Quick-link over rap rings?

Clint Cummins wrote: The rings can easily rotate in the lowest chain links, so they do not usually concentrate wear at a single point like the quicklink does.
So wear on these rings should not be a big concern.

This is true in theory but not in practice. I’ve rarely seen perfectly round steel rings and the welded joint is seldom finished well. Small imperfections and friction will keep the rings from rotating freely and once a rope wears the shallowest of grooves into the ring ropes will always settle to that point from there on out thus concentrating wear. 

The advantages I see to rings are that they give you more real estate for clipping carabiners and passing ropes and that they are generally thicker than even the fattest quicklinks.

Mark E Dixon wrote:

Yes, but 'just lower' should be the general practice. 

The orientation of the single quick link won't cause twisting, but might make it difficult to pull the rope if the climber insists on pulling the strand on top.

Personally, I've got no problem depending on a single adequately sized QL.

I'd guess the added QL was an afterthought to forestall wear on the more difficult to replace rings.
The link itself already shows some signs of wear.

Lowering should be the de facto for sure, but some areas have people that would rather you jump down than lower off their fixed gear. Just saying, you should know when and where before getting your tires slashed by the local dbag.

I trust quick links on permas, but at the anchor, at least if I'm cleaning draws and not just lowering, I dont like a single point between me and catastrophe.

It's not really about twisting the rope, it's about the rope not being pinned against the wall the whole way down, if you are lowering.

Ma Ja wrote:

Lowering should be the de facto for sure, but some areas have people that would rather you jump down than lower off their fixed gear. Just saying, you should know when and where before getting your tires slashed by the local dbag.

It's not really about twisting the rope, it's about the rope not being pinned against the wall the whole way down, if you are lowering.

Good point about excess lowering wear. No good reason not to use two links anyway.

As for the local dbag- I'm curious to know where these tire slashers are located.
Haven't met any of them, but haven't travelled as much as I'd like either.
As a rule, I try to donate some money to the local climbing org whenever I visit someplace.
Or add a couple of mussys or links myself.
Figure that covers the small amount of wear I put on the anchors.

Mark E Dixon wrote:

Good point about excess lowering wear. No good reason not to use two links anyway.

As for the local dbag- I'm curious to know where these tire slashers are located.
Haven't met any of them, but haven't travelled as much as I'd like either.
As a rule, I try to donate some money to the local climbing org whenever I visit someplace.
Or add a couple of mussys or links myself.
Figure that covers the small amount of wear I put on the anchors.

I've never met them either. I think to meet them, youd have to be very inviting.

Thanks for all the good points and replies! For anyone who's curious, this is the rap anchor at the end of P2 of Jamcrack (on Sunnyside Bench), so nobody's getting lowered from here without two ropes and weird priorities.

I guess the likely explanation is that the quicklink was added later by a different climber than the one who installed the rings, rather than the two things being planned to function together.