New TRS device

Dan Wwrote:

These failures make me think it wouldn't be great to pair with a Lift or similar camming device. If it needs to be held up with a chest harness, it seems difficult to keep the devices as far away from each other as I would prefer. Can anyone else comment on how smoothly it feeds or how it compares to other devices in this regard? Curious if it's similar to my ropeman 2.

Well if you're using one rope and this is your primary then definitely don't use it with a Lift or similar, those are not acceptable secondary devices on single strands as if the above device collides with them it can deactivate them completely. 

Why would it be difficult to keep device separation? I struggle to see how it would be different to using a Taz or Lift primary with a PCD backup. 

Okay. I TRS'd a bunch today on it and it's awesome.
- On super crusty 10.5 mm static it fed very well with just a small coil of rope. on skinnier dynamic line, it was buttery smooth with very little weight.
- Lowering was by all accounts fine, just takes little time to feel it out and then the raps start feeling great. One thing I noticed when rapping was that when I hit a known worn spot in the rope, quite flat, and damn near core shot, its felt like it "slipped" when I hit it.....it didn't slip, but since the structure of the rope was by all accounts "softer" there was much less friction at the amount I has the handle pulled back. Little startling, but caught immediately again the 3-4" below the compromised spot in the rope.
- Change overs where I had re fixed the line ws insanely fast, this thing makes change over an absolute breeze. My TRS systems are well rehearsed and this clearly saved time. I climbed a ton, with so much less faffing.
- I only used back up knots for catastrophe, so no real good input yet on how to back it up with something other than knots.

To the Mishap mentioned above and the similar failure mode to the TAZ......
Unlike the Taz which needs to physically rotate top engage, this does not need to rotate to engage. It kinda expands for a lack of a better term.
So although like the Taz you can overcome the device by not allowing it to rotate (too close to wall, between the legs, etc), this device if it is stuck between something you can defeat it, although what is prevented from functioning is different than the Taz.
Holding it up a little I think would alleviate that scenario well.

I forgot my Torse(Neck lanyard) so I did not LRS today so no input yet on this front, will post again when I take it for another spin.

So for a day where I probably climbed 12-15 pitches I could not be happier with the performance of this device when using it for TrS.
I'm confident saying, IMO, this is the best device on the market for TRS currently.

Mr Rogerswrote:

I'm confident saying, IMO, this is the best device on the market for TRS currently.

God damnit. *pulls out wallet*

Thanks for the great review, I wait for your LRS report with great anticipation. 

I'm currently in Taiwan but mine is waiting for me at home. When I get there in a few days I'll do the side-by-side with the Taz LOV 3.

Ricky Harlinewrote:

Well if you're using one rope and this is your primary then definitely don't use it with a Lift or similar, those are not acceptable secondary devices on single strands as if the above device collides with them it can deactivate them completely. 

Why would it be difficult to keep device separation? I struggle to see how it would be different to using a Taz or Lift primary with a PCD backup. 

If you missed my question upthread, I was looking to identify any issues with putting the Lift on top with the Sulu as the backup below on a single strand. If I have the Lift held up at chest height with a lanyard and people are recommending holding the Sulu upright as well, are you just doing that with 2 lanyards? I guess that's not terribly difficult but fewer things around my neck while climbing is always going to make me feel warmer and fuzzier.

Dan Wwrote:

If you missed my question upthread, I was looking to identify any issues with putting the Lift on top with the Sulu as the backup below on a single strand. If I have the Lift held up at chest height with a lanyard and people are recommending holding the Sulu upright as well, are you just doing that with 2 lanyards? I guess that's not terribly difficult but fewer things around my neck while climbing is always going to make me feel warmer and fuzzier.

The sulu can be defeated by pressing on the top of the aluminum piece so it must be the top device.  

You probably want a sulu on rope and a micro traxion or similar on bottom 

Totally agree.  Sulu needs to be the primary with some type of back-up. I haven't had a chance to get it on the rocks yet because of an injury,. But I have lots of observations and thoughts by just playing with it on the ground - both positive and negative - from a design and functional perspective. However,  I'll let those who are actually using it share their observations before i eventually chime in at some point. 

climber patwrote:

The sulu can be defeated by pressing on the top of the aluminum piece so it must be the top device.  

You probably want a sulu on rope and a micro traxion or similar on bottom 

Thanks, this is just what I was looking for

Kevin those warnings look like fairly generic advice for TRS, I wouldn't let it deter you using it for LRS. 

Rotate the handle to the right or left for better control when descending.

I just received mine today, had a play with it for 20mins with a rope before going to work. 

It's a very unintuetive device, I have found it quite difficult to pay out slack according to the instructions but I think I've found a way around that which I hope to share later after playing around with it a bit. 

Notes that nobody else has really covered

• Grabbiest device I've ever handled, locks up if you even look at it wrong, if you have a twisty rope I'd forget about it, maybe a skill issue, will comment more later. I doubt the thickness of the rope will have much if any impact on the feed however thanks to the "sled" design. 
• Lowering with handle away from you as is the case with every device that functions like this, terrible, twist it to the side and it's much better. This being said, the lever is slightly curved and can catch on the rope when you release it on abseil, seems janky but probably has no real impact on the function of the device. 
• I don't see any reason why running this device inverted for LRS with a chest harness wouldn't be the best way to do so, I haven't had a chance to play with it properly yet in this configuration but it seems very promising and certainly engages fine on the ground. If anyone gets a chance before I do they should try it out.
• Belaying direct (guide mode) from above is very smooth and very grabby, I can't see backfeeding being an issue so this may be the best device on the market for it. Due to the unique belaying style it may even be the best way to belay a leader in a multipitch scenario but this is speculation atm(works pretty well on the ground with device above the head) . 

https://youtube.com/shorts/QdGz2V73_gU?si=LZ3OpurzQ7M0bwxh

This is the failure mode that people have talked about. 

As you can see from the video, the angle that the force acting on the device is very important, if the device is angled perfectly upright this will impede the ability for the device to lock. This may be concerning on vert or anything around vert where the angel of your belay loop could push the device down in such a way. 

This is however noted in the instructions so is not an unknown failure mode (though I do think they could have communicated this better), and the use of a neck lanyard or chest harness does make this failure mode more or less impossible. 

This could also be avoided provided you sit back into your harness as you fall, though as we all know this isn't always possible. 

"Under no circumstances should sulu go be held in the hand and/or forced with the rope sliding corridor vertically, as this would impair the function of the device" 

When the device is loaded as straight up and down and the rope path is straight up and down the device will fail to engage. A chest harness puts a constant angle on the device eliminating this failure mode. 

I think this failure mode will be seen often in the field, we have already seen this demonstrated by others when the device is underneath them and between their legs and the device hasn't even been out 2 weeks. 

I don't really see that as a failure...

I found myself in steep terrain and could down climb and the device would go down the rope as show.
However, I could not get it to not catch if I fell even though it was tracking up and down just like that vid shows. It did take a bit longer to catch as I had to out pace the device while it too was traveling down the rope, before it would catch during the fall. But was not anything alarming to me.
But it all makes sense to me the way the device functions from my understanding and use.

I would imagine the possibility of a delayed catch (maybe no catch) would be exasperated the skinnier the cord as the friction of the rope running through device in goes down with diameter....
As you state though Seb, holding it up likely mitigates that issue to a large extent, if not completely.

Good info Kevin, thanks for this. So the length of any cord from a chest harness to the device will need to be noticeably longer than what we're used to when using the microtrax/rollnlock/lift/etc type devices. This also makes me think that it may be easier to throw the backup device on the second strand of rope, rather than have a trailing device on the same strand at the end of a sling but I'm sure that'll come down to personal preference. 

Mine hasn't shipped yet but I'll gladly join you all in testing and reporting back when it arrives. 

Edit: also noting the rope must be between the legs at all times to avoid the device being twisted, no huge surprise there. I see in the video he's minding the slack but I wonder if a chest harness would alleviate that need since it tends to with other systems. 

Good on them for releasing that. Gonna play with a lanyard and some secondary devices today.

Kevin DeWeese wrote:

So AC released a Trs explainer link: https://alternativecurrent.it/en/trs/

One thing I noticed was that they provide additional info about the placement of the device needing to never be higher than the belay loop. If using a loop through the device to a chest harness or neck lanyard (as suggested as optional in the manual) the device should not be lifted above the belay loop (not mentioned in the manual) 

So the only way to use this with a lower backup device would be to significantly extend the lower microtrax with a sling which means it can't be used this way because that device would then just be defeated when it comes in contact with the Sulu. And it can't be used with an upper backup device because when they collide that can defeat the sulu as well.

Additional info from the link:

It also has a bit of information about the testing that was done for trs certification 

It also has a video that shows a climber trs with the sulu and the process of actively managing the device as the climber moves up a climb. This video was shared on their insta story with the link to the new trs explainer website

Video here: https://vimeo.com/1062338520

Minor correction: you could use a backup by doing dual strand

my opinion to follow:

I dont think it’s necessarily the belay loop that’s important, but rather how the device is oriented on the carabiner. The carabiner needs to be90° or lower. My educated guess would be that you could attach the sulu at chest height so long as it meets that requirement, then put a trax or similar down low. Might lose a tooth though 

I just opened mine, but here's the start of the comparison.

Sulu is 329g    Taz LOV 3  383g    IMO that's not a very meaningful weight difference.

GG2 is 171g    El Mudo is ~425g

Size is also pretty comparable.  Obviously it's a lot bigger than a GG.

The clipping hole is big and works about the same as the LOV with my soft shackle. Any carabiner will fit, though I'd expect the Clepsydra S to be the best choice, as it is for the GG.

First impression is that the Sulu is nicely made, equal to the Taz. The double recessed button to release it is confidence inspiring, though in practice I don't have any concern about the single button on the LOV3 because it also kind of hooks the 'biner/soft shackle and can't really open unintentionally. The release handle is big and snaps back strongly, which I like. The LOV handle is kind of floppy.

I'll test them with a rope and harness when I'm a little less jet lagged.

Worth noting: not UIAA certified therefore can’t be used in movement gyms currently

Just got notice they're working on my order. Unfortunately, had I known the significant limitation to TRS I never would have taken a chance on this device. Very disappointed this info (thanks KW) wasn't available pre-order time. I feel a bit, let down. I'll still test it, but using two rope is non-starter for me, as is only using one device. 

Cherokee Nuneswrote:

Just got notice they're working on my order. Unfortunately, had I known the significant limitation to TRS I never would have taken a chance on this device. Very disappointed this info (thanks KW) wasn't available pre-order time. I feel a bit, let down. I'll still test it, but using two rope is non-starter for me, as is only using one device. 

Seems likely you will be able to put a PCD below it by holding it somewhat upright but not totally tight. I'm also uninterested in using it with two ropes or without a backup, but there have been some initial reports that there is plenty of room for a backup device below it. Guess we'll learn more with time.