Confessions of a zinc-plated bolter

I see a lot of grade 5 hardware store steel bolts with stainless hangers out there. Do people just not know that this combinations is actually corrodes faster than steel/steel?

hi john,

I'm right there with you. . . Slowly the SS drum is getting louder. Hit up nut and bolt products on about 2212 s west temple for stainless powers wedge bolts for 1.60/piece and the BD store has SS hangers for about $3 per. The bolts can be placed one handed for ground up ascents and if your hole is short it does not leave a spinner. . . It just shows a little more post. The 3.75" makes you have to go almost to the hilt and the last .75 " can be a real battery/arm burner on overhead holes. I may call and see if they can order in some 3" or 2.5" for quartzite.

At the risk of getting slandered . . . If everything is stainless, The youth of today won't have the added excitement of climbing a legacy route with manky hardware. My first time up the thumb in LCC with the original hardware is certainly my most memorable.

Glad to see this discussion - a very civil one by MP standards. Well done. Maybe the election debates are making us all realize how tedious and damaging it is to be snide and insulting. Like I said in the article, I have placed plenty of zinc-plated bolts ... but I've switched over. I think long-lasting hardware is ESPECIALLY important on obscure routes, that won't get adopted by a climbing community with a re-bolting program. It's a fair question what rights and responsibilities we have when it comes to placing bolts on public land. If you are climbing JUST for yourself, 9 times out of 10 you really can lead the route on gear, or just toprope the thing. If you place permanent anchors and create a sport climb, on public land, it's a public act. If you take the position that you have no responsibilities when it comes to quality of hardware, it's perfectly reasonable for the (climbing) public to respond that you can't legally bolt on "their" land. So watch out how far you take that position. So far we are in a soft-rule era, but for the reasons I cited in the article that's likely to change. I'm glad to be making this decision myself rather than have someone else telling me what to do.

climbing friend,

Are you thinking of the funny stuff?!?!??!

Stainless steel, and glue ins only, for pleasea! I do not do contributing to community or bolting in any way, but very much like tell others what to do!

I to your dangerous route do not want go and huck massive meat laden body onto corroded, snapping bolt! And then not stopping, oh my, the ground falling hitting it like they do on the wheekend whipper!

7 slaps to the wang you shall be receiving for every non stainless bolt you would be placing!

And 7 buckets fresh bloody of fishheads you will receive for every stainless bolt you place, and 70 cheesesteaks of high quality for each glue-in!

When it comes to route development, I say do it right the first time. When I first started installing fixed anchors I was terrified of having the old guard call me out for installing trash. So I just decided to suck it up and buy SS all the way. I've used Plated in some instances over the years, and the chain anchors I install are always plated, so nobodies perfect. But like Mr. Achey said, its nice that we can manage this ourselves for now, in the future we will probably be held to a "higher" authority.

You can make up for it a bit by donating to the ASCA - if you do this month the donation's matched too!

www.safeclimbing.org

Although as anyone who's replaced bolts will tell you - we'd rather you spent that money on placing stainless to begin with!

(or if you're developing on oceanside crags - titanium)

Blah blah blah... smoke'em if ya got'em!

If you got PS already, then use them up... then switch to SS when you don't have anymore PS.

Hey John, always a fan of your routes and contributions. That being said, I feel your struggle, and it's hard to justify spending more money when development is typically a self funded endeavor. If you ever need stainless bolts at cost, please contact me or even contact Gracie at Climbtech, they are so willing to help. Cheers-Dono

Zinc plated bolts are temporary, like you don't want anyone else to use them later.

I'd be curious to hear thoughts on shifting the mindset of the community. Currently, as has been mentioned in this thread, it is the burden of the developer to fork over the cash for development.

How do we shift to a more European system of subsidized development over here? How do we educate the future developers as well in a consistent manner that sets a common standard and practice nation wide?
How do we get folks in the desert to stop placing drilled angles for anchors on climbs that are currently being developed?

+1 for Greg and the ASCA!

Sam Feuerborn wrote: How do we shift to a more European system of subsidized development over here?

End the litigious culture in our society...

Pinklebear wrote:The process is very individual and often an expression of personal freedom; the community aspect is important, but when shrill cries of "USE STAINLESS ONLY" and "WE NEED TO REGULATE THIS" drown out other considerations, than climbing loses much of its original spirit of exploration and individualism. We started back sport climbing in the 80s and 90s using crap from the hardware store, and it's good that there's much more knowledge now about what works best in different rock types in terms of longevity and reliability. It gives people more tools to make the "right" decision when putting up a route, if they so choose.

With individual freedom comes individual responsibility.
Don't confuse people advocating for the most responsible choices to be a call for regulation. To the contrary, it may be a way to avoid it.

I agree with most of what Pinklebear says - I, too, hike to obscure places and bolt new routes, rather than climb in Rifle, which is right in my backyard, to get away from crowds and feel free to discover and explore and do what I want. Regulation is the LAST thing I hope to see. Tony states the point very well that choosing to use better, more expensive hardware because each of us individually believes that's the way it should be done, is a really good way to ensure that we will continue to have that choice. All over the country, efforts are in the works to help developers do this without shouldering all the financial burden. It's happening now in the Red, and could happen at a lot more places.

Pinklebear wrote: I got into climbing 30 years ago to get away from people, and for whatever reason I ain't getting any less cranky the more crowded the crags get.

Me too. And I used to talk about minimal placement of bolts and how those are all time-bombs of varying fuse lengths. And how when the # of bolts corroding in the field, or wearing with cycles, or... (what have you) exceeds the capacity of the # of people willing to replace them, accidents of the 'bad hardware' sort will become commonplace, and land managers will turn their attentive eye toward risk management. Which is to say, we get an access issue.

I've always thought it wise to think ahead and consider the potential to move that balance in our favor, and there are 3 ways that immediately come to mind:
1) Less routes/bolts (not a great option)
2) More people replacing bolts (great, but can you get that to happen on a profoundly larger scale?)
3) Longer fuses (Seems easier to get the bolts to last 3x longer by material and diameter than to get 3x more people active in replacing them)

So that's been the guiding philosophy for me since the first bad bolts I saw fail in the 90's got me thinking about it...

Pinklebear is the man!

So whats obscure anymore? Rifle was obscure as shit 30 years ago.
I climb on plenty of random crags and boulders,
but I always try to have the foresight that it could be a trafficked crag someday when I'm long gone.

I want to hear more about programs to support developers?
If I could afford to place 4" SS 5-piece on every bolt I would.
Seems like a big ball of wax to me that will probably need some "group" oversight and accreditation.

Ben Scott wrote:I want to hear more about programs to support developers? If I could afford to place 4" SS 5-piece on every bolt I would.

Well, here is that program

"ARE YOU CURRENTLY DEVELOPING NEW ROUTES?

If you are using plated steel (inferior, shorter-lasting) hardware instead of stainless steel (better, longer-lasting), we’ve got some great news for you! Thanks to a new partnership with ClimbTech we’ll be able to extend a nearly 50% discount on stainless steel hardware! We’re doing this to encourage developers to use stainless steel during initial installation, and hopefully slow down the need for bolt replacement later. "

This applies to Denver/Boulder locals, but I don't see a reason why other LCO's can't try to emulate the program for themselves locally.

Ok, so what about removable bolts for those backcountry routes?

+1 for Ben and pinklebear. I for one, think the way they do. Things are coming around on the bolting scene but It's a struggle. I'm 98% there on stainless but I think people talk louder on the internet about the situation than what they really know about what's really going on. Good thread:)

I don't mind the call to stainless by the community as a standard, as long as it is kept in the realm of persuasion and not elevated beyond voluntary compliance.
There are reasons though to consider as to where plated has advantages.
One analogy is the anode of a water heater.
I am quite sure at least half of you are unaware of them, and even those who are do nothing. A water heater anode is a sacrificial element in that it attracts corrosion away from the tank. If you can replace the things every 2-3 years, your water heater will last ten times as long.
Apply the sacrificial element to plated bolts. I have already replaced anchors on routes I installed 25 years ago. The corrosion was not even extensive, including a route in a water streak.
Now, if the routes were installed with stainless, the lifespan exceeds 50 years. Who is going to be around then with knowledge of the original install? How about other stress fractures that may occur over extended lengths of time? There are reasons to consider using materials with a shorter shelf life as part of the decision process.
Another general issue I take here is the propensity of people to rush to the coercive regulatory answer every time a question arises about utilizing common property. Let's slam the door on innovation and leave the decisions to a handful of elitists.
This issue parallels the whole hydrocarbon/AGW paradigm too.
Plated hardware led to explosion of sport routes we all enjoy today. They represent a type of consumerism and we are all better off for them. Just like coal feeding the industrial revolution. Curmudgeons exist who lament the accessibility to crags this brought about, just as there are curmudgeons who lament the elevated standard of living we have.
The call to change is based on anecdotal evidence with limited proof of additional benefit despite significant additional costs.
The better way can only be made plausible by applying a subsidy, such as the stainless bolt program.
No particular point here, I just people would quit taking the simple hook, line and sinker route and treat issues like this with awareness of both sides of the coin. Because if you limit your mindset, you will not find the best solution.

Mike Lane wrote: Now, if the routes were installed with stainless, the lifespan exceeds 50 years. Who is going to be around then with knowledge of the original install? How about other stress fractures that may occur over extended lengths of time?

First... Thanks to all of you who are taking the time and spending the money to put up routes. Even if you are using plated hardware. I'm just a lowly weekend warrior who has never bolted a route myself, so I won't give any opinion.

Mike, I simply don't understand your point above. Doesn't plated hardware develop stress fractures too? Also, isn't it possible that a 30+ year old plated bolt will appear ok on the surface, but can be completely corroded inside the hole?

I thought part of the reason for the push for SS is that plated can't be reliably inspected from the outside.