In reply to brunoschull:
> OK, here goes. Disclaimer: I've been ice climbing for a while, but I'm no expert. I'm just a regular weekend warrior like most.
> Just to get it out of the way, you've probably heard the general ice climbing advice, "Keep your heels down." An ideal ice climbing foot position, which may be an ideal that is rarely reached, might be something between the two foot-angle pictures you posted.
Thanks, I'd been aiming for a flatter foot based on explanations like halfway down this: https://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/skills/steep_ice_climbing_technique-431..., but this felt wrong especially when combined with the front point angle I've got.
As an alternative to "keep your toes [heels?] down," just another way to think about it that can help some people, is, "Keep your toes up" (engage the shin muscle that raises your toe). Yet another piece of advice that helps some people is to forget about the front points (!) and concentrate on kicking in the secondary points.
Thanks, good suggestions.
> On both the crampons your showed (Lynx and Cyborg?) the secondary points are far behind the toe of the boot--especially on the crampon in the background. I can't see where the toe bail is positioned on the crampon in the background, but on the Lynx you could shift it forward by one hole. This would at least get your secondary points (and the main point) more forward, which I anticipate would help at great deal. It does change the balance and feel, but on anything but very cold and hard ice, or dry tooling, having the points in a more forward position is often preferable. If you find that you don't have any adjustment holes left, and you still want to move you points forward, consider changing to a new toe bail.
Not my crampons, just examples I found to illustrate the change in front point angle I was trying to explain. One thing I have noticed though, which you comment made me remember, is that my secondary points very rarely engage when climbing water ice. Is that normal? This is what first made me notice that the front point/s don't engage very securely in the ice (not deep enough to engage 2nd points), and made me notice the (excessively?) downturned angle of the points.
> I don't know if that crampon in the background is your crampon, but, if so, Good God man, get some new front points! To my eye, they look short, somewhat rounded/dull, and very worked over with a file--perhaps best relegated to low consequence rocky scrambling. Get some new BD points, or check out Krukongo and Kuznia--good quality stuff, and they might have a different shape/orientation than the stock points.
Good suggestion of Krukongo etc, I'll have a look and see what they offer.
> To answer your last question, I think that the length, angle, and placement of the front points, and the configuration of the secondary points, and the relationship of everything to particular boots, ankle flexibility, climbing style, ice, and so on, is very important, and often overlooked. I would try a bunch of different crampons (Borrow from friends? Trade with others?) or climb with one crampon on one foot, and another type on the other foot, to compare. Hopefully, with some experimentation, you will find one that works for you.
This is what I was looking for. I feel that length and angle of front points is really important, but rarely (if ever?) mentioned. Perhaps most people just have a system that works and so are unaware of it, and it's relatively infrequent to find a problem? Either way, I'll try to find some others to borrow and see what the differences are. Good idea using two different crampons. Might be one to try on an ice wall somewhere. Sounds like it's half technique and half equipment, so I have an excuse to look at some shiney stuff. Thanks for your comments.
Post edited at 09:28