Continue with onX Maps
Sign in with Facebook
Taz Lov3 as a solo device
|
The Taz Lov3 released yesterday, March 15th 2021 without much fanfar. Manual: http://taz3d.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/taz_lov3_fr_eng-201218.pdf Judging by the images alone, the device can now be installed onto the rope while clipped. The upshot remains that the device is officially untested for recreational climbing and definitely not for solo climbing. Auspiciously the device does carry an increased array of EN testing. Many elements of the EN tests involved dynamic testing that mimic, in a limited way, lead fall situations. I'm not an expert and these are just my thoughts. One positive is that the device has (limited) certification for use with EN 892 ropes ranging from (9.5-10.5mm), that means dynamic ropes within a range typical used by recreational climbers. The EN15151-1 is what the device was tested for using those ropes, namely as a "braking device with manually assisted locking function". The limiting key words here are "manually assisted" and this implies manual assistance by way of a brake hand on the dead rope. That's a known caveat for a solo climber. Part of the EN15151-1 testing involves a dynamic test, a dynamic drop test, which involves dropping a mass of 80 kg from 1 meter above the device fixed. The test is repeated three times, whereby the device must not slip more than an average of 1.5 meters. So... 80 kg, Drop: 1 m, Rope length: 1 m, Average dynamic rope elongation: 30 % = Force: 2.62 kN, Fall factor: 1.0 fall (Source: https://clige.me/fall-calculator). Lead falls can exceed such forces and a person lead soloing won't always be able to manually assist by grabbing the brake strand. That said many of us are happy to fall on a GriGri and it too is EN15151-1 certified. For the solo climber, the challenge will be how to individually find a way to create "manual assistance" on the dead rope side of the device without making the device impossible to feed out on the live side. In a way "manual assistance" on the dead rope is the essence of lead roped solo climbing. Another promising certification is the device's EN 353.2. Here the device is tested as a "guided type fall arresters including a flexible anchor line". To me, the term "guided" is key here. In the German language version of certification the device's descriptor is translated as "guided". IMO "tracking/trailing" is more fitting as it is strongly implied that the device progress with the climber "hands free" and will arrest a fall. For the EN353.2 certification there is one dynamic test, the "dynamic elongation drop test", whereby a 100kg weight is dropped from a fixed point from 30cm above the fixed point. To me, this tallies to a force of 3.27 kN, still a fall factor of 1. Clearly taking a no-brake-hand whipper has not been tested. So it won't be a surprise that the device isn't designed as a solo device. That would be expecting too much. The previous iteration, the Taz Lov2, has been used for some time by many top rope solo climbers and the feedback is good. There is limited feedback regarding its pedigree as lead rope solo device. There is however a video from a seminal contributor showing a possible lead rope solo setup for the Lov2's use: https://youtu.be/lTJwuIBLJ-k I don't own any version, but will invest in a Lov3. It is certified as a temporary rope anchor, a guided fall arrest device, for descending, and as a braking device. Currently, that's seem to be as good as it gets and a real accomplishment by Taz to combine these functions in one device. Add to this the positive feedback from the field and this is a very desirable device for me. It will be interesting to observe over time whether the Lov3, with its increased certification, will be better in practice than its praised predecessor. |
|
Did you get your Lov3 yet? I'm thinking of purchasing one soon and curious to hear your actual usage thoughts. |
Buck Rogers wrote: I didn't buy one... yet. I see you're in Germany where the Lov2 is currently around €30 less expensive that the newer Lov3. The price of the Lov2 may start to drop even further once the arborist community start buying the Lov3. I too think the Lov2 looks more robust. That said, I wouldn't worry at all about the robustness of the newer Lov3. For me, it is worth the extra €30 to be able to use skinnier rope and attach to the rope without undoing the carabiner. For lead soloing I am currently "making do" with either an Eddy or Troll Rocker setup like this: http://soloalliance.blogspot.com/2011/12/self-belay-with-troll-rocker.html For top rope soloing I use a Petzl Traxion raised to chest height with a Petzl Ascension on the belay loop. Lowering and transitioning to rappell is a pain, but I feel very safe. Recently I also use the Troll Rocker for toprope soloing because I can add a bely device of my choice below it and then disengage the Rocker instantly using the rear hole and a sling. The Troll Rocker is a straight through device like the Lov2/3 and I love it but I can't rappell with it. I know I will love the Lov2/3 and for now it seems to do all. It also comes tested and recommended by some very experienced sources. |
|
Has anyone used the Lov3 already for TR soloing? Advantages/disadvantages over the Lov2? |
|
I haven't got one yet but I will be buying the Lov2. I don't like the idea that the plate can be opened during use on the Lov3 and prefer it be captured by the carabiner as in the 2 |
|
There's been info on it on both rope solo lists on FB. If you're only going to TR solo, then there's probably no major advantage to it over the Lov2 |
|
Re: no major advantage, that makes sense - but what about disadvantage? It does seem that if that spring-loaded plug opens accidentally, the device could unclip while climbing, at least while looking at the photos? (So the lov2 while having to unclip/there's a risk of dropping it, would be safer in that regard?) Thanks!! |
|
I have been using a Lov2 for a couple years but have examined a Lov3. Personally I would not have an issue with the cover release on that version. It has gone through thorough testing as a fall arresting device which is exactly how it will be used for TRing. However, If it causes you to doubt the device, then the simple answer is just get a 2. The last thing you want is a niggling doubt in the back of your mind while climbing. You need to have confidence in your device so that you are not constantly second guessing your choice while climbing. Not sure what else to say. If I were buying a new Lov right now, I would probably just go with the 3 because of the slight convenience of being able to load/unload a rope strand without having to take it off. |
|
Thanks - that's perfect & what I was looking for, thank you! :) I would use a mini trax/something else below it so I suppose there is always that backup too! |
|
I think a Microtrax is probably the best backup out there. I've tried several devices. It runs free and has positive lock-up - even it should collide with the Lov. I've also ground the nub off that is used for locking it open because i had that happen accidentally several times. |
|
Resurrecting this thread to see if anyone has had any experiences with this device in the field. I've heard some high praise of this device but wouldn't mind hearing some more due to the price tag on this one |
|
Haven't used it, but Robbie Phillips said it was the best TR solo device out there during his interview on the Nugget |
Jeff Mac wrote: Yeah that was exactly the big praise I was referring to actually haha. I enjoyed that interview in general and have been curious about the lov3 ever since hearing how much he loved it. I'd be willing take his word for it but I have a few months before I'll actually need one so I figured I'd ask around a bit! |
Nol H wrote: I've been using one for quite some time now and have fallen hundreds of times. I have the Lov 2 and Lov 3. The geometry is the same, but there each has a subtle advantage over the other. There are some glimpses of the Taz (3) in Robbie's videos. You can see he has connected his with a maillon rapide: https://youtu.be/RiLaTx_SeSs?t=82 I use it for TRS and LRS. For TRS I use a backup device (Micro Traxion moslty). For LRS I have an occasional knot in the dead rope in my backpack and I manage the cash loop with a M Trax. I know some LRS users back it up with a Revo, I can see that working. This device can do a lot, but it's not fool proof it needs proper attaching and understanding of how it locks. It rappels fine, progress captures fine, can be installed on a tensioned rope and is even certified to lead belay with.
|
|
One of the best LRS devices out there, without a doubt the single best TRS device. Traversing can cause it to lock in LRS which is annoying but manageable, no other downsides to report other than not catching inverted falls as is standard for that style of device. |
|
Does anyone have any experience using the Lov3 for TRS with ropes smaller than 10.5mm? I am interested in getting one, but would like to have the flexiblity of using ropes down to 9.5mm if possible. |
Tyler F wrote: I haven't used the Lov2/3 but for TRS on thin ropes the Trango Vergo works quite well. I use mine with a 9mm static and it feeds smoothly. On the flip side, it feeds quite poorly with ropes >=9.8mm, 9.5mm is probably the thickest you'd want to use with it unless you are fine with pulling through slack. As always with TRS on thinner ropes, be aware of sharp edges. |
Tyler F wrote: Works fine in TRS with such ropes. Have used mine with 9.7 and it's worked great. |
Tyler F wrote: The will be fine. |
|
Hi folks. My usual LRS set up is a Grigri in the regular position (not upside down) with a microtraxion or similar to manage the cache loop. I have used a Lov2 extebnsively for TRS. If I use the Lov for LRS, can I just pretend it's a Grigri? That is, can I just use it the same way you use a Grigri in this application? Or are there specific considerations for the carabiner, the rope line, a redirect through a chest harness, and so on, that I need to be aware of? Thanks. |
Bruno Schull wrote: Quoting from another thread (on LRS for the Lov2)
|
