“Guide Mode” usage

Sebastian Reichelt wrote:

Have you tried to lower someone that way with any other plaquette than the Pivot? I can totally understand why people choose to redirect. And then drop their follower.

Which raises an interesting question: Has anyone ever been dropped in guide mode with a Pivot?

Yes I've done it several times with the Reverso. I never felt the need to redirect. But the hold vs. release on/off was more difficult to manage. The Pivot is smoother. 

We've come full circle. I've lowered with both ATC Guide and Pivot - Pivot is definitely easier/smoother and manageable without extra leverage and elaborate back-up set-ups. I tied a back-up knot about 5 meters down the break hand side for the Pivot and lowered to near that, then repeated. Way easier than ATC Guide. No extra leverage needed other than the biner in the hole, for a near free hanging bigger guy. Prompting my statement about how I don't know why the Pivot is not more popular for tube guide-mode devices. Pretty much identical in every way as the others, with easier (and I feel safer) lowering. As soon as BD/Petzl makes one similar to the Pivot, or improves upon it slightly, everyone will grab one and tout the benefits...
 
 Now que the people that bring up the Gri Gri and Gigi...

Joe, I know this may sound dumb, but the main reason that I haven't gotten on a pivot is that in my field, I see moving parts break eventually.  I am worried that at some point, we are going to hear a story about how that pivoting joint failed.  I don't have that concern on a Gigi.

just a true confessions moment. It seems to me that a pivot works better in all aspects of guide mode than other autoblockers.

Adan Lopez wrote: 

This is the best argument made FOR the Pivot, thus far. Why use this device when you can use these two other devices (and always accurately predict which device might be best suited)

Here are a few reasons why I choose to carry the ATC Guide instead of the Pivot:

• It's extremely rare to need to lower, so making it easier isn't really helpful
• I generally lower using the LSD method, which doesn't engage the pivoting mechanism, so it adds no value (to me)
• The Pivot costs more
• The Pivot is less durable and the ATC Guide will last longer
• Maybe (unproven): The Pivot has more friction in autoblocking mode (so it's worse 99.99% of the time that you're using it, and better 0.01% when you need to lower)
• Maybe (unproven): The Pivot has less braking force for catching falls
• Maybe (unproven): The ATC Guide has zero moving parts and may have higher reliability as a result

In the end, the Pivot is totally fine.  Any of these devices is fine, really.  Somebody else asked why people wouldn't want a Pivot, so I answered.  I think that the claims that the pivot is a miracle device are overblown.  Use whatever you want, it probably doesn't really matter.

Pete Spri wrote:

Going to disagree with this since not all "plaquettes" are equal.

Kong gigi is a much easier pull even than a Petzl grigri.  At least, the old models.  I have not tried the new grigris yet.

Have you checked the calibration of your elbows lately? :)
Blake tested this a few years back, the ovo is equal in smooth pull to the gigi

https://cascadeclimbers.com/elbow-saving-belays/

I think there is a flaw in the testing though, that it measured how hard the device was pulled down on the masterpoint. A strain gauge hooked to a project capture pulley or ascender on the brake strand would be a more accurate test of how hard you're really working. I think we would see the ovo/gigi out perform the tube devices there, as they do with medium ropes in real practice in my experience. 

Joe Prescott wrote:  Prompting my statement about how I don't know why the Pivot is not more popular for tube guide-mode devices. 

Because over the last 1,000 pitches I've only had to pay out slack in an amount larger than pumping the brake carabiner could provide once. Flat out, lowering a second in guide mode isn't a concern. I've got a short prusik with me, I can back up and set to lower with an atc guide/gigi in less than a minute. With that happening on .1% of the pitches I climb, well 60 seconds ain't much.

Kyle Tarry wrote:

Here are a few reasons why I choose to carry the ATC Guide instead of the Pivot:

Whoa. Those were a lot of maybes and speculations. I own both devices. 

• It's extremely rare to need to lower, so making it easier isn't really helpful

Agreed avoid guide mode when lowering is likely. But pivot is definitely easier in the rare event or the frequent event for noobies using guide mode when they shouldn’t. 

• I generally lower using the LSD method, which doesn't engage the pivoting mechanism, so it adds no value (to me)

IIRC, LSD requires an unweighted rope. Not always an option. 

• The Pivot costs more

A couple of dollars. I don’t care. 

• The Pivot is less durable and the ATC Guide will last longer

Pure speculation. Yes pivot has a moving part. How about alloy quality?  The teeth on my guides ware fairly fast. Can’t say that the pivot wares as fast yet.  

• Maybe (unproven): The Pivot has more friction in autoblocking mode (so it's worse 99.99% of the time that you're using it, and better 0.01% when you need to lower)

I have not noticed increased effort belaying. The alleged increase friction is not what makes lowering easier. It’s the mechanical advantage. 

• Maybe (unproven): The Pivot has less braking force for catching falls

This contradicts the previous unfounded claim. I have not seen tests though. 

In the end, the Pivot is totally fine.  Any of these devices is fine, really.  Somebody else asked why people wouldn't want a Pivot, so I answered.  I think that the claims that the pivot is a miracle device are overblown.  Use whatever you want, it probably doesn't really matter.

The one benefit that I have noticed is when repelling. With the guide I usually add a second biner for added friction. It does not provide enough for me on some ropes. (200lbs+). I don’t need a second biner on the pivot. 

Kyle Tarry wrote:

Here are a few reasons why I choose to carry the ATC Guide instead of the Pivot:

• It's extremely rare to need to lower, so making it easier isn't really helpful
• I generally lower using the LSD method, which doesn't engage the pivoting mechanism, so it adds no value (to me)
• The Pivot costs more
• The Pivot is less durable and the ATC Guide will last longer
• Maybe (unproven): The Pivot has more friction in autoblocking mode (so it's worse 99.99% of the time that you're using it, and better 0.01% when you need to lower)
• Maybe (unproven): The Pivot has less braking force for catching falls
• Maybe (unproven): The ATC Guide has zero moving parts and may have higher reliability as a result

In the end, the Pivot is totally fine.  Any of these devices is fine, really.  Somebody else asked why people wouldn't want a Pivot, so I answered.  I think that the claims that the pivot is a miracle device are overblown.  Use whatever you want, it probably doesn't really matter.

Extremely rare to lower, but you 'generally' use the LDS method? Sounds like you lower once and a while. Why would you not use a device that lowers more easily and not complicate things? Might be a situation once and a while where this ease in lowering might make a big difference (my main argument for using Pivot).

Cost and durability are the same argument, really, and a few dollars maybe shouldn't factor into a belay device decision?

The slots on the Pivot are actually a little bigger and friction is greatly dependent of the biners and ropes used. This can be modulated and I find the Pivot at least as smooth as the ATC, but there are hundreds of possible combos.

Braking force difference (in normal belay mode) is very small, and just use the extra biner that you are now not using in guide mode to clip to belay loop/rope to have a 2-biner rig and braking force is greatly increased, for the times you need it. Of course works with any tube device.

If you don't trust the standards for testing moving parts in climbing gear, well, biners, cams, many other belay devices, endless list here...

To each their own.

Nick Drake wrote:

Because over the last 1,000 pitches I've only had to pay out slack in an amount larger than pumping the brake carabiner could provide once. Flat out, lowering a second in guide mode isn't a concern. I've got a short prusik with me, I can back up and set to lower with an atc guide/gigi in less than a minute. With that happening on .1% of the pitches I climb, well 60 seconds ain't much.

I'm talking about more popular - population level, not your n=1. Back to the OP, or a few posts down where someone was free hanging for 90min. A Pivot might make the difference (likely would have) in this and similar cases. Cases you might be in some day. A fully-weighted rope+ATC guide requires more than just setting up a prusik backup, in a lot of situations. You need to rig a mechanical advantage to get the sucker to lower. If you don't know this, you might want to cary more and lear how to rig it. I found weighted rope+Pivot+Spirit biner through the hole allowed me to lower a free-hanging 190 pound guy many meters no problem. Might be situations where more rigging would be required to provide a mechanical advantage for the Pivot, like needed for ATC/Reverso in heavily-weighted situations. I would have had to rig up more than just a prusik backup to lower in the above situation with ATC Guide.

I guess if people don't understand this distinction, that accounts for it not being more popular.

No one is talking about giving slack here, I don't think.

Joe Prescott wrote:

Extremely rare to lower, but you 'generally' use the LDS method? Sounds like you lower once and a while. 

I've lowered twice in approximately 500-1000 pitches of multipitch climbing, once using the Pivot method, and once using the LSD method.  Based on those experiences, and testing during practice, the next time this happens I will likely either use the LSD method, or convert to a non-autoblocking system, even if I am carrying my Pivot.  I don't understand why you're trying to pick this statement apart so much.

If you don't trust the standards for testing moving parts in climbing gear, well, biners, cams, many other belay devices, endless list here...

There is no standard for testing the breaking strength of the autoblock attachment hole.  Don't try to throw "standards" in my face if you don't know what's in them.  (Edit: 7 kN minimum force, thanks for the correction from Jim Titt below.  I stand by my original statement that less moving parts may result in better long term reliability, which isn't directly related to initial proof strength.)

Again, I think the Pivot is a great device.  I also think that if someone wants to use one because the lowering is easier, that's totally reasonable.  You asked why anyone might not choose to use one, and I answered truthfully, for me.  I don't know why you're so eager to prove that the Pivot is the best choice, it seems like any device is a reasonable choice as long as you know how to use it, and there's no reason to make a big deal out of it.

Kyle Tarry wrote:

There is no standard for testing the breaking strength of the autoblock attachment hole.  Don't try to throw "standards" in my face if you don't know what's in them.

The strength (7kN) is tested in ALL braking configurations.  16kN is DMM's figure if I remember rightly.

Jim Titt wrote:

The strength (7kN) is tested in ALL braking configurations.  16kN is DMM's figure if I remember rightly.

Thanks Jim, I stand corrected!

I am really enjoying the SMC spire...

half the weight of a pivot and less bulky

Kyle Tarry wrote: I've lowered twice in approximately 500-1000 pitches of multipitch climbing, once using the Pivot method, and once using the LSD method.  Based on those experiences, and testing during practice, the next time this happens I will likely either use the LSD method, or convert to a non-autoblocking system, even if I am carrying my Pivot.  I don't understand why you're trying to pick this statement apart so much.

There is no standard for testing the breaking strength of the autoblock attachment hole.  Don't try to throw "standards" in my face if you don't know what's in them.

Again, I think the Pivot is a great device.  I also think that if someone wants to use one because the lowering is easier, that's totally reasonable.  You asked why anyone might not choose to use one, and I answered truthfully, for me.  I don't know why you're so eager to prove that the Pivot is the best choice, it seems like any device is a reasonable choice as long as you know how to use it, and there's no reason to make a big deal out of it.

Why/how would you assume I don't know anything about standards? I'm not an engineer, (actually studied architectural engineering but switched to biomedicine) but I am fairly familiar with the standards and how they are used, after selling gear for many years, some guiding, and working with (not for) Black Diamond/Patagonia. The strength of the pivot/hinge/pin is certainly tested. Yeah, you can't test the strength of the 'hole' but you can test the strength of the whole.

Just seemed strange to say you almost never do something, then you usually use a certain method - didn't mean to ruffle your feathers so. I spend a lot of me day writing, reading and analyzing technical manuscripts, so there is some carryover....

Joe

Joe Prescott wrote:

Just seemed strange to say you almost never do something, then you usually use a certain method - 

Like standard practices for CPR, the Heimlich maneuver, first aid, use of a fire extinguisher, and many other aspects of climbing self-rescue, there are a whole litany of scenarios that we may experience very rarely (in fact, perhaps never) and yet we still have a normal/standard way that we would "usually" expect to approach them.

Kyle Tarry wrote:

Like standard practices for CPR, the Heimlich maneuver, first aid, use of a fire extinguisher, and many other aspects of climbing self-rescue, there are a whole litany of scenarios that we may experience very rarely (in fact, perhaps never) and yet we still have a normal/standard way that we would "usually" expect to approach them.

Ok - but if you told someone you normally perform CPR using method XYZ, they'd surely think you did it a lot of CPR...

Anyway, I'm not trying to stick up for the Pivot, just curious why more people don't favor it. I wouldn't have guessed that people would actually be concerned with the pivot/pin, or a few extra $, but maybe so. If you do use guide mode a lot, I could certainly see that the ease of taking in slack would be a major factor, because it can get very tiring. Not sure one is better than the other for this. It will be interesting when/if BD/Petzl comes out with something similar. Might not have a hinge. Pretty sure a lot of folks will happen to need a new device around that time...

Joe

Pivot is now my standard device for long multi-pitches.  For short multi-pitch I also carry a GriGri for its ease of use in top belaying.

Joe Prescott wrote:

I'm talking about more popular - population level, not your n=1. Back to the OP, or a few posts down where someone was free hanging for 90min. A Pivot might make the difference (likely would have) in this and similar cases. Cases you might be in some day. A fully-weighted rope+ATC guide requires more than just setting up a prusik backup, in a lot of situations. You need to rig a mechanical advantage to get the sucker to lower. If you don't know this, you might want to cary more and lear how to rig it. I found weighted rope+Pivot+Spirit biner through the hole allowed me to lower a free-hanging 190 pound guy many meters no problem. Might be situations where more rigging would be required to provide a mechanical advantage for the Pivot, like needed for ATC/Reverso in heavily-weighted situations. I would have had to rig up more than just a prusik backup to lower in the above situation with ATC Guide.

I guess if people don't understand this distinction, that accounts for it not being more popular.

No one is talking about giving slack here, I don't think.

You posed a question, I answered. Yes I'm n=1, but I also climb with a large breadth of partners, far more than I care to figure out an actual sample size for. What I can say is that none of them are currently using a pivot, nor felt any compelling reason to switch when it came out. In the western US for multi pitch routes most of us are climbing slab to slightly overhung with the occasional roof. The scenario of a follower hanging free in space unable to pull back on just doesn't happen with any type of frequency for the very mast majority of climbers in this area of the world. If I was climbing in the gunks regularly I'd probably be very concerned about this part of guide mode, I don't, so I'm not. 

I also have to say that your assessment of setting up a guide device to lower is grossly over stated. For the gigi I just grabbed a sling, girth to the device, up through the biner on the master point, down to my foot, brake strand got a few wraps of sterling hollow block to my belay loop. I set that up and lowered the climber in less than a minute, it really isn't that hard.  

Nick Drake wrote:

You posed a question, I answered. Yes I'm n=1, but I also climb with a large breadth of partners, far more than I care to figure out an actual sample size for. What I can say is that none of them are currently using a pivot, nor felt any compelling reason to switch when it came out. In the western US for multi pitch routes most of us are climbing slab to slightly overhung with the occasional roof. The scenario of a follower hanging free in space unable to pull back on just doesn't happen with any type of frequency for the very mast majority of climbers in this area of the world. If I was climbing in the gunks regularly I'd probably be very concerned about this part of guide mode, I don't, so I'm not. 

I also have to say that your assessment of setting up a guide device to lower is grossly over stated. For the gigi I just grabbed a sling, girth to the device, up through the biner on the master point, down to my foot, brake strand got a few wraps of sterling hollow block to my belay loop. I set that up and lowered the climber in less than a minute, it really isn't that hard.  

Still not answering the question, and I was specifically comparing the guide mode tubes (BD/Reverso/Pivot...). Because your partners don't use one and haven't felt the need to switch, isn't a reason for the Pivot not to be more popular (it is a result). Others have posted it say it solves a non-problem, but the whole original point of this thread, and several others over the last several years, and accident reports, surrounds the difficulty and danger of lowering in guide mode with these devises. The Pivot at least partially solves this.

If you had to pick between the 3 popular ones (ATC-Guide, Reverso, Pivot) and all 3 are for all intents and purposes identical in function in every way, except one is far easier to lower in guide mode, what would you choose? Because you very rarely need to lower isn't a reason to pick BD/Petzl. My point of view is that on that very rare (and maybe dangerous, emergency) occasion, you might want the Pivot.

Kyle brought up a few points that might answer this - I hadn't thought that people might be afraid of the pivot/hinge. Cost - slightly more. Breaking power is very slightly lower - I bet few people look at this (or are even aware of it), but maybe? Harder to pull in guide mode? These would be reasons, but none that I consider, but others might.

Again, not talking gigi (I have zero experience with it) but ATC-Guide and Reverso, I don't think the difficulty in lowering is overstated. This is from personal experience, accident reports, discussions on MP with problems lowering, posts on this thread, etc. Lowering with BD/Petzl is not trivial in many cases (or for many people) and people have been dropped, or stuck because the belayer couldn't figure it out. I have never heard anything negative about lowering with Pivot regarding lowering, and in my very little experience, it was very easy in a situation that would have been very difficult with the ATC Guide I was using previously.

I’ll make this short “Because you very rarely need to lower isn't a reason to pick BD/Petzl.”

Again read my post above, it’s solving a problem that has occurred in .1% of the pitches I climb. Why spend more (reverso/atc are always on a cheap sale) to solve a non existent problem to the terrain I climb?

Tube style devices are not any harder to set up for lower, just have to get a carabiner in the nose. Gigi/ovo are a hair faster to girth hitch with a giant hole. It really isn’t hard or complicated, people are just too damn lazy to RTFM.