just the one, saving time and money?
Single-bolt lower-offs are standard where I climb, not sure where I could find a route with two in the Frankenjura where the bolting is done by the DAV and IG Klettern. What installers install is their affair, the only place two-bolt belays are recommended by the UIAA is on multi-pitch routes.
However the discussion has wandered from Grid North´ s "single point" to single bolts. The belays in Sicily have two bolts and a chain joining the ramshorns to both. The pigtail ones have an additional bolt beside for the climber to use as they think fit. As the pigtail itself is 120mm deep 12mm dia stainless bar it is unlikely they will fail but the climber has every opportunity to test it´´ s security before commiting to a single point, alternatively they may utilise the second bolt to provide the level of safety they desire at their own expense.
The only belay-related accident in Sicily was caused by rock failure involving BOTH bolts and we know from elsewhere this can also occur.
Grid North´´ doesn´ t trust single bolt lower-offs because of the bolting he has seen in the UK;- " The thing with bolts is that you are putting your trust in someone else and I have seen some dreadful bolting in the UK. I am sure that when placed correctly they are fine, it's just that I am used to seeing 2 attachment points so they came as a bit of a culture shock."
It´s hard to see why the rest of the world should adjust it´´´ s practices to make up for the shortcomings of others.
3
4
In reply to jimtitt:
I think I said I was uncomfortable with them, partly because I am not used to seeing single points used for situations where everything is committed to that point, which is not quite the same as saying I don't trust them. You use the term the rest of the world, I've climbed across most parts of the world but the number of times I have encountered this type of lower off is minimal, I might even go so far as to say just Sicily but I seem to recall finding one or two elsewhere. Never been to Frankenjura but I think if you counted all the sports routes in the world the number with single anchors would be tiny. The norm, at least in my experience, is two so it is hardly surprising that a single one causes some of us pause for thought.
I think I said I was uncomfortable with them, partly because I am not used to seeing single points used for situations where everything is committed to that point, which is not quite the same as saying I don't trust them. You use the term the rest of the world, I've climbed across most parts of the world but the number of times I have encountered this type of lower off is minimal, I might even go so far as to say just Sicily but I seem to recall finding one or two elsewhere. Never been to Frankenjura but I think if you counted all the sports routes in the world the number with single anchors would be tiny. The norm, at least in my experience, is two so it is hardly surprising that a single one causes some of us pause for thought.
2
In reply to jimtitt:
Even well placed bolts have been known to fail, rock is a natural material and sometimes moves, cracks etc. Two bolts is always better than one. I agree one set of chains to join the two bolts is fine, you can inspect these easily but you can't inspect the inside of a bolt.
Even well placed bolts have been known to fail, rock is a natural material and sometimes moves, cracks etc. Two bolts is always better than one. I agree one set of chains to join the two bolts is fine, you can inspect these easily but you can't inspect the inside of a bolt.
2
1
In reply to springfall2008:
Jim makes some valid points and if the single placement, including the drilling, the rock and the gluing were all tested/ certified as rigorously as the ropes and the krabs I would have more confidence added to this is of course is the fact that bolts, or perhaps more accurately, the rock/workmanship fail but historically ropes, krabs etc. in most circumstances do not. I suppose the weakest link in all of this will always be the belayer but I can't see what you can do about that other than ensuring that you get a competent one. Jim's point about a single anchor being the same as all the other single elements does not IMO really hold water when weighed against the above and to be honest felt like a bit of a sarcastic put down. I wasn't after all criticising the engineering but rather the psychological effect on people like me unused to seeing this. Keep up the good work Jim, we do respect and appreciate it.
Jim makes some valid points and if the single placement, including the drilling, the rock and the gluing were all tested/ certified as rigorously as the ropes and the krabs I would have more confidence added to this is of course is the fact that bolts, or perhaps more accurately, the rock/workmanship fail but historically ropes, krabs etc. in most circumstances do not. I suppose the weakest link in all of this will always be the belayer but I can't see what you can do about that other than ensuring that you get a competent one. Jim's point about a single anchor being the same as all the other single elements does not IMO really hold water when weighed against the above and to be honest felt like a bit of a sarcastic put down. I wasn't after all criticising the engineering but rather the psychological effect on people like me unused to seeing this. Keep up the good work Jim, we do respect and appreciate it.
4
In reply to Rick Graham:
I must admit, so am I. Call me paranoid, but I was always taught built in redundancy keeps you safer - I'm always very wary of being lowered off a single bolt.
For example if you're being lowered off and stripping a 20m route even at 13m up, if your top, single bolt suddenly fails (unlikely I know, but it is possible) you're decking it.
> I am with you all the way.
I must admit, so am I. Call me paranoid, but I was always taught built in redundancy keeps you safer - I'm always very wary of being lowered off a single bolt.
For example if you're being lowered off and stripping a 20m route even at 13m up, if your top, single bolt suddenly fails (unlikely I know, but it is possible) you're decking it.
2
In reply to GridNorth:
The weakest link is not the lower-off, nor the rope, the karabiner, the belayer, the belay device or your harness. Stand in front of a mirror and you will see it. Ropework (knot) failure and communication failure are the killers, searching for technical solutions is merely failing to face up to reality.
The only fatality I know of involving failure of a lower-off point as such was in the USA were the climber decided to ignore the two brand-new bolts installed by a volounteer at his own expense and used the single old bolt left for "historical reasons" to top-rope the route.
We (my brother and I) always give the climber a second bolt, you can use it to test or inspect the lower-off at your leisure and in safety before commiting OR decide your life is worth the price of a karabiner and add a second link to the safety chain, that is your decision.
Sport climbing outdoors is NOT the same as indoors in the gym and personal responsibility is a pre-requisite, I decide what my life is worth before commiting to a bolt (or bolting a route) and it is for subsequent climbers to do the same.
We know historically that single-bolt belays ARE as safe as two-bolt ones as long as the bolts conform to EN959 and the fact that many countries need to use two bolts due to the poor quality of their bolting is no reason for anyone else to be obliged to follow, there is ALWAYS another bolt to use if your personal experience makes you uncomfortable with the bolts provided.
The mass of routes in the central European areas with single-bolts is huge and we are all comfortable with this, we know to use a draw in the bolt further down and we know to test the bolt before commiting to it. Other countries it works differently for historical reasons. Another problem is the proliferation of climbing walls where due to the unregulated nature of their bolting they feel it desirable to link two bolts to make a lower-off, as the fixings are only tested to 12kN this is perhaps understandable but leads to climbers mistakenly expecting this or even thinking this is a requirement. The European standard makes no differentiation between protection bolts and belay bolts and the UIAA proposals in 2006 in fact reduced the strength requirements for lower-off points to 15kN and installing more than one bolt was never mentioned.
I have never bolted a sport route with less than 2 bolts at the lower-off with the exception of two routes in the Frankenjura where I followed the local ethic rather than impose my own views HOWEVER I will defend at all times the right of an equipper to install what they feel suitable providing they meet the current required standard.
Subsequent ascencionists must make their own decisions whether to use the equipment.
The weakest link is not the lower-off, nor the rope, the karabiner, the belayer, the belay device or your harness. Stand in front of a mirror and you will see it. Ropework (knot) failure and communication failure are the killers, searching for technical solutions is merely failing to face up to reality.
The only fatality I know of involving failure of a lower-off point as such was in the USA were the climber decided to ignore the two brand-new bolts installed by a volounteer at his own expense and used the single old bolt left for "historical reasons" to top-rope the route.
We (my brother and I) always give the climber a second bolt, you can use it to test or inspect the lower-off at your leisure and in safety before commiting OR decide your life is worth the price of a karabiner and add a second link to the safety chain, that is your decision.
Sport climbing outdoors is NOT the same as indoors in the gym and personal responsibility is a pre-requisite, I decide what my life is worth before commiting to a bolt (or bolting a route) and it is for subsequent climbers to do the same.
We know historically that single-bolt belays ARE as safe as two-bolt ones as long as the bolts conform to EN959 and the fact that many countries need to use two bolts due to the poor quality of their bolting is no reason for anyone else to be obliged to follow, there is ALWAYS another bolt to use if your personal experience makes you uncomfortable with the bolts provided.
The mass of routes in the central European areas with single-bolts is huge and we are all comfortable with this, we know to use a draw in the bolt further down and we know to test the bolt before commiting to it. Other countries it works differently for historical reasons. Another problem is the proliferation of climbing walls where due to the unregulated nature of their bolting they feel it desirable to link two bolts to make a lower-off, as the fixings are only tested to 12kN this is perhaps understandable but leads to climbers mistakenly expecting this or even thinking this is a requirement. The European standard makes no differentiation between protection bolts and belay bolts and the UIAA proposals in 2006 in fact reduced the strength requirements for lower-off points to 15kN and installing more than one bolt was never mentioned.
I have never bolted a sport route with less than 2 bolts at the lower-off with the exception of two routes in the Frankenjura where I followed the local ethic rather than impose my own views HOWEVER I will defend at all times the right of an equipper to install what they feel suitable providing they meet the current required standard.
Subsequent ascencionists must make their own decisions whether to use the equipment.
4
1
In reply to jimtitt:
You really seem to be getting a bit defensive Jim and I do not understand why. I thought I had explained myself but obviously not well enough. I was merely pointing out that when I first encountered the single lower off I was a little taken aback and yes, uncomfortable. I do not doubt for a second your engineering qualifications or experience in these matters and I hope that is not an impression that I have given. If I have I apologise, but I do not appreciate patronising lectures. I have no more to contribute to this thread so I will back off , I do not want us to fall out over such a trivial matter.
I would by the way have to take exception to your saying that all the lower offs in Sicily have two points of attachment, if they had this thread would never have developed the way it has.
You really seem to be getting a bit defensive Jim and I do not understand why. I thought I had explained myself but obviously not well enough. I was merely pointing out that when I first encountered the single lower off I was a little taken aback and yes, uncomfortable. I do not doubt for a second your engineering qualifications or experience in these matters and I hope that is not an impression that I have given. If I have I apologise, but I do not appreciate patronising lectures. I have no more to contribute to this thread so I will back off , I do not want us to fall out over such a trivial matter.
I would by the way have to take exception to your saying that all the lower offs in Sicily have two points of attachment, if they had this thread would never have developed the way it has.
Post edited at 19:40
2
In reply to GridNorth:
Well it wasn´´ t a personal attack, sorry if it came over that way but it´´ s awkward to reply to everyone seperately! More a general rant to people who don´t understand how bolting works generally, assume what they are used to is "correct" and can´´ t differentiate between "two bolts are safer" and "I think two bolts are safer but there´´ s no logic in my thinking."
Well it wasn´´ t a personal attack, sorry if it came over that way but it´´ s awkward to reply to everyone seperately! More a general rant to people who don´t understand how bolting works generally, assume what they are used to is "correct" and can´´ t differentiate between "two bolts are safer" and "I think two bolts are safer but there´´ s no logic in my thinking."
1
In reply to jimtitt:
OK I'm glad we are not falling out over this so I will re-enter the debate. Your point about single points is perfectly logical and I totally accept the reasoning but it will take more than logic to overcome several years of ingrained "best practice" and personal experiences. What I don't understand is why you singled me out in such a lecturing, patronising tone. I wasn't being critical of you or your opinion in any way but forums are not good at communicating are they so lets just put this behind us and move on
Al
OK I'm glad we are not falling out over this so I will re-enter the debate. Your point about single points is perfectly logical and I totally accept the reasoning but it will take more than logic to overcome several years of ingrained "best practice" and personal experiences. What I don't understand is why you singled me out in such a lecturing, patronising tone. I wasn't being critical of you or your opinion in any way but forums are not good at communicating are they so lets just put this behind us and move on
Al
1
1
In reply to jimtitt:
15kN sounds OK for a lower off but what about the rock quality?
In the UK bolting often takes place on the crappiest rock left over by the trad brigade.
The loosest blocks/ rock is often at the top of the cliff. Well spaced lower off bolts in pairs or more is quite common and sensible. I have seen examples of a back up bolt 1.5 metres away from the main lower point.
Never heard any complaints on the crag
> The European standard makes no differentiation between protection bolts and belay bolts and the UIAA proposals in 2006 in fact reduced the strength requirements for lower-off points to 15kN and installing more than one bolt was never mentioned.
15kN sounds OK for a lower off but what about the rock quality?
In the UK bolting often takes place on the crappiest rock left over by the trad brigade.
The loosest blocks/ rock is often at the top of the cliff. Well spaced lower off bolts in pairs or more is quite common and sensible. I have seen examples of a back up bolt 1.5 metres away from the main lower point.
Never heard any complaints on the crag
In reply to leewil86:
If you're that worried about it, surely every lower off has a back up bolt. It's the next one down.
If you're that worried about it, surely every lower off has a back up bolt. It's the next one down.
1
1
In reply to Oceanrower:
Always best to lead a sport route first and lower off with the clips in.
Next leader or second up has the hassle
TBH if the lower off looks dodgy, I use a method like the petzl prussick back up.
Always best to lead a sport route first and lower off with the clips in.
Next leader or second up has the hassle
TBH if the lower off looks dodgy, I use a method like the petzl prussick back up.
In reply to jimtitt:
This doesn't seem to add up. You assert that single bolt lower-offs of the type you describe are as safe as twin bolt ones, but then allude to routine precautionary measures which "we" all take when using them, such as using a draw in the next bolt down. Why are these measures necessary, if the single bolt is as safe as the twin?
> We know historically that single-bolt belays ARE as safe as two-bolt ones as long as the bolts conform to EN959 and the fact that many countries need to use two bolts due to the poor quality of their bolting is no reason for anyone else to be obliged to follow, there is ALWAYS another bolt to use if your personal experience makes you uncomfortable with the bolts provided.
> The mass of routes in the central European areas with single-bolts is huge and we are all comfortable with this, we know to use a draw in the bolt further down and we know to test the bolt before commiting to it.
This doesn't seem to add up. You assert that single bolt lower-offs of the type you describe are as safe as twin bolt ones, but then allude to routine precautionary measures which "we" all take when using them, such as using a draw in the next bolt down. Why are these measures necessary, if the single bolt is as safe as the twin?
2
In reply to bpmclimb:
"We" use another draw in the lower bolt for top-roping/seconding the route after it´s stripped mainly because we tend to just use a single draw in the top bolt, this also allows the last person to be protected while they test the top bolt and while they are re-threading.
> This doesn't seem to add up. You assert that single bolt lower-offs of the type you describe are as safe as twin bolt ones, but then allude to routine precautionary measures which "we" all take when using them, such as using a draw in the next bolt down. Why are these measures necessary, if the single bolt is as safe as the twin?
"We" use another draw in the lower bolt for top-roping/seconding the route after it´s stripped mainly because we tend to just use a single draw in the top bolt, this also allows the last person to be protected while they test the top bolt and while they are re-threading.
In reply to leewil86:
How many people in this thread (with the obvious exclusion of Jim) have up close personal experience of placing / removing bolts. If you don't then get in touch with your local bolt fund and get some experience in how they are placed and removed to get some real knowledge on placement and the thought process that goes into what belay / bolt to be use in various different circumstances. Plus I'm sure the bolt fund would appreciate the help.
Even poorly placed bolts are tough to remove without mechanical intervention.
I have no issue using single point swan's or even a single home-made staple as the belay. I did see a group abseil the crag to retrieve gear after they couldn't make the move instead of just lowering off a single bolt half way as they didn't trust to lower off one bolt. Everyone is different.
How many people in this thread (with the obvious exclusion of Jim) have up close personal experience of placing / removing bolts. If you don't then get in touch with your local bolt fund and get some experience in how they are placed and removed to get some real knowledge on placement and the thought process that goes into what belay / bolt to be use in various different circumstances. Plus I'm sure the bolt fund would appreciate the help.
Even poorly placed bolts are tough to remove without mechanical intervention.
I have no issue using single point swan's or even a single home-made staple as the belay. I did see a group abseil the crag to retrieve gear after they couldn't make the move instead of just lowering off a single bolt half way as they didn't trust to lower off one bolt. Everyone is different.
1
In reply to sam.sam.sam.ferguson:
Very few, I should imagine. This is a forum catering specifically for beginners, on a UK climbing website, and more experienced climbers need to be careful what they say. Until such time (if ever) that newcomers to the sport get around to in-depth investigations of bolting technique, international variations in protocol, etc., the best basic advice they can be given is to go for redundancy; i.e. a minimum of two for any top/belay anchors, and to treat single anchors with great suspicion.
> How many people in this thread (with the obvious exclusion of Jim) have up close personal experience of placing / removing bolts.
Very few, I should imagine. This is a forum catering specifically for beginners, on a UK climbing website, and more experienced climbers need to be careful what they say. Until such time (if ever) that newcomers to the sport get around to in-depth investigations of bolting technique, international variations in protocol, etc., the best basic advice they can be given is to go for redundancy; i.e. a minimum of two for any top/belay anchors, and to treat single anchors with great suspicion.
2
In reply to sam.sam.sam.ferguson:
Have to disagree with that. I've removed a few just by pulling straight out with my hand.
Al
> Even poorly placed bolts are tough to remove without mechanical intervention.
Have to disagree with that. I've removed a few just by pulling straight out with my hand.
Al
2
In reply to bpmclimb:
Apologies - didn't read what area this was in, didn't know it was in the starting out forum. Just read through a massive thread of people arguing about bolts.
Even so - if you don't know very much about bolts it couldn't hurt to contact someone local who does to learn what good and bad looks like.
Apologies - didn't read what area this was in, didn't know it was in the starting out forum. Just read through a massive thread of people arguing about bolts.
Even so - if you don't know very much about bolts it couldn't hurt to contact someone local who does to learn what good and bad looks like.
In reply to GridNorth:
Same... I have removed one by hand a few weeks ago at a very popular crag.
Out of the billion(ish) i've clipped over the past few years the percentage of ones I have or could have removed by hand is extremely low.
A total removal by hand without a crowbar or anything else is a mega rare find which excludes bolts that are obviously poor and corroded. You only get the points if its a decent looking one!
Same... I have removed one by hand a few weeks ago at a very popular crag.
Out of the billion(ish) i've clipped over the past few years the percentage of ones I have or could have removed by hand is extremely low.
A total removal by hand without a crowbar or anything else is a mega rare find which excludes bolts that are obviously poor and corroded. You only get the points if its a decent looking one!
In reply to sam.sam.sam.ferguson:
Redundancy.
Rely on one at a time and you only need one bad bolt, placement or rock section and you will be dead!
You will find that one eventually, no chance to look for another, sorry.
Redundancy.
Rely on one at a time and you only need one bad bolt, placement or rock section and you will be dead!
You will find that one eventually, no chance to look for another, sorry.
Post edited at 18:09
2
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...