UKC

Hello all,

I will preface this by saying I am obviously going to learn how to use it before taking it out in the real world, but I am looking for recs for a first ice axe.

I want one with an adze, and a slight bend (alpine?) in the shaft - the type that are between a straight hillwalking shaft and a more curved climbing shaft. Examples like Grivel Airtech evo or DMM Spire Tech. Ideally T1/2 rated? Will be using it for "simple" hillwalking to start but want some future-proofing for when I get closer to climbing/graded

What would you recommend? Features I should look out for/avoid? I'm keen to go to a shop to work out what length I need (I'm 6'2") and buy once. Any shops in the lakes that have a good range of axes? I'm in Leeds and Go Outdoors don't have much lying around that I'm interested in.

Ideally I'm not spending more than £100! Closer to £70 would be good.

Thanks in advance!

Ed

In reply to Echo_Delta21:

I have the DMM Spire tech as a walking ace and it’s great. I am also 6’2 and the 55cm length works for me, but you should really go and see which feels best.

I don’t think the T1 rating would be a big concern of mine given what you’re going to be using it for. It’s nice to have but wouldn’t be a dealbreaker for me.

In reply to slawrence1001:

Excellent, thank you! Not too expensive either.

Did you buy a leash, lanyard or handrest for it? The thought of a cold wet/slippery shaft (lol) with no grip makes me think I'll lose it off the top !

In reply to Echo_Delta21:

I never personally found that I’d ever be using it in a situation where a leash or lanyard was entirely necessary, but I’d recommend getting a lanyard just in case you drop it.

As long as you’re wearing gloves the grip is normally fine but if it worries you I’d wrap the shaft in self amalgamating tape.

At the end of the day you will find out what works best for you so take necessary precautions but try a few different things out and take some different viewpoints.

In reply to Echo_Delta21:

In less you are really concerned about saving a minimal amount of weight I'd get one with a grip if I was you. Grivel air tech evo is a good option but it perhaps a little heavy overall. Self amagulmating tape i is a poor second, it damages easily and sticks to any other such tape it touches.

In reply to Echo_Delta21:

You can probably pick up an air tech on ebay second hand. Overall personally I'd want a T / type 2 rated shaft if you intend to belay off it, the pick is less important. You'll struggle to get an axe with a T rated shaft and grip thats lighter than the air tech IMO.

There is one on ebay now for 90 thats hardly been used.

In reply to Echo_Delta21:

Don't over think it, it is your first ice axe, as long as you don't buy it ridiculously long, it will be alright. Even if you end up climbing with it, a wrist loop isn't some big problem. We all used them on general mountaineering axes until relatively recently. 

If money is an issue - something like this https://www.ukclimbing.com/gear/snow+ice/ice_axes/climbing_technology_nupts... (scroll down past the crampons) is absolutely fine, and Alpinetrek have them on sale for under 60 quid currently.

If you reckon you are definitely going to start climbing stuff enough to use a second tool, one of these: https://bananafingers.co.uk/blue-ice-bluebird?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCA... is the best all round mountaineering tool I've used in 30 years. Absolutely fine (and quite light) for walking or ski touring, but can be swung and used with second tool to climb II/III sort of ground with no big problem. They are just so nicely designed and made.

In reply to TobyA:  Agree completely about the Blue Ice Bluebird Best all round tool Ive used in 40 years.   Brilliant axe and to me feels superior to my old Grivel Evo Air Tech in every way. However everyone has different requirements so if possible try to go to a shop to get an idea for which feels best for you

In reply to leon 1:

My first 'lightweight' general mountaineering axe was the first gen of the Grivel Air Tech Racing - I got it in 2001 I think. It's a lovely tool with nice forged head. With a leash on and a second tool I've happily climbed grade II routes with it, so again a straight shafted axes that needs a wrist loop won't be a bad axe, but, yep, modern ones like a Bluebird are just lovely pieces of engineering!

In reply to Echo_Delta21:

FWIW I have a 55cm Bluebird (original version) in good condition that I'm currently looking to sell on...

It's a bit more substantial feeling than the Spire Tech which I've replaced it with. The Spire is lovely and light for classic ridge days and "just in case" type usage though I wouldn't take it on anything like actual ice climbing. I've got technical tools for that! The Bluebird falls further into the middle ground as a modern lighter version of a classic mountaineering axe.

Regarding plain anodised shafts I find even a couple of wraps of black gaffer type are surprisingly effective for grip. On steeper ground the answer is to fit a small rest at the bottom of the shaft - DMM have apparently started making one specifically for the Spire, though the shaft profile and diameter seem to be the same on most of these tools and I use an old Petzl trigrest that came off a set of Quarks.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Unless I'm reading the UIAA 152 spec incorrectly (entirely possible) then there is no difference in strength rating for the shaft between type B and T when using as a snow anchor.

https://www.theuiaa.org/documents/safety-standards/Pictorial_UIAA152%20Ice%...

In reply to smbnji:

There is and the clause 2.1 from the document you linked is the clue, that doc is ammendments and does not list all the tests. This link may help https://www.outdoorgearlab.com/topics/snow-sports/best-ice-axe "Without going into too much detail (there is lots of available from the UIAA), we will share some of the easiest to understand tests and see their real-world intentions. The first test is an ice axe weighted from mid-shaft being pulled perpendicularly as if it placed as a deadman. A CEN-B rated axe has to withstand 2.5KN, and a CEN-T has to endure 3.5KN. The strength of the head shaft interface when being pulled perpendicularly, as if it was a vertically placed anchor or standing ice axe belay, a CEN-B has to withstand 2.5KN, and a CEN-T has to withstand 4KN. There are also several tests regarding the strength of the pick."

If that is important is up to you, yes very often snow probably won't be strong enough to hold 2.5 kn ice axe belay anyway, that's surely not always the case though.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

My understanding is that the B/T classifications and tests have been superseded by Type 1/2, and that the shaft strength tests for type 1 and 2 are the same. In other words, a type 1 axe and a type 2 axe both meet the same standard for e.g. t slot belay.

Type 2 tests are more about the strength of the head and its attachment to the shaft - torqueing, stein pulls etc.

My source for this is the Needle sports site, if you look under Buyers Guide when looking at an ice axe, e.g. https://www.needlesports.com/Catalogue/Climbing/Winter-Alpine-Expedition/Ic...

(Screenshot attached)

I don’t exactly know about how this extends to the ratings for pick strength as it seems the B/T ratings may still apply to picks specifically.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Apologies, I had actually linked the incorrect pdf, which I've now updated to:

https://www.theuiaa.org/documents/safety-standards/Pictorial_UIAA152%20Ice%...

This document shows the minimum shaft strength test to be the same for both ratings (2.5 kN).

In reply to mcawle:

Interesting that sounds like a desent change, perhaps most the old axes already passed the T rating for the burried axe test anyway which is what really matters here in most scenarios for people buying a mountaineering / walking axe where a rope may be used. If the ground is suffiently tricky the rock or turf maybe used for a belay then the assumption is that a light rack would cover that I guess.

In reply to smbnji:

I don't think I'm going to be able to decipher the issues with that linkl, but its not the original document and does not outline all the tests and is a simplified pictorial presentation. I believe it probably has an error, also the modern terminology is type 1 and type 2.

If you follow this link you'll find the same diagram with the correct now outdated test strengths https://www.barrabes.com/en-gb/blog/tips/2-182/how-to-choose-an-ice

Regarding old B and T ratings, I found this on Association of Mountaineering Instructors FB page (posted by them)

"EN 13089:2015 and UIAA 152

Tools that receive a 'T' rating have to pass 4 physical tests:
1) 0.9 kn pull at 90° to the shaft of the tool,
2) 3.5 kn pull at 90° on the center of the shaft,
3) 4 kn pull at 90° on the head of the tool
4) A 182 N Pick Deflection Test. (Max deflection =70mm)

Tools that receive a 'B' rating have to pass 4 physical tests:
1) 0.6 kn pull at 90° to the shaft of the tool,
2) 2.5 kn pull at 90° on the center of the shaft,
3) 2.5 kn pull at 90° on the head of the tool
4) A 127 N Pick Deflection Test. (Max deflection = 70mm)"

I'm pretty sure those figures for the centre pull test are correct for the old B and T ratings.

Now we have type 1 and 2, I don't think the centre pull stength required of type 2 (old T) rated axe shafts will have been downgraded. Firstly thats illogical and secondly the needlesports page says that now type 1 axes have to meet the requirments of the centre pull of the shaft of an old T rated axe (3.5 kn up from 2.5 kn)

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Ah yes, I think we're saying the same thing now.

My first reply was to your comment

Where I said

Which I think we're agreed on? (Although they're now type 1 and 2).

In reply to smbnji:

I guess although I think you need to be clear when you mean type 1 and 2 and when you mean B and T ratrings as B tests are not the same as Type 1 and the T not the same as Type 2. 

In summary for B rated axes I believe the centre pull test was different to T being 2.5 and 3.5 kn respectively.

Now we have type 1 and 2 I don't think the pictorial has yet been published and it costs money to access the standard, but I think the new centre pull test will be the same for both, most likely inline with the old T test (~3.5 kn not 2.5 kn) 

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Well, I was only taking the same definitions as used on the spec from the spec website. It's still not entirely clear to me whether:

• UIAA 152 still refers only to B and T rather than 1 and 2 (as that is what is implied in the document)
• Whether UIAA 152 shaft ratings for a 90° downward force are both 2.5kN or not
• Whether UIAA 152 shaft ratings differ from EN 13089

Though unless anyone has access to both standards, I don't see how they can get answered definitively.

In reply to smbnji:

That said, I've just found the pictorial representation for EN13089 from the edelrid website which shows Type 1 and Type 2 having the same shaft test also at 2.5 kN

https://avs.edelrid.com/images/attribut/EN_13089.pdf

In reply to CurlyStevo:

https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/588bbe2215d5db5e23af5390/1486...

In reply to smbnji:

I believe the original doc you linked is now outdated, and was written prior to the replacement of B / T by type 1 and 2 it looks to have been written around 2020

Who knows when the elderid one was written it doesn't list any of the later ammendments, perhaps there was a time when type 1 and 2 was used in the docs as well as T or perhaps its current and Needlesports have it wrong. I guess we need someone who has actually read the current version  EN13089 with all the latest ammendments to clear it up. Until then I guess the needlesports info seems to be the most likely state of affairs to me, but thats just guessing

In reply to duchessofmalfi:

Yup, that looks like the older standards (EN13089-1999 and UIAA152-2008) so it seems since then, "they" made the decision to:

• EN13089 - introduce Type 1 and Type 2 and rate the shafts the same at 2.5 kN
• UIAA152 stick with the names B and T and rate the shafts the same at 2.5 kN

Seems an odd decision on the UIAA spec.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Yup agreed! 

Also, sorry to OP for massively highjacking the post...

In reply to Echo_Delta21:

Like TobyA I wouldn’t over think things too much!

I wouldn’t worry too much about straight or bent shafts. It makes little to no odds in my experience. 

At 6’2 you’ll want a longish axe. Around 60cm. Shorter axes are great for strapping to a bag whilst climbing/ski touring, but annoyingly short for actually using, if you’re tall. 

I would only buy an axe with a rubber grip, as it makes cutting steps and any climbing much more secure feeling. Metal shafts are cold and slippery and self amalgamating tape doesn’t last 5 mins in my experience. This sadly rules out the excellent DMM Spire Tech. (To DMM please make them with rubber handles).

I have a Grivel Nepal SA, which whilst not the sexiest looking axe in the world, does the job and is very good value. 

https://grivel.com/products/nepal-s-a-nepal-s-a-plus

In reply to smbnji:

This is correct. I have no idea as to why CEN and the UIAA have diverged from standard nomenclature nor why the shaft rating was normalised to 2.5kN for both, it was before my time. (Though Type 2 is till denoted by a T on the axe in both CEN and UIAA Standards)

In reply to Tom Ripley Mountain Guide:

Does this include if you are using it with a wrist loop? I can't remember last time I cut a step, but for climbing, I've found that for an axe with a wrist loop, and when you have half decent gloves, you don't need a rubber grip.

With the leashless Blue Ice Bluebird that has no rubber grip (and which I pair when needed with a Petzl Gully hammer - also no rubber grip) it doesn't matter because it (and the Gully) have the sliding handrest-thingy which make them easy to hang on to as well.

In reply to TobyA:

I'm not old enough for wrist loops Toby!

I cut steps on pretty regular basis.

Regardless of what gloves you're wearing a rubber grip will feel much more secure. Metal shaft and Dachsteins don't mix!

In reply to Tom Ripley Mountain Guide:

So you never use a classic "walking " axe with a wrist loop? In which case, if it doesn't have a sliding (or fixed) hand rest hook thingy at the base, I see why you want a rubber grip. At least they are mainly low profile now, not a layer of rubber stuck over the shaft like older designs. 

Do you actually have dachsteins? First used an ice axe in 1991, never owned Dachsteins! :⁠-⁠)

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Thanks, I'm definitely interested in second hand

In reply to leon 1:

Interesting! You don't miss the grip then

In reply to smbnji:

Hahaha don't worry, interesting reading!

In reply to Tom Ripley Mountain Guide:

That's on my list for sure, and fwiw I don't think it looks bad!

In reply to Echo_Delta21:

Anything to look out for with second hand axes? From my reading it seems something in the 55-60cm range is going to be about right... Hoping to make it to Keswick on Saturday and into Needlesports (even if just for sizing)

In reply to Echo_Delta21:

Popped into Needle sports as promised today and had a great discussion with a chap behind the counter - nothing beats pro knowledge

He showed me a few axes they had in stock and recommended I got something around 60cm, any longer and not useful when plunging on steep terrain (unless very deep snow - not UK snow)

He noted that only black diamond have shaped the axe to better accommodate the fingers with a cutout area (pictured). He said that personally he noticed a good improvement in comfort, especially with bulkier gloves with this cutout and that black diamond were the only brand he could remember that have done this. Anyone else have any cents to add on this?

We chatted rests vs. leashes and he recommended a spring leash (attached high on pack) primarily for the purpose of not losing the axe down the mountain. No use personally for traditional leash, e.g. on Grivel AirTech Evo, unless personal preference for tension when using the pick. Finger rest could go either way.

TL;DR he recommended the BD Raven Pro. They had it on sale for £108 but I'm going to try and find one second hand if possible. Grip tape may be advisable due to slippery handle in wet conditions - he admitted function over fashion with this

In reply to Echo_Delta21:

It's a solid choice, the cutout shape is unusual but makes good sense if it feels comfortable, as that's how you'll be holding it 95% of the time walking and easy mountaineering. 

Very similar in capabilities to the Blue Ice bluebird mentioned upthread, there was an interesting post on (I think) the Cold Thistle blog contrasting the two designs as an exemplar of the different philosophies of alpine climbing in Europe versus the USA! (or something...)

I'd agree about the spring tether to a shoulder strap. If you want to save a few quid then just get a length of fat shock cord and a mini crab - it's not supposed to be weight bearing at all.

In reply to elliptic: Allow me http://coldthistle.blogspot.com/2014/02/a-tale-of-two-ice-axes-by-bruno-sch...

Although the Bluebird is the older more unrefined with a  non curved shaft version and the Raven is the basic standard Raven the head shapes are still relevant to current models