Absurdly good gear since 1983

To see something truly amazing, click on the photo above. This collection is owned by Marty Karabin of Phoenix Az. He tells me he has 400 different bolt hangers, 140 different bolts, 50 different hand drills, 300 home made anchor pieces, and 130 different hooks, and even more not on this display! When the display is finished, it will be housed in a 4ft X 38ft. shrine. WOW!
(my personal fave is the grappling hook on the right middle area.)

Bolt Info

Stainless Steel bolts
From - Sept. 09.99
Newsgroups: rec.climbing

Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
N.B. I am *not* a metallurgist or an engineer. I've just been reading
a lot of stainless steel reference books this afternoon.

Various people have been wondering about failures of relatively new
stainless bolts in sea cliffs. After a quick glance at the Rawl
catalog and some quick research, I'm not sure this surprises me.

Rawl gives material types for stainless blue-collar bolts (actually,
they're now called "Power-Bolts") as:

Internal Bolt: Type 303/4
Washer: Type 18/8
Expansion Sleeve: Type 304
Expansion Cone: Type 303

A few people have suggested that galvanic corrosion between different
grades of stainless (e.g. a hanger made from Type 316 and a bolt like
the Rawl made from type 303, or its 18/8 washer) might be problematic.

I'm not a metallurgist so I'm not going to pretend I know about this;
I haven't found any convenient source of information on which types
of stainless steel may or may not be safely mated. One would presume,
however, that Rawl selected grades for the bolt itself which could be
mated safely (the "18/8" above appears to specify any 301/302/303/304
series stainless steel with approximately 18% Cr and 8% Ni). Most
hangers appear to be either Type 304 or Type 316.

However, a quick look at http://www.assdn.asn.au (the Australian
Stainless Steel Development Association) yields the following
information about the steel used in the Rawl bolts:

> A compromise between desirable properties of certain grades may be
> necessary. For example, grade S30300 (austenitic steel known as
> 303) has excellent machinability, but the high sulphur content
> which dramatically increases the cutting speed also substantially
> reduces the grade's weldability, formability and corrosion resistance
> (its PRE is wrong because the negative effect of sulphur is omitted,
> making it totally inappropriate for applications where there is a
> likelihood of corrosive conditions of even a mild nature).

Type 303 is one of the two types listed by Rawl as alternately used
in the inner bolt (the main load-bearing component!) of the assembly.

The other one is Type 304. But 304 is harder to work, so there's at
least a decent chance that any random box of Rawl bolts you pick up
has a Type 303 inner bolt:

> Machinability of 304 is lower than most carbon steels. The standard
> austenitic grades like 304 can be readily machined, provided that
> slower speeds and heavy feeds are used, tools are rigid and sharp,
> and cutting fluids are used. An 'improved machinability' version
> of 304 also exists.

In any event, 304 is _also_ not the usual choice for a marine (e.g.
a sea-cliff) environment:

> Alternative grades to 304 should be considered in certain environments
> and applications, including marine conditions, environments with
> temperatures above 50-60C and with chlorides present, and applications
> requiring heavy section welding, substantial machining, high strength
> or hardness, or strip with very high cold-rolled strength.

Type 316 is listed as "standard for marine fittings". Its typical
cost is given as $6 (australian) per pound compared to the $5 per
pound of the more common Type 304 (which is evidently the world's
standard stainless steel for most purposes). Some Rawl anchors are
available in Type 316, but at least according to the online catalog,
the blue collar is *not*. None of the other bolt manufacturers with
products in common use for rock climbing anchors (Petzl, Fixe) list
the type of stainless steel used in their bolts; I do have some Kong
hangers here which are marked "316".

However, it seems that Type 316 may *also* not be appropriate for
use as an anchor bolt in a sea cliff (particularly the often-soaked
limestone ones where some recent failures have occurred because of
problems with stress-corrosion craking under tensile load):

> Common austenitic grades (e.g. S30400 and S31600) may suffer from
> stress corrosion cracking (SCC) in chloride-containing environments,
> particularly in temperatures above about 50C and when a tensile
> stress is present in the steel. The ferritic and duplex grades are
> highly resistant, though not immune, and should be selected if SCC
> is a possibility.

That is, they recommend against using *either* 304 or 316 in a
chloride-containing environment under tensile load (like, say, a
hanging belay anchor on a popular route on a Thai sea cliff) and
particularly in hot (okay, very very hot, but every bit can't
help, and some of the stainless bolt failures heard of recently
_have_ occurred in tropical, salty places) conditions. This type of
stress-corrosion cracking could presumably let the shaft of a bolt
snap off without visible surface corrosion on the bolt head, washer
or hanger. Ugly, huh?

The upshot? It seems to me that *all* currently-available stainless
and nonstainless bolts are unsuitable for climbing anchor purposes on
many (perhaps only those with porous rock?) sea cliffs. Furthermore,
it seems possible that this will only be rectified if some manufacturer
can be convinced to build a special-purpose anchor for these
environments. Rawl will fabricate bolts in any steel desired for an
order of sufficient quantity, says their catalog, but I doubt this is
cheap -- the duplex and "super austentic" stainless alloys used for
high tensile load under marine conditions appear to cost a lot more
than 304 or 316, and then there's the issue of just how many you'd
have to buy...

Stress-corrosion cracking can lead to failure under very small loads
(e.g. body weight) -- if I recall correctly, this was also the issue
with that bad batch of Leeper hangers people have been trying to
replace for a few years now. Be very careful on seaside crags -- that
"bomber" bolt you're looking up at might be about to break in two
when you rest on it...

At Acadia National Park, there are permanent toprope anchors made from
glued-in 1" stainless bar stock. It sure seemed like overkill last
time I saw it, but now I'm thinking other areas might want to consider
something similar for toprope/belay anchors, unless/until stainless
bolts made from appropriate materials become available.

Thor Lancelot Simon tls@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Z-Mac Rivet Questions:
From - Sat Aug 28 12:00:14 1999
Newsgroups: rec.climbing

Alex Kratochwilla wrote:
> I thought they were the same steel bolts like everywhere in the valley but
> without hangers, so I only clipped in rope to the rivets and just fiffied
> the heads in between to keep rope drag low and speed high.
> Probably we were lucky that nothing happened.
> But how to distinguish between zmacs and normal 1/4" bolts, the buttons
> looked pretty similar to me?
> bye
> Alex

> >Rex Pieper <madbolter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >news:19990827193104.28290.00000330@ng-fl1.aol.com...
> >>They are quite shallow, and very weak. Numerous
> >> instances of failures have been recorded. In other words, they're
> >shit.

> Eric D. Coomer wrote in message <7q82oj$mq@xxxxxxxxxxx>...
> >They're made of inferior metal. Might even be zinc- can't remember.
> >They're manufactured for securing rain gutters to houses- not
> >exactly load bearing...
> >Cheers
> >Eric

Say yo,
The Z-Mac is a Rawl product and is shit as stated. Here is some numbers
and facts to back it up.....
Made of: Zmac 7 Alloy with a zinc plated steel of stainless steel
nail. Zmac Alloy is a special zinc alloy developed for its resistance
to corrosion. The expansion device is a nail which can be supplied in
either zinc plated steel or 304 stainless steel, depending on the
corrosion resistance required. They are manufactured in a msuhroom head
and flat head configurations.
Load capacities in 4000psi concrete: 1/4" X 7/8" imbedded, 820lbs
pullout, 1500lbs shear. Rawl says these are the ultimate load
capacities, and should be reduced by a factor of 4 or greater to
determine the allowable working load.
How to tell the diff?: A standard Rawl buttonhead botl has no nail in
the middle of the head and is a one piece anchor. A Zmac has a hole in
the head with a different colored pin in the center. A standard "dowel"
(also shit) is similar in look to a Zmac, but has an irregular mushroom
head and no hole in the center with a nail going through it. A rivet
(machine bolt) has a hex head, and a Zmac does not. Hmmm... what
else..... A Zmac will often look dark and droopy in the hole, becasue
they bend easily and are ready to fall out. A RedHead anchor is similar
to a Zmac, but will oftentimes have a red nail instead of a steel
colored one... still suspect, but better than a Zmac. Anything with
threads visible above or below the hole is not a Zmac.
That should probably give you some idea of what you are clipping.
adios,
Russ

Bolt damage from freezing.
Author: hlehmann
Email:   hlehmann@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 1998/09/01
Forums: rec.climbing

In article <6sfadn$l5b$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,
Jeremy_Rock_Jock@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Just wondering, how much effect would freeze-thaw effect a bolt? I mean, does
> the rock (or bolt) contract in the cold? I know this makes a difference in
> cracks; but I can't envision how the rock would contract against the bolt.
> Maybe one of you physists could enlighten me.

It's not the expansion of the bolt *or* the rock that you need to worry about
so much. What causes the damage is the rain-water that seeps into the gap
between the bolt & the rock and then expands as it freezes. As an experiment,
take a jar filled to the top with water, screw the lid tight and put it in
the freezer overnight. I've heard various debates on whether bolts should be
sealed with some sort of silicon caulk to keep the water out of the hole.
Some say it helps, others say that is just traps the water that would
inevitably find its way into the hole anyway, thereby just increasing the
likelyhood of frost damage. Any thoughts out there on this practice?

For all you physics students out there; if you drill a hole into a block of
granite and then freeze the block, does the hole get bigger or smaller?
Hans Lehmann

Re: Bolt testing article?  
Author: Chuck Spiekerman
Email:   cspieker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 1998/10/07
Forums: rec.climbing

On Wed, 7 Oct 1998, Irving J. Oppenheim wrote:
> A few years ago one of the climbing magazines had an article describing
> the results of laboratory strength tests on bolts. What I recall as
> noteworthy was the very low strength demonstrated by ordinary hardware
> store anchors, as contrasted to the much higher strength recorded for
> seemingly comparable specimens from Rawl, Petzl, etc. Does anyone
> recall the month and year?

There was an article like this in Climbing. I don't remember the
month, but it was last year around Spring. It was the "Spring Tease"
cover which featured the well-endowed woman in small bikini top.
Chuck

Re: Rapping off slings through the bolt hanger? 
Author: Russ Walling
Email:   FishProductsInfo@gmail.com
Date: 1998/08/26
Forums: rec.climbing

sulam@construct.net wrote:
> Let's say you have two bolts at a rap anchor. There are two slings in good
> condition, one for each hanger, each threaded through the hanger and a rap
> ring (one ring).
> Would you trust this setup? <<snip>>
> James

I would trust the set up but would not use it if it was in the
wilderness. In an effort of being fully compliant, I would simply untie
and jump, hoping to land on a Forest Service softbody.
Russ

Sealing Bolt Holes??? 
Author: Bruce Hildenbrand
Email:   bhilden@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 1996/11/12
Forums: rec.climbing

There seems to be some debate as to the benefits of sealing protection
bolts in the rock with silicone rubber.
One camp says it is a good idea to keep water (and corrosion) out of the
bolt hole so it is good to seal the hole with silicone rubber.
The other camp says it is a bad idea because it keeps the water that seeps
into the hole through the rock from drying out and actually promotes
corrosion, so don't seal the hole.
Does anybody out there have any field data to support one practice or the
other?
Thanks,
Bruce Hildenbrand

Patching bolt holes 
Author: Eric Hirst
Email:   eric@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 1996/04/10
Forums: rec.climbing

Old question -- what's the best way to make a bolt hole invisible?
I've tried JB Weld (dark grey epoxy) mixed with rock dust on my pet
rock at home, and the bolt hole still looks like a bolt hole,
only patched with JB Weld. I've heard white epoxy turns yellow
with time and is also no good, but that polyester resin (i.e. Bondo
and other plastic hold technologies) may work better. Or mortar
mix? I want something that's damm near invisible from up close
on a couple types of reddish grey rock -- has anyone found it?
Thanks.

(If anyone is wondering, the reason I need to fill holes is
because I have been stealing hangers and bolts from established
classics to put on my own piles of choss, and I want to plug the
holes so that I can eventually deny that the established routes
ever existed and then retrobolt them in my own unique style
and claim them as first ascents.)
Eric Hirst

Stupid bolt chain anchors 
Author: jim bowers
Email:   FQV@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 1995/09/20
Forums: rec.climbing

While at city of rocks this summer, I noticed a rather unsafe anchoring
practice. This consists of a 1/2 inch rawl bolt (actually the bolt diameter is
3/8 inch) with links of 3/8" chain. This system was outlined in climbing
magazine a while back. The problem is that 3/8" diameter chain will easily fit
over the head of a 3/8 inch bolt. The only thing keeping the thing from
pulling over the head is rather flimsey washer. If you use this system use
5/16" chain. It's plenty strong and won't physically fit over the head of a
3/8" bolt (but you won't have to deform much metal to do this). Better yet
use an actual 1/2" diameter bolt (5/8" inch rawl or 1/2" stud bolt) with
5/16" chain. This will rip the head off the bolt or break the chain.
Jim Bowers

Re: Belay anchors: why not use daisy chains? 
Author: Chris Harmston
Email:   chrish@xxxxxxxxx
Date: 1997/12/16
Forums: rec.climbing

The ratings of BD daisy's are as follows (3 sigma ratings):
Material End to End Pocket
Nylon 16 kN (3597 lbf) 3 kN (674 lbf)
Spectra 19 kN (4271 lbf) 3 kN (674 lbf)

Why don't we recommend a Daisy as your primary anchor? Because your rope
is safer. Worn Daisy's are significantly weaker. If you clip into more
than one pocket with your carabiner you could find yourself in space if
you riped the pocket tacks. Use your rope with a locking biner as the
primary anchor and use your daisy as a backup and as the adjustability.
Don't trust a single piece with your life either. Two Daisy's are plenty
strong. Your rope is still safer.

Chris Harmston (chrish@xxxxxxxxxxx).
Quality Assurance Manager. Materials Engineer BS, ME.
Black Diamond Equipment Ltd.
2084 East 3900 South, SLC, UT 84124 phone: 801-278-5552

On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Gary Carson wrote:
> I remember seeing this "body-weight only" disclaimer on Black Diamond
> (I think it was) daisy chains, but does it apply as well to other
> makes? A5 daisies, for instance, are supposedly rated to 3000 pounds
> overall, something like 300 pounds for each pocket (source: John
> Middendorf in an aid class I took at City Rock). I'm not sure what
> the numbers are for Fish daisies. (FISH Note: Similar numbers)

Was:"fixing" bolts, Now: Bad Bolt Advice 
Author: Russ Walling
Email:   FishProductsInfo@gmail.com
Date: 1998/04/13
Forums: rec.climbing

Russ Walling writes:
Sheesh Rex....I expected so much more...

MadBolter wrote:
> p.s. to answer Steven's original question about tightening the loose bolts:
> If it's the kind w/ a visible threaded stud and a nut you can tighten away.

Bzzzt......Wrongo. There are numerous bolts in use that have the
configuration described above. If you tighten these "other" bolts, you
will really fuck the pooch.

> If it's a Rawl 6-piece (just a hex head visible) tighten only until hanger
> is snug and maybe a 1/4 turn extra...

Bzzzt...Wrongo again. In some areas the 'hex head" you speak of is just
the ass end of a machine bolt. Australia comes to mind. If you tighten
these, they will usually twist off at the root and break inside the
hole. I have even had this happen with the Rawl 6piece.

>it is only the Rawl 6-piece that has
> the danger of being "overtightened".

Bzzzzt....Wrongo once more. Many of the other sleeve type bolts, and
even some threaded shaft bolts will suffer if over tightened.

>While you're at it, replace any
> Leeper hangers you find w/ modern, thick ones.

Ok, I'll agree on this one.

Now, you are probably saying "well, what *do* we do Mr. Bolt Know-it
-all Bastard?" Good question and far too involved to go into here on
rec.bolt. This is where that rare commodity of experience dictates the
action. If you do not know *exactly* wht type of bolt you are dealing
with, don't fuck with it. Mild tightening *might* be OK, but unless you
are pretty sure what is going on, best bet is to leave it alone, or tell
someone who monitors bad bolts (local Mt. Shop, new route guys,
guidebook guy). If you really want to be a good citizen (depending on
area restrictions) pull the suspect bolt, drill out the existing hole
and launch in a big fatty with a modern "Access Fund Approved" hanger.
later,
Russ

Re: Was:"fixing" bolts, Now: Bad Bolt Advice 
Author: chris maytag
Email:   alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 1998/04/14
Forums: rec.climbing

Russ Walling wrote in message <3532F48C.761B@aol.com>...
><snipsnipsnip>
> Mild tightening *might* be OK, but unless you
>are pretty sure what is going on, best bet is to leave it alone, or tell
>someone who monitors bad bolts (local Mt. Shop, new route guys,
>guidebook guy). If you really want to be a good citizen (depending on
>area restrictions) pull the suspect bolt, drill out the existing hole
>and launch in a big fatty with a modern "Access Fund Approved" hanger.

I'll second Russ' comments. Bolts are too important to mess with unless
you're SURE you know what's going on inside that hole - being "pretty
sure" doesn't cut the mustard when your life (and more importantly, that
of the next guy to clip the thing) is at stake.

If you're going to "fix" a bolt, and IF LOCAL ETHICS AND REGS ALLOW,
drill out the hole to 3/8" or 1/2" and replace it with a fat new bolt
and a modern, thick stainless hanger (rock-colored if need be or if
possible). In particular, the beefy Fixe hangers are nice (and
reassuring for those of us who sometimes climb on those homemade hangers
at Shelf rd...)

Additionally, I'd say that if you can't use the same hole safely, it's
time to consider filling in the existing hole with epoxy, cover the end
with some rock dust to hide the scar, and re-drill a smooth new hole.
Worth the extra effort to do it right.
chris maytag - alpha@xxxxxxxxxxx

Re: Belay anchors: why not use daisy chains?
Author: Chris Harmston
Email:   chrish@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 1997/12/16
Forums: rec.climbing

Daisy's are weaker than runners because, as the pockets rip out, damage to
the webbing occurs at the pocket tacks. In static testing the pockets rip
out until you are in the standard runner configuration. The web breaks at
the damaged area of one of the pocket tacks.

In factor 2 falls with 185 lbs of steel I have seen some break outright
without popping all the pockets! I have also seen them hold factor
2 falls and pop all pockets. Dynamic loading is not the same as the
slow pull we use for batch testing and rating. Runner materials do not
stretch like your ropes does. Use your rope for your primary anchor and
use the daisy as a backup and as the adjustability. I have heard reports
of daisy's breaking in factor 2 aid falls. The samples I have seen that
broke in the field were fairly well worn. Daisy's get worn quite quickly
and their strength degrades accordingly. Use your rope as the primary
anchor!

Chris Harmston (chrish@xxxxxxxxxxxx).
Quality Assurance Manager. Materials Engineer BS, ME.
Black Diamond Equipment Ltd.
2084 East 3900 South, SLC, UT 84124 phone: 801-278-5552

On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Jerome Stiller wrote:
> Isn't a daisy chain essentially a long sewn sling with a series of
> "pockets" sewn in? If the long sling is sewn with the same length of
> overlap and number & density of bar tacks as a regular sling, wouldn't
> it be just as strong? If the "overall" length is just as strong, then
> wouldn't being clipped into a "pocket' be an advantage in holding a long
> fall, because the pocket and then subsequent pockets would rip, thus
> absorbing force before it came on to the "overall" length of the sling?
> If in fact my first supposition is correct (that the "overall" sling
> from which a daisy chain is made is as strong as a comparable length
> standard runner) then the only problem I would see in long fall against
> a daisy chain in an anchor system is the shock loading of each pocket as
> the one before it rips, and the eventual shock loading of the sling if
> and when all the pockets rip.
> or am I stoopid? (well, *of course* I'm stoopid in general - I do climb
> ice, ya know - but I mean specifically about this).
> Jerome

Re: KN theory 
Author: Chris Harmston
Email:   chrish@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 1995/08/29
Forums: rec.climbing

there are 224.8 lbs force in 1 kN.

Chris Harmston (chrish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Black Diamond Equipment Ltd.
2084 East 3900 South, SLC, UT 84124 phone: 801-278-5552
DISCLAIMER: Unless otherwise indicated, this correspondence is personal
opinion and NOT an official statement of Black Diamond Equipment Ltd.

On 27 Aug 1995, M. Eggeman wrote:
> Anybody out there have a good handle on this KilaNewton thing?
> I understand the concept of measuring impact force vs. mass. What I can't
> figure out is how the hell are you supposed to calculate a KN?
> Any thoughts out there? - Thanx

Re: Rappel rings - my beef with them 
Author: Clyde Soles
Email:   csoles@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 1998/04/11
Forums: rec.climbing

<wfinley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In reality, my problem with them is that too many people tend to trust
> single rap rings and I've never felt comfortable with this.

You may not feel comfortable but the reality is the modern ones are
plenty safe for the intended purpose (unless there is visible damage).
None have ever failed. Your practice of removing the rings and pulling
the rope through webbing is bad for your ropes, not really safer for you
and much more dangerous for the rest of us.

> You can't be too safe on rappel.

Yes, you can. Too safe is often too slow and that can be much more
dangerous.

Re: How good are those shuts? 
Author: ratagonia
Email:   ratagonia@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 1998/10/31
Forums: rec.climbing

> I always thought the issue of running a TR through the cold shuts or lowering
> on a rope passed through the shuts is the heat caused by the friction. It
>isn't suppose the heat the metal to the point of failure, but the constant
>heating and cooling can severely weaken the bolt's placement in the rock.
>Climbing or Rock and Ice had a piece on this several years ago.
> I could only make it through about half of these messages, so if this has been
> covered I beg your pardon - go ahead and flame me,

OK
Me thinks your memory is failing. Too much aluminum dust? Don't lick your
hands after rappeling, please.
I posit:

1. Cold shuts are unreliable because who-the-hell knows what they are made
of? The route setter could of put in heat treated 4130, which would last
forever, or they might be something really soft, which cuts really easy. The
way you figure it out is you look at how fast it wears.

2. Loss of temper from lowering heat? I think you're about an order of
magnitude off here. Your hot belay device ( same amount of energy, less mass
) burns your hand but not the rope. The temperature to lose temper is quite
a bit higher.

3. Freeze/thaw like cycles from the lowering heat ? Again, I think you're
about an order of magnitude off. I think the holes erode from the many
loadings. The metal itself probably doesn't since you would be way below the
fatigue limit, though if poorly placed, some specific mechanism might be
working itself to failure.

Perhaps someone who actually knows something about metal would return fire.

>I won't be back to check.

Weenie.

Jratus "I went to engineering school and remember knowing this stuff" Utahnus

Re: How good are those shuts? 
Author: Russ Walling
Email:   FishProductsInfo@gmail.com
Date: 1998/10/28
Forums: rec.climbing

murphy@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> In article <36375179.31DF@ptdcs2.intel.com>,
> Gregory M Daughtry <gmdaught@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>So you are saying that anyone that climbes with a locking biner for a
>couble of years should see a notch in it from the rope running through
>it. That's a CROCK of shit. But, I'd really like to see a picture of
>one if you can show me yours.

Wrong. I have a FEW biners with notches worn into them from rapping.
Try rapping with wet/muddy/sandy ropes some time and you will see
notches, not in years, but in hours.

Gregory M Daughtry <gmdaught@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > I've never seen nor heard anyone talk about any anchor (be it chain,
> > shut, rap bolt, lap link, or Fixe anchor) that would wear through after
> > years of lowering through. I've seen plenty of anchors that were
> > polished, but it would probably take centuries of this abuse before
> > ropes would file through that metal. It just doesn't make sense.

> murphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Gee, and because you've never heard anyone talk about it or seen it, therefore
> it must be false? Tell you what, if you want to see it so you can talk about
> it, fly to CA, drive to Owens River Gorge, climb a popular route, and look
> *real* close at the shuts at the top. I've seen them close to halfway worn
> through on occasion, thankfully rare. On your way home, stop by Wilson's
> Eastside Sporting Goods in Bishop and give up a buck or two in the collection
> for the replacement fund of said shuts.
> That being said, you probably could find something closer to home ( assuming
> you aren't from CA ), but I can only talk about what *I've* seen.
> Tom

On this note, Marty Lewis and Kevin Calder, Owens Gorge caretakers and
new route guys were just here 5 minutes ago stocking up on tons of big
fat lower off clips to put in the Gorge. Why? To replace worn out
shuts that are not only grooved, but if the wind kicks up just might
fail. Come on Greg, get with reality. The Gorge is especially hard on
shuts from the volcanic pumice that embeds in the rope sheath and then
saws at the metal. Sounds good to me.
Russ

Le Petit Verdon - Unwelded Cold Shuts 
Author: Greg Opland
Email:   opland@xxxxxxxxx
Date: 1995/09/20
Forums: rec.climbing

system@climit.enet.dec.com (Brian Mullin) wrote:
> did not like the proliferation of 3/8 inch unwelded cold shuts on the top
> of most every route. At least some were 1/2 inch cold shuts. Dave Dangle and

Just as an info thing...at least as of about a year ago, there
were still cold shut anchors at the top of some of the the climbs
at Le Petit Verdon (the Pit) near Flagstaff, AZ. I'm sure they went
in before they were widely accepted as totally unreliable.

For the newbies: It's bad enough rapping on one of these types of
anchors, but by no means should you toprope off of one. That's how
they discovered they were weak in the first place (at the cost of
a few broken bones/deaths).
G.