For over 160 years, we've embraced climbing in all its forms, from rock to ice and everything in between. We believe in pushing boundaries, staying curious, and sharing the joy of the vertical world.
Join us as we evolve our gear and solutions for climbers and professionals alike.
Our vision: We bring ideas to life that enable free movement in the vertical world.
Regarding the use of a carbiner for belaying at an achor or repelling, the reason is that your bely loop is already under tension, and thus, it can be a bit finicky to place the pinch. Why not use a harness with 2 belay loops then ?
nein nicht EDEL🏇 aber dafür EDELRIDDD Streitet euch bitte nicht und guckt zusammen das Video 🥰☺ ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TDs-oZCqLHo.html
Can you tell me how to do the buddy check? What are the points to look for? I'm interested because I used the pinch and my partner didn't know the device. Is a visual check ok or how do you make sure the device is closed and the rope properly installed?
For a partner check, you can refer to our user manual for a visual representation and textual explanation: avs.edelrid.com/images/attribut/54692_GAL_Pinch_ANSICHT_DINA4_Homepage.pdf Hope this helps! 🙂 You can also check out other FAQs about the PINCH here: edelrid.com/eu-en/sport/belay-devices/pinch
Ich habe z.B. eine Bandschlinge zur Selbstsicherung, die bei einem Drittel vom Gurt aus abgeknotet ist. An diesen Knoten wird der Karabiner für das Abseilgerät befestigt, damit ein größerer Abstand zum Prusik geschaffen wird. Wenn ich nun aber doch einmal in das Seil falle, dämpft das Seil dann so weit, dass die Bandschlinge dadurch nicht reißt oder wie verhält es sich damit?
Hallo, bei dieser Anwendung dämpft einerseits das Seil die Kräfte und andererseits läuft noch etwas Seil in das Abseilgerät (auch wenn der Prusik gespannt ist). Die Kräfte beim „Fallenlassen“ in das Abseilgerät lagen bei unseren Versuchen unter 3 kN: edelrid.com/de-de/wissen/knowledge-base/seilverbindungsknoten-beim-abseilen-vergleich Deshalb sind die auftretenden Kräfte weit weg von den Festigkeiten von Schlingen in dieser Anwendung.
Frage an Edelrid: Warum sollten die gezeigten Produkte nicht am Klettersteig verwendet werden? Eignen sie sich nicht als eine Art Rastschlinge? (Zur Sicherung benutze ich natürlich eine separates Klettersteigset.) - Viele Grüße, Patrick
Just to make sure we all understand: Episode 1: At 1:59 you present a graph showing the leading cause of accidents to be of severed ropes due to sharp objects. Episode 2: You display your testing techniques to provide a sense of legitimacy for the following results in episode 3 Episode 3: You display results of your testing, but refused to make a recommendation based upon said results Conclusion: Politics If my goal was to find the safest child car seat, then do crash tests on child car seats, then find the best one but refuse to mention the brand or model of the best performer, I have lost the reason for testing. You have basically said nothing that would help save lives even though your stated goal was to help save lives. These series of videos had NOTHING to do with saving lives or helping the climbing community. This was a publicity stunt to bring your company business and hopefully sell products. Prove me wrong. Show us which brands and models you tested and which one was the best performer. I bet you won't.
Good that you want to clarify that, because in my opinion you are drawing the wrong conclusions ("for us all") out of this as well as missing the most important ones. But I try to explain in my words: - Severed ropes due to sharp objects are not generally the leading cause of accidents, but sharp edges are the number one cause for all accidents due to a severed rope. - The main take-away from Episode 2 is the influence of weight in a rope system on the overall safety regarding sharp edges. It shows, that independent on how safe your rope might be or not be, if you have the chance to lower the weight applied to it, the gains in safety will be much greater than any cut resistant characteristics of your rope. - The intention of Episode 3 ist to show, that we urgently need a way to quantify cut resistance of ropes as currently climbers can not judge the safety of their rope in regards to sharp objects with the data they get provided. And staying with that last point. Your shown frustration of not knowing what rope might be the best for your purposes in regards to sharp objects is exactly the point made. And we would like to change this. Maybe we just differ in the approach here. For one, we put 6 years of research into building a test-setup that now, for the first time, provides the possibility to quantify this characteristic for ropes (not as trivial as it might seem, but you saw Episode 1 to understand this). We also provide the cut values within our own rope range for all our dynamic ropes. So within our rope range you can perfectly see which would suit you best. And we also have used the knowledge we gained in those years of research to built products that are perfectly optimized towards the characteristic in question. What this whole topic is to us here in the development though, is anything but a marketing stunt. We strongly believe in the importance of this proven number one risk for rope failure and will do anything that this is taken seriously and exactly not as a promotion. If we were to publish the values of all our competitors, it would not only be an unfair and disrespectful behaviour towards our competitors, it would then really look like and be a marketing stunt! Knowledge Base videos should be as neutral a source of information as possible and not a product marketing tool! The content comes from the development team, not from any of our commercial departments. And with this in mind, our approach in this matter is to talk about practical implications of our research as well as raise awareness for the urgent need of such a test. We are actively seeking dialogue with our competitors on a factual level and in a working group within the UIAA currently that has been set up specifically for this purpose, we are trying to develop a standard that will subsequently apply to everyone and which will make information about a cut value not only visible then but also objectively reliable for the user. Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
Seile, bei denen Mantel und Kern vernäht sind, gibt es nämlich nicht. Wir haben Seile, bei denen Mantel und Kern verklebt und Seile bei denen Mantel und Kern verflochten sind.
Are these "infinity" belay loops? (Kinda like the BD Zone and Airnet)? I couldnt quite tell from the video. Also idk if that is the right terminology for a belay loops that, rather than being overlapped and sewn into itself, is one continuous-looking loop. Hopefully I'm making sense 😅
Das ist ein sehr anschauliches Video. Es zeigt gut auf, wieso wir geocacher, überall einen Seilschoner einbauen müssen beim Lost Place klettern. Danke 👍
I wish Santa would get me a edelrid pinch! I got to try one at my local climbing gym, since the owner of the shop had access to an early pinch unit and BOY was it magical. The satisfying *click*, the increased slack you can give due to not needing a carabiner, the easy feeding beats grigri. Overall i like it more than my Neox. Plus it just looks so dang slick. Did I mention the *click*??
You can find all details, including a step-by-step guide, here: edelrid.com/eu-en/vertical-freedom/edelrid-news/tips-ideas-knowledge/creative-rope-mat Here is the link to the pattern: edelrid.com/007-landing-pages/articles-and-news/seilteppich/Seilteppich_pattern.pdf
Hello, In my case, I have the FLEX PRO harness, which I find incredibly comfortable. However, it does not have a ventral anchor point. Due to my work in the wind energy industry, we in the industry like to use the double hook on the dorsal ring of the harness. The positioner, I could use it on the "ears" of the harness or the lateral rings, but I do not find it as comfortable or I had simply gotten used to using the work line on the ventral ring. With this harness, I lost that possibility and used the position line on the two green fabric rings: the pectoral ring (A). A colleague saw me doing this and stopped my activity, saying that what I was doing was reckless because this pectoral anchor point should NEVER be used for positioning. Is this true? Thank you very much for your attention. Also, thank you for your products. The best harness I have ever used has been yours, and I will use it until it wears out to buy another one from you. Best regards.
The dorsal and sternal attachment points (EN 361) are only for fall arrest systems and not for positioning. Only the lateral attachment points (EN 358) may be used for positioning on the FLEX PRO. For further information please visit: avs.edelrid.com/images/attribut/54594_GAL_FlexPro_FlexProPlus_PART_I_PART_II_ANSICHT.pdf
Hello, @@edelrid Thank you for your response. I appreciate the clarification regarding the usage of the dorsal and sternal attachment points on the FLEX PRO harness. However, I would like to bring to your attention some information from your own documentation which seems to present a different perspective. In the document titled "54594_GAL_FlexPro_FlexProPlus_PART_I_PART_II_ANSICHT," on page 34, point 11 (STERNAL), it states: "The sternal attachment may be used as an alternative fall arrest attachment in applications where the dorsal attachment is determined to be inappropriate by a competent person and where there is no chance to fall in a direction other than feet first. ACCEPTED PRACTICAL USES FOR A STERNAL ATTACHMENT INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO, LADDER CLIMBING WITH A GUIDED TYPE FALL ARRESTER, LADDER CLIMBING WITH AN OVERHEAD SELF-RETRACTING LIFELINE FOR FALL ARREST, ****WORK POSITIONING**** AND ROPE ACCESS. The sternal attachment may also be used for travel restraint or rescue. When supported by the sternal attachment during a fall, the design of the FBH shall direct load through the shoulder straps supporting the user and around the thighs. Supporting the user, post fall, by the sternal attachment will result in roughly a sitting or cradled body position with weight concentrated on the thighs, buttocks, and lower back. Supporting the user during work positioning by this sternal attachment will result in an approximate upright body position. If the sternal attachment is used for fall arrest, the competent person evaluating the application should take measures to ensure that a fall can only occur feet first. This may include limiting the allowable free fall distance. It may be possible for a sternal attachment incorporated into an adjustable style chest strap to cause the chest strap to slide up and possibly choke the user during a fall, extraction, suspension, etc. The competent person should consider FBH models with a fixed sternal attachment for these applications." Based on this, it appears that your own documentation allows for the use of the sternal attachment point for work positioning under certain conditions. This seems to contradict the guidance provided in your recent response. Perhaps, as often happens, personal preferences or ideas are being turned into dogma? Or perhaps the document you yourself cite is incorrect and Edelrid drafted it without taking into account the EN 361 standard, which specifies the requirements, test methods, usage instructions, marking, and packaging for fall arrest harnesses. Could you please provide further clarification on this discrepancy? It is crucial for those of us in the wind energy industry to understand the correct and safe use of the harness to ensure our safety and compliance with industry standards. Thank you once again for your attention and for producing such reliable equipment. I look forward to your clarification. Best regards,
@@hectorpadron3099 Thank you for you reply. Please note that the paragraph you are referring to is meant for applications in the context of the ANSI/ ASSP Z359.11. The user instructions do not replace a risk assessment for a workplace. Please excuse any misunderstanding and contact us via customerservice@edelrid.de if you have further questions.
It's written on the website... 'BUY ONLINE' "The product you selected is not available at partnered online shops in your country" Can't I buy it in Korea?
Got my Ohm II few days ago. As a heavy climber (roughly around 100kgs) owning Ohm II widens range of people who can belay me without hurting me or them. Thank you Edelrid :)
You have the data for this in a table or short write up? You seem to blow past a pretty decent correlation of strength and cut resistance but without knowing what was actually cut it isn’t possible to see if that is just a material difference. Making the data available would be very helpful and interesting
@@edelrid I did not see the raw data from this video saying what the rope construction or type was for each test here. Maybe a table like that has been added since or maybe I missed it? Where can I find the data from this specific test saying the rope or rope material and the cutting length? Basically where would I see the number you used to make the plots in this video?
@@andrewhunter6536 Hey, yes I agree that this particularly data set doesn't look as obviously dismissive as the others. However, we of course looked deeper into this (as well as many other facettes not even shown here in this video) and the conclusions still stands that tensile strength does not reliably influence the cut value. Otherwise, this would also have been really low hanging fruit for us and other rope manufacturer. Unfortunately it is not so easy as just to control tensile strength :) We could easily construct ropes with little tensile strength and a great cut value. Maybe an example for this could also be seen at 7:34 where we show the results of a 7mm cord with a much higher cut value then one 11mm rope. For sure the 11mm rope has a much higher tensile strength than the 7mm rope.
Since Tommy Caldwell had a Finger in the development of the pinch, could we please get a video of him using it? (No disrespect to mr. Gebel, I'm a big fan of Daniel as well)
Concerns about random opening if clipped directly to the belay loop or anchor should not be dismissed. In a longer 45 minute video, the interviewer casually opens and removes a loaded but unweighted Pinch from a belay loop, simply by giving an inch of slack to the loop. No 90 degree rotation needed, and worse, earlier prototypes were revealed to have had a more typical three-step release protocol, but they dropped it as too complicated - even though the UIAA has vigorously pressed for two and three-step locking biners in belay applications. I've lost half a dozen acquaintances in the past two years, in mostly avoidable circumstances, and I am tired of memorials without anything learned. If a rare sequence of events can happen, given enough user hours, it WILL happen, and some belayer messing with their anchor will manage to unclip a loaded Pinch, and watch it go skittering out of reach, a now unbelayed and clueless climber on the other end of the rope. Immediate recall, or certain lawsuits - their choice.
OMG, spent an hour searching for exactly the evidence at 36:30, where he casually opens the device merely by giving an inch of slack to the belay loop, no special rotations needed. Perhaps more future evidence, at 20:45, he describes their earlier design, with a three-step maneuver to open, and says "It was safer, because of the three-way movement, but cancelled that . . .because it was too complicated." This may become crucial, because at the same time the UIAA has been pushing for more acceptance of two or three-step locking biners for belaying. In the early days of my 55 year climbing career, in my climbing shop job we'd listen to reps touting every new gizmo, and the minute one would describe anything as "foolproof," we'd jump to prove them wrong - find the flaw or weakness. This is actually a vital process, in debugging anything; manufacturers may test and test, but only after thousands of user hours do sequences line up, where a potential danger is discovered. Given enough time, "rare" events will begin to occur, and may result in predictable, hence avoidable accidents. Two friends experienced one of the first mysterious carabiner failures, that eventually led to the theories of oscillation of a weighted moving rope, vibrating the gate open during a long fall - and the shift to wire gate and keylock designs to reduce this phenomenon. It's not a stretch to imagine a climber at a stance, fiddling with the belay while the rope is not under tension, and having the loaded Pinch device detach itself from a harness or fixed anchor, and go swinging out of reach with a now unbelayed climber unawares. The cardinal rule of any "rare" event is: If it can happen, it WILL happen.
