1/4" quick-links. Am I going to die?

Delaney Bray-Stonewrote:

Climbing gear is rated to breaking strength.

nope...

SOME climbing gear is, some is not. read the manual or the warnings on the piece of equipment.

Ok, lets clear something up about WLL v. Breaking Strength.

WLL is the amount of weight the QL can be under and still be opened. This means there is so little deformation that the threads do not seize.

In actual testing 5/16" QLs with a WLL of ~1700lbs actually broke at ~8000 lbs repeatable...3/8" QL break at 10,000# plus ie they are strong AF and insano overkill. This is not a bad thing as they leave a large safety margin for many years but strictly speaking are over kill.

So, though I haven't seen testing, a QL that has a WLL of 640 lbs likely breaks at 3000# or more ie You ain't gonna break it in a climbing scenario....UNLESS it is significantly grooved from many many repeated whips like on some trade route crux. Everything else they are perfectly fine, just not confidence inspiring due to lack of familiarity (like we have seen in this thread). Would I use them on my routes? No. Would I take the whip on a new looking one? Without a doubt. As they rust however reasonable people will find them sketch even though they are likely perfectly safe for some time.

If you placed some 1/4" on your obscuro project I wouldn't worry about it. If you think anyone else is ever gonna be interested then use 5/16" and forgetaboutit.

Galvy is perfectly fine, imo (esp on a roof where they stay dry), if they can be easily got to and replaced though SS is ALWAYS preferred. The question is always who is going to pay for them and then do the work to eventually replace them. Modern SS should last a very, very long time unless grooving becomes an issue.

You're gonna die. Might as well leave a legacy of quality SS hardware behind you. :)

WLL/strength ratings on hardware store quicklinks can be a complete joke. During some bolt testing at our local climbing area, a new 1/2" quicklink rated at over 10,000 lbs failed at less than 2000 lbs. The quicklink was not supposed to be what was being tested. Whoops. It seems the threads were defective.

That's part of the reason people should go big, if they're going to use hardware store links, that added with the fact that they get grooved easily when paired with sharp edges hangers, should be plenty of reason to go minimum 5/16'', 3/8'' is preferred for anything that's going to get a lot of traffic. 

DrRockso RRGwrote:

WLL/strength ratings on hardware store quicklinks can be a complete joke. During some bolt testing at our local climbing area, a new 1/2" quicklink rated at over 10,000 lbs failed at less than 2000 lbs. The quicklink was not supposed to be what was being tested. Whoops. It seems the threads were defective.

That's part of the reason people should go big, if they're going to use hardware store links, that added with the fact that they get grooved easily when paired with sharp edges hangers, should be plenty of reason to go minimum 5/16'', 3/8'' is preferred for anything that's going to get a lot of traffic. 

Could you expand on "failed" ie did it snap or completely open and do you have pictures? Just trying to get a complete idea of this failure.

Sprayloard Overstokerwrote:

Could you expand on "failed" ie did it snap or completely open and do you have pictures. Just trying to get a complete idea of this failure.

Threads stripped and it opened like a sardine can is what I read.

So did anyone  die when this happened?  Every test I have done with 5/16th and larger  quick links the climbing rope has broken at the knott. I have peeled quicklinks open in the manner that you describe with logging chain however if you put climbing rope into the system the rope always breaks before the link making the ultimate strength of the link a moot point. 

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

So did anyone  die when this happened?  Every test I have done with 5/16th and larger  quick links the climbing rope has broken at the knott. I have peeled quicklinks open in the manner that you describe with logging chain however if you put climbing rope into the system the rope always breaks before the link making the ultimate strength of the link a moot point. 

I safely lowered and TR soloed on them. No whips though lol. Anecdotally, a local developer claims to have used 1/4" QLs for permas on a bunch of 5.11-5.12 routes and nobody has died yet (after multiple years). I do think that there is logic behind the arguments that 1) gouging is a concern and that 2) Chinesium QLs may not all be manufactured to the same standard, and that it makes sense to have a large margin of error.

Sprayloard Overstokerwrote:

Could you expand on "failed" ie did it snap or completely open and do you have pictures? Just trying to get a complete idea of this failure.

What Montoya said, I'll see if I can dig up some pictures. They used to be floating around online but that website got taken down. 

I probably have a failed  5/16 th link  kicking around  but I  broke it with  logging chain.  Not  climbing rope.  

Delaney Bray-Stonewrote:

Kind of a shitty option for new-routing hard overhanging terrain. Especially on routes completely devoid of gear placements where you have to place bolts just to get into the wall to clean/figure out beta. I guess that removable bolts would solve that, but that's a big investment. Seems easier just to throw a fat QL in?

If I was for whatever reason replacing the bolts on this route, I'd agree with using glue-ins.

this isnt really that hard with waves and RBs... it might even be less as you only drill lead bolts where they need to go off of shallow Rb holes.

Sprayloard Overstokerwrote:

Could you expand on "failed" ie did it snap or completely open and do you have pictures? Just trying to get a complete idea of this failure.

these cheaper links have cut threads.  When coupled with how the links are formed and not re heat treated cause the threads to fail at low loads. the link then has a cascade of failures that cause the body of the link to open and lose the load. 

the biggest reason to use big links is gouging. followed closely by the warm fuzzy feeling of big quick links. 

Fixe and climbtech dont sell stainless off the shelf because there is no relavent standard for fixed hardware outside.  

The biggest client for there Perma Draws is gyms which would not pay for a hardware standard that does not apply to their environment.

Bolts can have a rating for a certain material of UIAA. Perma Draws with the additional variable of rope wear are much harder to legislate. 

Its better to think of them as a consumable as in most incidences, both the link and the biner will be consumed before the plating.   

You can always make your own, the tools to make rated cable draws are not diffcult to understand. Buying stainless wire rope, thimbles and swedges will be expensive from a trust worthy souce. However, the swedging tool, apopriate cable cutter and go/no-go gauge are quite simple. Be prepared to spend upwards of $30 per draw for somthing that will wear out before rusting occurs. This may still be benefical enough to justfiy the cost in some cases. The sitution disccused above of a low traffic but still steep area in a wet or maritime environment is a good case study for stainless.

Kong, Cypher and Austri-Alpine all make decent SS clipping biners if you want to go that direction. With the cost of tools, SS chain will be more economical by far for the scenario 

 I absolutly agree that bigger is better when fixing hardware.

Thanks for everyone's response re QL failure. 

Nothing really new, just hadn't heard of an (apparent) hardening issue that greatly affected their strength. This is hardly shocking given the supplier (hardware store cheapo China) and is a good warning that single QL should not be relied upon when purchased from mank suppliers. In an anchor situation if backed up they should still be a reasonable alternative for some uses however with CAMP etc supplying CE rated links at a good price these should be adequate (and were the actual 5/16" links that tested to ~8000#) and the default choice when 5/16 is used.

I get mine from Climb tech. 

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

I get mine from Climb tech. 

I don't believe the CT QL are CE certified which ensures consistency of production. I would want more information as to QC and testing of the CT, imo.

they are sold as life support anchors and are stronger than climbing rope every day of the week. 

Ok, I'll take that fwiw lol. Normally a huge fan of Climb Tech.

PS (Post Limit).

No worries, Nick.

This is one of my favored anchor set ups for a rappel station:

And, imo, a CE certified QL would just make me feel better.

With all due respect to yourself and CT, what we have in the other case seem to be "promises from China...." unless there is an extra step of QC that CT is doing they aren't sharing with us?

QC is never about what one will hold, but regular testing to make sure no batch goes through that is defective. I have no doubt if we pick one it will be strong AF. The question though is if we and others use thousands might one fail?

Maybe CT can chime in just what they do to QC their QLs? There is no mention on their site of any rating or test results that I see...

you supply the dynamic climbing rope. I will supply the climb tech 5/16ths quick links and break your rope for whatever amount of money you are willing to put down. 

Climb Tech does say their perma draws are CE certified but I don’t know if that means their cable draws are CE or the entire draw which includes the quick link.   Personally I am not going to lose any sleep over wether their quick links are strong enough.    Has anyone ever heard of a quick link from CT failing? I didn’t think so.

Kevin Mokracekwrote:

Climb Tech does say their perma draws are CE certified but I don’t know if that means their cable draws are CE or the entire draw which includes the quick link.   Personally I am not going to lose any sleep over wether their quick links are strong enough.    Has anyone ever heard of a quick link from CT failing? I didn’t think so.

so as far as i can tell, and I am only sharing my personal experience...only the Carabiner is rated.  the QL is a 3/8's from china, no stamp and no rating. However, the anticapted  load is so low they could be open and not lose the load from bending. The cable is a standard Nico press 5/16s aircraft cable. The cable is also stronger than the anticipated load. It however does not have a CE stamp

if your wanted to stick to the most CE compliant option, go with camp or FIxe.

the camp draws are rated for the biner and the QL. I like the Biner and cable more if that counts for anything.