When I come up on the top of a climb that has bolts that are uneven I'll use a sliding x. But then I'll also back up the lower bolt with webbing or a quickdraw. This makes me feel a bit better about extension and redundancy. I never have had any problems but also never had the webbing or bolt or 'biner break.

I use the alpine equalizer on every other pitch of multi pitch climbing since I only have one (use cordellete on the others) and usually do 3 pieces protecting the down and one protecting the up.

I use knots instead of the "Sliding X" whenever possible...which is pretty much always.

I don't buy the "AKA Death X" though. I heard people have been doing a lot of studies lately by shock-loading static climbing materials (ie spectra slings, daises, etc) and they've been breaking at relatively low kN values. That's probably why people are up-in-arms about the extension factor regarding the "Sliding X."

--Marc

What is an alpine equalizer?

or and equalette? is this different than a cordalette?

Check out the equalette in the new climbing anchors book. Thats pretty much all i use now. The sliding X is great But I only use it when I have solid bolts and am in an area with little risk of rock fall, Or as a leg to a larger system.

EDIT: When I use the X I always have limiter knots to reduce possible extension.

If you use limiter knots doesn't it eliminate the sliding action?

Good discussion but I was not specific enough in my original post.

I intended to ask about equalizing two protections points on a lead... not while building anchor.

Cheers,
Brad

Brad,
I have sometimes used a sliding X on lead with a fixed pin and a bomber cam placement...From all the comments, I still can't sort out if this is a bad thing - but it sounds like one?

If you have a bomber cam, why screw around with additional rigging?

Brad's clarification (now he tells us :) changes a lot. It eliminates redundancy objections, because it's a single protection point, not the belay. Doesn't it substantially answer the shock load issue, too? I mean, if you're worried about the sling-length shockload, what's the alternative? Go with one piece and if it fails, accelerate for another 10-to-30-to-whatever feet to the next piece? I'll go with the short shock, thanks.

Mark said: If one's great, why mess? 'Cuz sometime more feels better!

That said, I can't remember using an X on lead. Brad, why wouldn't you just clip each piece with a separate sling? ...I guess that's Mark's point citing Malcom--if the placements are marginal, and you're hoping to reduce impact load on both to maximize chances that something holds.

EDIT: And NSFOD's too. Wow, I shoulda been working the last 10 minutes instead:)

In light of Brad's clarification of the question...

...YES

I did say "for equalizing two pieces of protection" in the title. :)

Seems to me that equalizing two pieces is better than clipping just one. If you have the extra slings then the redundancy of clipping two draws is a bit better but certainly nothing is unsafe about equalizing two as opposed to clipping just one. If one fails and shock loads the other then you can think of the setup as having a really bomber screamer on it.

If it was one piece and blew then you'd fall, having the second is just insurance.

I always find in life/climbing that two things are always better than one,i.e.: two pieces of pro below your feet at a scary crux, two beers at the bar with your name on them, two dollars as opposed to one, two ice axes, etc.

When setting up said two pieces of pro always keep the runners angle less than 120 degrees. If you use a two foot runner and it's at a wide angle replace with a longer one. Decreasing the angle will better equalize the fall on both pieces. If at a wide angle the fall will have the same affect on both.

I use it a lot. I don't climb really hard but I tend to run it out a little so when I'm at a good stance and there is good pro I always put two pieces in.

Since I'm having a hard time imagine this without having my gear in front of me:

Will equalizing two stoppers on lead with a sliding X also help in holding them in place so that they don't walk out of place. You know as the rope moves past pieces knocking them out of the ideal location...or just plain knocking them out of the crack.

?

Typically I tie a stopper that might move statically to another piece. This takes a bit more time/effort than just slapping a sliding X on.

Sal, thanks for the link. Could you do the same just with your cordalette/master knot - by running clove hitches instead of just clipping the loops through the gear placement biners?

I never wrote you back...we should get out sometime.

Also, in response to the original question....how would just two pieces ON LEAD tied together with a sliding X ever be dangerous? I can see the at an anchor argument which has been covered already.

How is the Ophir Wall? Awesome? Worth a trip down from Boulder? I've been meaning to do some exploring in the San Juans anyways..

maybe the problem concept is looking for redundancy when it isn't there.

I'd use an x for marginal position - trying to get the load to distribute between multiple placements -- shockloading is irrelevant because of the nature of the anchors, if one blows the other will more than likely anyway as neither are solid. Given marginal placements, the goal of the x is to distribute between, not to create redundancy.

Wasn't the whole "death" in relation to any sliding X setup due to NOT making the twist?

Therefore if one piece goes it all slips through?