rock exotica

quercus · 30th November 2007, 11:51 AM

Guys , I have a problem...

I've seen a very interesting piece of equipment from rock exotica. It's called the dualcender.The design is exactly the same as Petzl's ascenders, but for double rope.I think it would be great for footlocking and I think it's in sherrill's catalogue but like I said... there's a problem. Because of the fact that it's not CE certified (the european standard for PPE) they won't send it to Belgium. I've asked several tree gear company's around here but they won't order or sell it, wich is normal due to restrictions on testing and CE standards.
I'm looking for someone in the US or somewhere else who can order it for me and send it to me... I'll pay up front of course.
can someone help me?

Done it · 1st December 2007, 01:49 AM

Hi Quercus,
There are a few mail forwarding sites where you can buy items in US. They supply an address then forward them to you. Some are a bit dodgy but this one is safe. It might seem a bit expensive to set up but with what you save it works well.Access USA - The Leader In Package Forwarding

Hope that worked I haven't done it before.

ronnyb · 2nd December 2007, 07:26 PM

Have you ever tried a handled ascender? I use a Kong double ascender. The handgrips really help. I'm 40 years old, so I'll take any advantage I can get. PM me in you want either the exotica or whatever.

George Hayduke · 3rd December 2007, 05:05 PM

Kong products, especially the double cammed handle ascenders should be used with extreme care. There are plenty of great products, don't use inferior gear.

Tree Machine · 4th December 2007, 05:37 AM

I don't think George is implying that the Kong dualcenders are inferior.

Maybe, though. What's clear is 'don't buy inferior gear'. Well, of course.

Quote:

Kong products, especially the double cammed handle ascenders should be used with extreme care

All climbing gear, including ascenders should be used with extreme care.

George, who has better dual-handled ascenders? As Ronny B says, having the handle gives a climber an advantage. Additionally they don't have to be disassembled to put them on and take them off and one side can be used independently of the other. These are also advantages, not in the dualscenders, though.

I will use the dualscenders as backup to the Kongs, but would only use the dualcender as a sole ascender if it were the only option. This is not a personal preference. We use the safest gear that will offer is the most in performance.

A simple captive bar is missing for the Kong Duals. I have written Kong about a couple improvements, they have only incorporated one, a couple years ago. The other improvement can be created here at our end for about a dollar, a piece available from any hardware store.

Still, the improvements could be created at the Italy end and it would be nice if they did.

George Hayduke · 5th December 2007, 09:38 AM

Maybe I'm being too PC...the Kong dual ascenders have failed MANY time leading to injuries. They are dangerous.

Check for yourself, but I think that Kong has stopped making them. Good!

Shift to using single rope like the rest of the rope access world and things get sooo simple! Lots of great options for gear and backups are way better.

ronnyb · 6th December 2007, 05:05 PM

Never seen or heard of a kong failing, you're supposed to use a backup with any ascender any ways. Matter of fact, I was introduced to the Kong at ArborMaster.

reachtreeservice · 7th December 2007, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronnyb

Never seen or heard of a kong failing, you're supposed to use a backup with any ascender any ways. Matter of fact, I was introduced to the Kong at ArborMaster.

Some accidents have occurred and are documented. Causes include one leg of the rope being pushed out of the cam because the climber placed the ascender too close to the tie in point, climbers accidentally releasing the cam with their thumbs, tree debris preventing the cam from properly closing, etc...

Even placing a keychain biner behind the cams, the climber can still accidentally release the cam with their thumb or debris can prevent the cam from engaging properly.

The kong should always be backed up. The best back up is a bow shackle placed in the hole above the cams. A piece of 3/8 tenex is spliced to the bow shackle so that there are two equal lengths coming off the shackle. One leg is tied with a friction hitch ( I use a Distal ) to each leg of the doubled climbing rope.

Credit for the above technique and info goes to Mark Adams, Instructor for North American Training Solutions. It was first published in the Climbers corner of I.S.A.'s Arborist News some time ago.

reachtreeservice · 7th December 2007, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Hayduke

Maybe I'm being too PC...the Kong dual ascenders have failed MANY time leading to injuries. They are dangerous.

Check for yourself, but I think that Kong has stopped making them. Good!

Shift to using single rope like the rest of the rope access world and things get sooo simple! Lots of great options for gear and backups are way better.

I agree that SRT is almost always the best method of canopy access.

newguy18 · 7th December 2007, 06:57 PM

Its alright for heights above 70' but any lower I perfer drt.

quercus · 12th December 2007, 11:15 PM

I use double cammed ascenders too but I made one myself using two ascensions (left and right) from Petzl. I cut the rubber handles off, screwed them together using holes that are originally in the device (so no drilling) and secured the bolts with loc-tite, then I cut the handles very accurate in two seperate parts (again one left and one right part). I glued the handles back on on each side and secured them with a very strong vinyl based tape. In this system you can't use a carabiner anymore to lock the rope in because the device is too wide. So at first I used a smooth nut and bolt. Because it was a bit too bulky I switched to a 10 mm rope with stopper knots. When I use this device I climb for a meter or two and place a figure 8 knot on the two ropes combined so even if the device would fail and slip, I cannot fall on the ground. I don't use Kong ascenders because the two cam sections are riveted together. The idea of loose rivets makes me feel all warm inside....The device I made myself would still be safe, even if the nuts and bolts would fail with whom they are screwed together...

Therrin · 13th December 2007, 01:50 AM

Sounds like a candidate for Dr Storrick's equipment design division.

Ekka · 13th December 2007, 02:39 AM

Lets see how long it takes Tree Machine to recruit him.

Tree Machine · 13th December 2007, 05:07 AM

I've been awhile getting back to this. I've been searching for Kong dual ascender accidents. I'm sure they exist, but I come at this from a solid 8 years on the duals as my primary ascenders, for both SRT and the doubled line 1:1 ascending method that Quercus is looking to enjoy.

I have other ascenders, though, too. The Petzl ascension, CMI's then other non-handled ones like Pantin, micrograb, and croll.

in '95 or 96 I did exactly what Quercus did to his ascencions, but with CMI's. This involved pulling the cam pin out of BOTH ascenders at the same time, keeping the cams motionless so the springs don't pop and dismount the cams. Then replace those two individual pins with one double-length which jopins the two. Then I drilled 3 small holes, inserted rivets and peened them down. This worked beautifully as the blocky, flat-sided CMI's fit together side-by-side really well. I used these for about a year and then Kong came out with theirs. This was a big improvement as the handle on a single CMI is uncomfortable, and two of them together, doubly poor comfort as far as an ergonomic grip.

To be honest, I don't find the Kong twins to a comfortable grip either. Most of my work of late has been SRT on a blue Petzl Ascension, and the handhold configuration on that is like butta. BUT, except for Quercus' dual ascensions, a dual Petzl simply does not exist, at least that I'm aware of (and having talked personally with the President of Petzl America at a TCIA expo, I have thoughts on why).

Here's a shot of the old, beaten warriors. No loose rivets after all this time, but if the DID loosen, I would either peen the original rivet, or go to the hardware store and get the appropriate size replacement rivet and peen it in.

Tree Machine · 13th December 2007, 05:52 AM

As far as the Kong documentable accidents, I have come up with nothing. My curiosity and pointed question would be this, was it gear failure, or operator error? Was it in normal working conditions, or was it during formal testing.

See, when you test gear, you do all you can do to see at what point or places it can fail. If you are TRYING to make something fail (any product) then you probably will. If you ram the ascenders through branches, or up against a limb just right while pushing up through, then events can happen. I could make Quercus' dual petzls fail if I set my intent to do that, or we could climb safely on them for the next decade without incident.

All ascenders are built pretty much the same, at least from the cam mechanism. Major differences are in the handle design.

We discussed years ago how to back up duals, and how to modify the design of the Kong duals to be more safe.

Basically, this meant shortening the thumb release bars to be shorter, pan-headed, and less like a protruding rod. Place a hole (thru-rivet) in the area where the cam lever seats while disengaged. A keychin biner is inserted through this as a stop, preventing the cam from possibly moving into the disengage position. Add a captive bar (just like Quercus' thru-bolt) to keep the rope from any possibility of escaping the ascender shell and finally, an ATTACHMENT POINT at the top of the ascender for insertion of a locking biner and attachment of your backup.

These first two mods can be done at home, but shouldn't have to be. Kong DID put in the hole for the keychin biner in the last couple years, that helps, but there's still a ways to go, easy, easy to do at the Italy end, and we shouldn't have to mod our gear for enhanced safety. Or reconfigure existing gear into something that's better than current stuff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ekka

Lets see how long it takes Tree Machine to recruit him.

Knock, knock..... Kong Bonaiti..... are you home....?

quercus · 13th December 2007, 11:35 AM

guys, I'm gonna take pictures of my device too. I'll post them on this thread ASAP.
I do have something to say that could help you document accidents with cammed ascenders. Not the ones from Kong though, but with the ones from Petzl. Not so long ago, I stumbled upon a failure notice from Petzl itself about the ascension. The reason why seemed very odd to me at first, and it occured to me that this would be operator error, so I tried to let one fail for about a whole day. Petzl claimed that if the ascension with certain lot numers would be tilted far enough in the opposite direction in wich the handle is faced, the teeth of the cam wouldn't grab the rope anymore and the ascender would slip. This in mind and the fact that it is never a good thing to drop load an ascender could result in sheath damage and sheath and rope failure at some point. What was wrong with de device? The bottom teeth of the cam were simply not there and therefore the device became unrelyable.
Because of the fact that I have had an accident once with an ascender because of this problem, and the rope got pretty damaged due to that occurence, I thought that it was worth investigating.
This is what I think of the Kong ascenders:
-The device itself is far to big and bulky
-I feel that Kong made a bad choice between a fool-proof design and a weight problem.Therefore they left essential parts who would make the design tougher out.
-The design from Kong is simply not a unique design, but a modification handle that is riveted onto a small ascender that allready existed. The ones from petzl is not riveted, but a totally new device that is differently forged except from the cam section.
-If it were droploaded pretty good, the rivets could fail, and if that were the case, the device would break apart with one small part going up very very fast and the other bigger part to wich the climber is attached would drop instantly.Far too many rivets who could loosen trough the years and fail at one point in time.
Just my two cents...

Tree Machine · 14th December 2007, 06:12 AM

Quote: