Photos of BEAUTIFUL HARDWARE

On vertically staggered anchors:

What's your response to new/sport only climbers who don't have anchor material and just clip two draws to build a TR anchor? I don't think crossed draws will work on staggered bolts.

IMO, new climbers are taught to expect a certain anchor setup (generally parallel bolts with rap rings) and for someone without a lot of technical experience, a new or different anchor setup could confuse them. So I'll echo Taylor's comment - it's all about public education. I would want climbers to be confident and safe rather than force them to use a marginally(?) better system. I think it's good to remember that this community is very technically minded. Maybe most climbers out there are not so technically minded?

Ben Turcotte wrote: On vertically staggered anchors:

What's your response to new/sport only climbers who don't have anchor material and just clip two draws to build a TR anchor? I don't think crossed draws will work on staggered bolts.

IMO, new climbers are taught to expect a certain anchor setup (generally parallel bolts with rap rings) and for someone without a lot of technical experience, a new or different anchor setup could confuse them. So I'll echo Taylor's comment - it's all about public education. I would want climbers to be confident and safe rather than force them to use a marginally(?) better system. I think it's good to remember that this community is very technically minded. Maybe most climbers out there are not so technically minded?

Why wouldn't they work just fine?

2 Draws, gates reversed, on the ring (tests to like 10k lbs or something ridiculous).

Not a problem.

Harumpfster Boondoggle wrote:

Why wouldn't they work just fine?

2 Draws, gates reversed, on the ring (tests to like 10k lbs or something ridiculous).

Not a problem.

And even if you put one on the ring and one on a link higher up the chain there is no problem, the higher draw takes all the load and the lower draw is there as a backup.  As has been said, education is key, 2 good bolts don't need ot be equalized for any reason other than that is what continues to be taught to noobs.

John Wilder wrote:

You haven’t met many beginners, I take it. Every AMGA post I see on insta still talks about equalizing anchor points.

The AMGA cult is strong with teh noobs....I mean, it must be complicated they're paying someone $250 for the anchor class....right?

Be a pretty short class if taught by me. How long does it take to hang two biners and tie two cloves?

But that doesn't make business sense for guides or gear makers.

Harumpfster Boondoggle wrote:

Why wouldn't they work just fine?

2 Draws, gates reversed, on the ring (tests to like 10k lbs or something ridiculous).

Not a problem.

I personally hate those anchor sets. The ring is oriented badly and when it wears out too much of the hardware needs to be replaced (plus those Fixe hangers chew the crap out of biners). I am slowly coming around to vertical setups though. The worst is the old school idea of really widely spaced and off angle bolts while in perfectly good rock.

Edit - not to mention ​Fixe quality problems​​​

John Wilder wrote:

You haven’t met many beginners, I take it.

The idea of equalization and equalizing anchors and the expectation of horizontal bolts at anchors is extremely pervasive in America- look at any guide book or any how to book, poster, or general guidance video and take a close look at the anchor and the words the instructors are using regarding anchor building. Every AMGA post I see on insta still talks about equalizing anchor points.

Honestly, in some areas you don't see too many totally inept people. Granted I climb by the odd youtube apprentice and euro death trap anchor on the easy classics in yosemite (I will pause and help them if I think they are in a YGD situation), but generally I don't see the Sender One belay card on harness gumbies I saw at red rock crags this weekend. In the areas where the beginners still believe trad is some form of death cult though, there are usually nice, textbook horizontal anchors that will take QDs.

M Sprague wrote:

I personally hate those anchor sets. The ring is oriented badly and when it wears out too much of the hardware needs to be replaced (plus those Fixe hangers chew the crap out of biners). I am slowly coming around to vertical setups though. The worst is the old school idea of really widely spaced and off angle bolts while in perfectly good rock.

Yea, tbh I posted that for simplicity but they are expensive for something useful for only the life of the ring and despite best intentions they tend to wear in a single spot if used as a lower off.

But, I more commonly use one ring on a chain and one double ring setup on another hanger so that two rings are hanging together (one from each bolt).

Its insanely confidence inspiring to have that as a master point and that way the individual pieces can be replaced separately.

You can build the same with quick links and chain etc, just a little more time consuming to assemble the sets but that way only the rings need replacement after many years.

Mikey Schaefer wrote: I don't understand why we don't adopt the vertically offset anchor that is a lot more popular in Europe.  Equalization on a modern well placed anchor isn't needed and is rarely even achieved.  Horizontally aligned anchors require more chain/quicklinks and are more likely to twist the rope.  

I have started doing this the last few years.  Some of my partners complain that "it's not equalized".  I point out that they just took countless whips on a single 3/8" bolt and they didn't bat an eye, but now when you are statically rapping off one that is backed up you freak out? 

Taylor Spiegelberg wrote: That's interesting Patrick, those proto-Wavebolts still look great. It looks like they're in an area that would see water a lot too, as they're at the top of a cliff. One question I have is were these hammered in with the Wavebolt installation tool, a stainless hammer, or a regular hammer? There looks to be absolutely no corrosion on the front face of those bolts.

Yes very wet area. they were hand drilled. So the bolts just fell in. No hammering needed. I know what your talking about tho. I just use some scotch bright or light sand paper.

 I know a few guys that will wallow the hole out a bit so as not to have to hammer so hard.  More glue, less sand created And no metal transfer 

Patrick Miller wrote:

Yes very wet area. they were hand drilled. So the bolts just fell in. No hammering needed. I know what your talking about tho. I just use some scotch bright or light sand paper.

 I know a few guys that will wallow the hole out a bit so as not to have to hammer so hard.  More glue, less sand created And no metal transfer 

Good to know the scotch brite trick works, thanks!

Mikey Schaefer wrote: I don't understand why we don't adopt the vertically offset anchor that is a lot more popular in Europe.  Equalization on a modern well placed anchor isn't needed and is rarely even achieved.  Horizontally aligned anchors require more chain/quicklinks and are more likely to twist the rope.  

I love these vertical offset anchors and have installed a couple. They require less hardware, work really well, and are less visible.  I really like glue ins because they seem really robust and are less visible.

Sadly, locals are somewhat backwater and resistant to new ideas or thinking.  The 1st party that came across a vertical anchor panicked,  insisted on equalisation, removed and kept the quicklinks,  then built an equalised anchor made out of webbing.  Locktight is my friend now.

Ben Turcotte wrote: On vertically staggered anchors:

What's your response to new/sport only climbers who don't have anchor material and just clip two draws to build a TR anchor? I don't think crossed draws will work on staggered bolts.

IMO, new climbers are taught to expect a certain anchor setup (generally parallel bolts with rap rings) and for someone without a lot of technical experience, a new or different anchor setup could confuse them. So I'll echo Taylor's comment - it's all about public education. I would want climbers to be confident and safe rather than force them to use a marginally(?) better system. I think it's good to remember that this community is very technically minded. Maybe most climbers out there are not so technically minded?

My response to those people would be that they've missed the point of learning the basis of protection and anchoring systems that can then be applied to a specific situation and instead have learned how to do things exclusively by rote; they need remedial training.

Hole re-used in columnar basalt. Total PITA to get rusted Rawl sleeves out of this rock, but worth it for the finished product. Thank you, ASCA!

Had a lot of failures today, but at least I was successful in putting in this beautiful new anchor. 

eli poss wrote: Had a lot of failures today, but at least I was successful in putting in this beautiful new anchor. 

That’s a good looking anchor. 

Kevin Mokracek wrote:

That’s a good looking anchor. 

I'm pretty proud of it. However, my pride went down the toilet when I wasn't able to pull a weird sleeve bolt and was stick with a stud sticking out of the hole and no way to remedy it. 

Any socal bolters out there that want to pass on some knowledge? I would love to tag along and lend a hand.

Ryan U. wrote: Any socal bolters out there that want to pass on some knowledge? I would love to tag along and lend a hand.

Just hang on the internet long enough and you'll be an expert before you know it!

Jaren Watson wrote:

Nice job! What route?

Something at the Talls at the Black Cliffs. Last clip on ‘thanks for the mammaries’ if I recall correctly.