The BEST multi-pitch rappel anchor?

One pro about D is definitely the weight, and potentially price as well. I’ve used many on backcountry routes. Much nicer than leaving tat imo. Obviously not the best setup, but can be nice for a given context. Placing them vertically can help with rope twisting, although this further makes it a bad anchor for hanging at.

Similarly, can also get away with leaving only one biner/quick link on each bolt with a normal hanger if they are placed vertically. Like the photo posted above, but with only one quick link on the top bolt. Just be sure the bolts are placed basically straight up and down.

I am also surprised to see wear on an anchor that is strictly used for rapping.

Finally, another vote for leaving biners. This makes things so much easier, especially on rap routes that require two ropes. It’s very common to have a rap that is much shorter than the rest, and having to re thread all that rope is a pain. 

I'm a big fan of the "B" setup, but I also like "C" for being super clean and low profile. 

In my mind the B setup spreads the bolts into different fracture cones (?) And gives additional realestate for clipping in. Just my 2 cents.  

Here's my last "B" setup. (Ignore the shi* paint)

Brian Princewrote:Similarly, can also get away with leaving only one biner/quick link on each bolt with a normal hanger if they are placed vertically. Like the photo posted above, but with only one quick link on the top bolt. Just be sure the bolts are placed basically straight up and down.

I like this setup for low key placements when the rock allows for it. Couple variations I've used in overhanging rock:

Finally, another vote for leaving biners. This makes things so much easier, especially on rap routes that require two ropes. It’s very common to have a rap that is much shorter than the rest, and having to re thread all that rope is a pain. 

Definitely pros and cons. But overall I like this idea for the alpine. Easy to replace by anyone, which is nice and creates a bit of ownership in the community. Lighter too, in more ways than one: Don't have to haul up gear you ain't gonna use on the ascent. The gear you use on the way up can be left on the way down. Great use of old biners, IMO, and a lighter hike out.

nbrownwrote:

I like this setup for low key placements when the rock allows for it. Couple variations I've used in overhanging rock:

Definitely pros and cons. But overall I like this idea for the alpine. Easy to replace by anyone, which is nice and creates a bit of ownership in the community. Lighter too, in more ways than one: Don't have to haul up gear you ain't gonna use on the ascent. The gear you use on the way up can be left on the way down. Great use of old biners, IMO, and a lighter hike out.

I like adding a ring to the top bolt so the rope is easier.  The way it is in the picture if you pull on the top rope the quick link will try to pinch the bottom rope and the rock making it harder to pull and causing more wear on your rope.  Also a ring will rotate distributing the wear and lasting longer.

climber patwrote:

I like adding a ring to the top bolt so the rope is easier.  The way it is in the picture if you pull on the top rope the quick link will try to pinch the bottom rope and the rock making it harder to pull and causing more wear on your rope.  Also a ring will rotate distributing the wear and lasting longer.

No, it won't. Not at all. Not if done on a steep wall like in the second picture. That panel of rock is probably ~ 45 degree angle. That's the key. 

The first picture illustrates a situation where this was not the case and a second link had to be added. 

I typically use more standardized setups for crags that get regular traffic, but these (new ones) may or may not. If they do then I can always add chains in the future. 

These pics were meant to show unique setups that can be used, in some cases, to save on hardware for obscure routes. I go through quick links by the hundreds and try and save when I can.

Of course, yer gonna die either way.

Very nice, nbrown. Another reason I like the fixe single ring ones is that it forces me to go all stainless. I also go through quicklinks by the hundreds and am often tempted to cheap out and go plated with them. Yeah, not great, but better than tat. I will also stress that I'm talking about very low-traffic routes with these things.

+1 on vertical without chain:

ERRAND WOLFEwrote:

I'm a big fan of the "B" setup, but I also like "C" for being super clean and low profile. 

In my mind the B setup spreads the bolts into different fracture cones (?) And gives additional realestate for clipping in. Just my 2 cents.  

Here's my last "B" setup. (Ignore the shi* paint)

I think this is a better example pic of the B version. 

None of the problems from the original pic. 

timothy fisherwrote:

I think this is a better example pic of the B version. 

None of the problems from the original pic. 

What I dislike about these is that the chain can blow in the wind and every time you pull the rope- over time causing abrasion on the rock if it isn’t steep.

Jeremy Baumanwrote:

What I dislike about these is that the chain can blow in the wind and every time you pull the rope- over time causing abrasion on the rock if it isn’t steep.

Easy enough to put a small quick link between the bottom quiclk links to prevent that. Reduces wear in the top quicklink at the same time. I will do the same when there are 2 chains from horizontal bolts.

Consider this to be option E.

Best application is a multipitch route that climbs and rappels the route.

The mock-up is shown with ss wave bolts, 6 links of plated harbor freight 5/16” chromate transportation chain, 5/16” plated steel screw-links, and cypher plated steel wire-gate carabiners. Vertical offset between bolts is 11”.

Of course it can also be made entirely stainless.

Theft-resistant if keeper pins are installed

Non rope twisting

Won’t blow in the wind and scratch the wall

Doesn’t require untying on lead or threading on rappel

Ample places for multiple people to clip into with a lanyard on rappel and is immediately redundant with one clip

Redundant throughout 

Spreads out the cone of influence widely from the drilled holes

Bolts are vertically spaced and idefor sedimentary rock- they are installed in 11’ differing vertical strata in the column

Easy to replace the upper wear point

Bottom biner offers easy clip to complete a redpoint for a leader

I think it checks all the boxes… still tinkering with how it might be improved… more photos to folllow if I come up with anything

Dwayne La Rocawrote:

I love this. One tiny improvement I see is please put the upper carabiner either one link higher or lower to absolutely minimize twisting. 

The chain is superflous.

Jim Tittwrote:

The chain is superflous.

Why is that Jim?

Doesn’t it make it redundant with one clip of a lanyard on rappel? And also add additional clip in points for multiple people at the anchor?

M Mwrote:

The whole configuration sucks, the rings are almost always jammed against the rock on top of the welds not being smooth and allowing rotation. Vertical and overhanging the hangers flex like springs when weighted.

And act as a lever pulling out on the bolt. 

Dwayne La Rocawrote:

Why is that Jim?

Doesn’t it make it redundant with one clip of a lanyard on rappel? And also add additional clip in points for multiple people at the anchor?

A lanyard is also not redundant so why one part but not another? If it worries you then smack a draw in.

Jim Tittwrote:

A lanyard is also not redundant so why one part but not another? If it worries you then smack a draw in.

A lanyard such as the petzl connect is what I have been using for multipitch climbing for a number of years now- it is always in my care and it’s integrity can be inspected with each use.

I understand we exercise curious mental gymnastics regarding redundancy or the lack there of in our belay systems (belay loop, belay device, locking carabiner, rope) every time we climb, but again those items are always in our care and subject to our inspections on the ground and not while at height.

I also understand that modern anchor materials are more than strong enough for our uses.

I have no irrational phantom fears about failing anchors or non-redundancy, it’s just more of a “best-practices” situation.

We could just use a single bolt if it doesn’t matter?

(I admit I have done this numerous times over the years)

Here in the US I have smacked in a draw to cross-bridge horizontal anchor set-ups and create redundancy for decades now. But this set-up with the chain makes that unecessary. This is meant to be an anchor of convenience:)

Unless I’m missing something, I still see the chain as allowing for a single clip-in point that is inherently redundant within the anchor system and still allows more locations for multiple parties to easily clip- into the anchor while on rappel.

I do really appreciate the criticism:)

I like the chain but don't use it anymore, mainly because of the whining you'll hear if its not SS and the cost per foot is just crazy expensive compared to 4 quick links.

M Mwrote:

I like the chain but don't use it anymore, mainly because of the whining you'll hear if its not SS and the cost per foot is just crazy expensive compared to 4 quick links.

Non stainless chain in an arid climate or desert environment will last forever.   I’ve never seen plated or galvanized chain corroded so bad it was a danger outside of severe wet or beach environments.  

Okay, now I think the configuration is optimized… option F! (As in Fugg Yeah!)

Seven links of chain seems best:) Vertical displacement is 11.5 inches. Any greater odd combo for links will also work fine (9,11,13 etc) but less than 7 defeats the purpose of offering multiple clip-in links.

Team-Tough rams-horns are an amazing and beautiful addition. I was able to hammer them on with some finagles.

Now I will work on building an all-stainless version and report back with pictures and price.

Thank you Mr. Titt! ;)