Best momentum based capture device for backup in a LRS rig?

I'm getting into lead rope solo and am interested in finding a way to mitigate cached clove backups. Really there's nothing wrong with them, its a simple and strong setup, but it costs time when setting up and I'm not the biggest fan of climbing with all those loops getting wrapped up around me. I'm sure I'd get used to them and avoid sinching the loops through my crotch (keeps happening when I'm moving fast or cruxing), but it'd be great to find a more streamlined setup. 

I like the idea that youtuber Amir Nickname has, where he maintains a loop of slack with a micro, and still has a backup capture device with the Petzl ASAP but I don't think the ASAP is a great device for the purpose of lead climbing. It is a lot of expensive gear, but I already own a grigri+ and a microtrax so really I'd only have to buy 1 more piece of equipment and I think that'd be worth it to mitigate cached cloves going forwards. My gripe with the ASAP is price, and it's use of teeth. As we all know, toothed devices are not meant to capture lead falls and can desheath the rope or worse in a lead fall, so although it feeds nicely I don't want to use it because of it's teeth. 

The DMM Buddy would be sweet, as it largely does the same job but uses a smooth camming lobe instead of a toothed lobe, but it is only meant for 10.5-11mm ropes. Same thing applies to the Kong Back-up and the Camp Goblin unfortunately, both meant for 10.5-11mm rope.

My only other thought at the moment is a Wild Country Revo. It feeds rope both ways, and locks up if the rope moves through it quickly enough. It seems a little silly to climb with 2 full on belay devices and a micro, but I think it would work. Only real hangup is the cost. Also, it could be a contender for a main belay device instead of the grigri, but I personally, and I think most other soloists, stay with the grigri because of the extra time it takes for the rope to move quickly enough for the revo to initiate a catch, possibly resulting in a bigger fall (as recently tested by Jenks). So if the grigri fails, you have the time (and distance) for the grigri to fail, plus the time for the REVO to start spinning and finally catch. Could be a fatty. 

Do y'all know of any other momentum based capture devices, without teeth, that might be good for this purpose? 

this( facebook.com/photo/?fbid=28…;set=gm.1244827189851131&idorvanity=265622081104985) might be interesting, i think if you are searching for a backup and don't want a toothed device this might be a solution, but I havent tried it so cant speak for experience

I get bot vibes from the post above. I wouldn't click on that link.

Re: toothed devices, HowNot2 has done some testing around this, and found that toothed devices don't desheathe the rope at meaningfully different impact forces than toothless devices. Think about the way most of these devices work—it's not the teeth doing the heavy lifting of stopping backward progress down the rope, but rather the camming action. The teeth provide some initial bite and that's why you get a little more slippage before engagement with a toothless device, but in the end it's the camming action pinching the rope that's acting as your progress capture. The exception would be something like a tibloc which relies entirely on teeth and, I suppose, the geometry of the attaching carabiner. But a device like a microtrax or a spoc or whatever is no less safe than something like a roll n lock.

Have you looked into Brent Barghann's work around LRS? It seems to me that he's developed a really refined approach to LRS, and I think I'd be inclined to emulate his setup pretty much as closely as possible.

 This is the "last great problem" in LRS.  We're all looking for ways to stop an upside down fall without tying knots.  I personally prefer a Taz LOV primary over a GG, but it works similarly.  I have no concern about it failing in a regular fall, and I think the fear of a GG or other primary device just exploding are wildly overblown.  

Upside down falls, however, challenge any system.  Your primary will simply allow the rope to go through until you hit your stopper knot or secondary at the end of your cache.  I tried a Yomi, ATC-G, and some other ideas, but ultimately settled on just tying slip knots behind my micro traxion (which manages the cache) when I think USD falls could happen.  With a tiny bit of practice you can tie a slip knot with one hand very quickly, and removing it is as easy as just pulling hard on the dead end.  You can also tie them inside of your cache loop if you really want to minimize the fall length, but ofc then you need to accurately predict how far you need to go before a stance or whatever to deal with them.

This ASAP idea comes around every so often.  Usually people propose it like it's a new idea, but they never post videos (or even claim to have done testing) of an actual USD fall with it.  I have concerns about the way they are attaching the ASAP because it would slam into the primary device after catching, and IDK how that would go.  One guy on FB did post a video of a (gnarly) fall which he claimed the ASAP had caught, but he didn't follow up with any detail or pictures of his setup so we don't really know what happened.

Brent's system is super safe, but really pretty optimized for hard redpoint style climbing.  I tried climibing with a bunch of pre-cached loops and it sucked.  Adding a double rack and a bunch of 'draws to the harness on top of those loops made everything kind of a cluster.

Do let us know if you solve the problem!

(Oh, and the link above is to a post on the FB LRS page, where most of these kinds of dicussions happen.)

Slim Pickens wrote:

I get bot vibes from the post above. I wouldn't click on that link.

Re: toothed devices, HowNot2 has done some testing around this, and found that toothed devices don't desheathe the rope at meaningfully different impact forces than toothless devices. Think about the way most of these devices work—it's not the teeth doing the heavy lifting of stopping backward progress down the rope, but rather the camming action. The teeth provide some initial bite and that's why you get a little more slippage before engagement with a toothless device, but in the end it's the camming action pinching the rope that's acting as your progress capture. The exception would be something like a tibloc which relies entirely on teeth and, I suppose, the geometry of the attaching carabiner. But a device like a microtrax or a spoc or whatever is no less safe than something like a roll n lock.

Have you looked into Brent Barghann's work around LRS? It seems to me that he's developed a really refined approach to LRS, and I think I'd be inclined to emulate his setup pretty much as closely as possible.

Hm ok I will watch some Hownot2 content again, I suppose desheathing forces are probably higher than a worst case scenario whip. My current cached clove setup is based on Brent's setup, I haven't looked into the other ways he might do it, I'll try that too. Thanks!

evan freeman wrote:

 This is the "last great problem" in LRS.  We're all looking for ways to stop an upside down fall without tying knots.  I personally prefer a Taz LOV primary over a GG, but it works similarly.  I have no concern about it failing in a regular fall, and I think the fear of a GG or other primary device just exploding are wildly overblown.  

Upside down falls, however, challenge any system.  Your primary will simply allow the rope to go through until you hit your stopper knot or secondary at the end of your cache.  I tried a Yomi, ATC-G, and some other ideas, but ultimately settled on just tying slip knots behind my micro traxion (which manages the cache) when I think USD falls could happen.  With a tiny bit of practice you can tie a slip knot with one hand very quickly, and removing it is as easy as just pulling hard on the dead end.  You can also tie them inside of your cache loop if you really want to minimize the fall length, but ofc then you need to accurately predict how far you need to go before a stance or whatever to deal with them.

This ASAP idea comes around every so often.  Usually people propose it like it's a new idea, but they never post videos (or even claim to have done testing) of an actual USD fall with it.  I have concerns about the way they are attaching the ASAP because it would slam into the primary device after catching, and IDK how that would go.  One guy on FB did post a video of a (gnarly) fall which he claimed the ASAP had caught, but he didn't follow up with any detail or pictures of his setup so we don't really know what happened.

Brent's system is super safe, but really pretty optimized for hard redpoint style climbing.  I tried climibing with a bunch of pre-cached loops and it sucked.  Adding a double rack and a bunch of 'draws to the harness on top of those loops made everything kind of a cluster.

Do let us know if you solve the problem!

(Oh, and the link above is to a post on the FB LRS page, where most of these kinds of dicussions happen.)

I'm somewhat in the same boat, I really have no fear of my grigri failing (more likely the carabiner it seems) but I like to be above-board with these kinds of things so climbing partners don't label me as sketchy lol. I'm planning on switching from a gridlock to a steel quicklink to attach my GG to my harness, and once I have that I really don't fear my GG+ failing whatsoever. In Ryan and Brett's latest video they tested several devices in USD falls and the GG+ performed well, of course that may not represent every USD fall, but I think the GG+ did a fine job. 

The way Amir attached his ASAP was with a quickdraw to his belay loop, he then tied the ASAP off to a gear loop with a piece of weak cord that would break away in the event of his GG failing, meaning the ASAP would bust off the gear loop and ultimately be oriented above the GG due to the length of the quick draw. I think the ASAP is supposed to attach to you dorsally/ventrally? Not sure about that or how it would perform at waist level, curious to see the video you mentioned. 

I tried aiding yesterday with cached cloves, 2 ladders each with a tether and an al-fifi and it was a nightmare. I thought tangles were bad when I was aiding and being belayed by another person, the cache loops made it that much worse!! Still, manageable and something I could get used to. 

I requested access to the FB page but haven't gotten in yet. Curious to ask the same thing on there. Thanks!

evan freeman wrote:

Brent's system is super safe, but really pretty optimized for hard redpoint style climbing.  I tried climibing with a bunch of pre-cached loops and it sucked.  Adding a double rack and a bunch of 'draws to the harness on top of those loops made everything kind of a cluster.

Echoing this. It's a great system but man it's an absolute mess doing trad pitches and dealing with all your gear plus cache loops. For sport climbing it feels manageable but for trad it's extremely cerebral because you've got to manage a boatload of stuff all at once.

Fisher, the FB group is really the hub for LRS talk.  Search will turn up just about anything you can think of, and a lot you have never considered.  People come up with all sorts of stuff that seems like it might work in their garage, but has various fatal flaws in real life.  There is a discussion going on right now about how to make the ASAP work as a backup.

A quicklink will make your GG+ bomber.  You should have zero concern about it breaking at that point.  I use the Taz LOV3 with a swivel and a soft shackle that never comes off of my harness, and I don't need to remove the device at all to switch from LRS to rap/TRS mode, which is both faster and safer than having to take the GG completely off between pitches.  If you're single-pitch climbing it doesn't matter much, but I mostly LRS on multipitch routes, so eliminating the possibility of dropping my primary device is pretty sweet.  (Plus being able to use it for TRS as well.)

I’ve thought about trying to solve this as well, but generally I find Brent’s system to “just work” really well with the cloves. It feels faffy at first, but at this point I’ve used it enough that it feels like a minimal encumbrance.

Maybe on some low angle stuff where there are things to snag on it would be annoying, but in the case I probably would just use a micro and expect not to fall.

for longer routes, I guess it’s annoying to have to remake the cloves each pitch, but spending a few mins taking a breather between leading and TRSing has actually felt welcome. 

To op, maybe just stick with it a bit longer and you will come to find it’s fine? 

evan freeman wrote:

Brent's system is super safe, but really pretty optimized for hard redpoint style climbing.  I tried climibing with a bunch of pre-cached loops and it sucked.  Adding a double rack and a bunch of 'draws to the harness on top of those loops made everything kind of a cluster.

You know, that resonates. I can totally see how his approach makes more sense for some use cases than others. Thanks for bringing this perspective. 

Just picked up a pair of USHBA Ti hand ascenders.
Anyone try an USHBA hand ascender for cache loop management and back up? It can catch both directions..... I think it might serve this purpose well. I'll post some pics/video when I test it, but was wondering if this rabbit hole has been gone down. 

Mr Rogers wrote:

Just picked up a pair of USHBA Ti hand ascenders.
Anyone try an USHBA hand ascender for cache loop management and back up? It can catch both directions..... I think it might serve this purpose well. I'll post some pics/video when I test it, but was wondering if this rabbit hole has been gone down. 

I am extremely curious to learn how this works for you. 

Mr Rogers wrote:

Just picked up a pair of USHBA Ti hand ascenders.
Anyone try an USHBA hand ascender for cache loop management and back up? It can catch both directions..... I think it might serve this purpose well. I'll post some pics/video when I test it, but was wondering if this rabbit hole has been gone down. 

I second being very interested, Mr. Roger’s, in how this works out… looking forward to hearing about it.

Mr. Roger’s, could you post a picture? The USHBA ascender that I’m familiar with (basically identical to the Camp Lift) only catches in the downward direction, at least that’s my understanding of the device. A bi-directional rope grab is new to me, and seems like it would have huge potential in the LRS realm.

Mr Rogers wrote:

Just picked up a pair of USHBA Ti hand ascenders.
Anyone try an USHBA hand ascender for cache loop management and back up? It can catch both directions..... I think it might serve this purpose well. I'll post some pics/video when I test it, but was wondering if this rabbit hole has been gone down. 

You might want to take a look at this thread https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/106804013/breaking-an-ushba-basic

Ushba ascenders were reported to fail at 5.5 kN by severing the rope...not something I would rely on as backup for LRS. I'm not sure if this design is the same as the one you're taking about (am not aware of any of these devices holding in both directions) but worth checking out before you give your set a try.

TThurman wrote:

I second being very interested, Mr. Roger’s, in how this works out… looking forward to hearing about it.

Mr. Roger’s, could you post a picture? The USHBA ascender that I’m familiar with (basically identical to the Camp Lift) only catches in the downward direction, at least that’s my understanding of the device. A bi-directional rope grab is new to me, and seems like it would have huge potential in the LRS realm.

Different than the basic. 2 pics from Vertical museum which is the exact ascenders i have, and the part of the manual describing the catching in both directions.

ubu wrote:

You might want to take a look at this thread https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/106804013/breaking-an-ushba-basic

Ushba ascenders were reported to fail at 5.5 kN by severing the rope...not something I would rely on as backup for LRS. 

Read that ages ago. An excerpt:
"Peak impact force and slippage with a fall factor 2 drop with a 100 kg mass....The total lanyard length was therefore simulated as being one metre including connectors: giving a factor 2 fall of 2 metres."

FF2 with 100kg is not what I would call real world, although yes it can surely happen.
Almost all toothed ascenders destroy/tear the sheath minimally @4/5kn so to be worried about this one doing the same? Folks are using ASAPs as back ups for LRS without a screamer. ASAPs also destroy rope around 4/5kn without the absorbica/ASAP'sorber in play. ASAPs have also successfully backed up LRS leader falls where the primary failed to engage.

I'm fine with it as a back up at those forces, but having that info available for each to make their own choice around what they consider safe is absolutely warranted and appreciated that you brought it to the table for posterity.

I'm not sure if this design is the same as the one you're taking about (am not aware of any of these devices holding in both directions) but worth checking out before you give your set a try.

I'll post some video later with some testing I do today/tomorrow as it indeed catches in both directions. Very smart engineering.
The design is super similar to the basic, but not identical as the image above shows.

Mr Rogers wrote:

FF2 with 100kg is not what I would call real world, although yes it can surely happen.
Almost all toothed ascenders destroy/tear the sheath minimally @4/5kn so to be worried about this one doing the same? Folks are using ASAPs as back ups for LRS without a screamer. ASAPs also destroy rope around 4/5kn without the absorbica/ASAP'sorber in play. ASAPs have also successfully backed up LRS leader falls where the primary failed to engage.

I guess the question is whether the backup is for complete failure of the main device, or to help trigger the main device in case it fails to initially catch.  For the former I would want something that fails above 4-5 kN to handle higher FF.  For the latter case the ascender looks very interesting...backup & cache loop management in a single device...would love to learn how it compares in both performance and ergonomics to other options.  

Video for the people.
Will be playing more with this device and will make a follow up with new discoveries, caveats, etc etc.
Please LMK if there is any testing you want done with this (except destructive testing [at this juncture]), or different ways you'd like to see it set up, etc, etc.

I've been contemplating this same question pairing a momentum capture device with my old Silent Partner. Since buying my SP nearly 20 years ago, I've used variations of cached knots or backpack knots, but it was never an easy process and my SP sat unused for the last five years as I dealt with injuries. 

Over on the LRS Facebook group, I've seen the SP paired with a DMM Buddy, Edelrid Fuse, and (I'm assuming) with the ASAP. These are then paired themselves with a MicroTrax for cache management of the dead rope.  

Yann or HowNot2's testing has shown that both toothed and camming momentum capture devices desheath the rope around ~5KN. In the event of a SP failing to lock (I think the chances of an SP exploding are so remote as to discount it), the momentum capture device would theoretically lock and jam up against the SP. The clove would then tighten around the SP drum, dissipating some of the fall force. And seeing as even a FF2 fall doesn't cut the rope (per Yann's testing with the Fuse on a 9.5 rope), this seems like a very robust backup (assuming the SP doesn't explode or the backup doesn't fail to activate as well). Considering I've never come across a report of a SP failing to activate in non-cold conditions, I'd be happy to sacrifice a rope to a backup device doing its job in this very very unlikely circumstance of needing it.

Am I missing something here? I'm trying to identify as many failure modes as possible before dropping a couple hundred on one of these devices. Or do the failure modes differ between these devices? Would pairing the SP with a Revo as a backup a possibility?

The Ushba hand ascender also is an intriguing option, and makes me wonder if I can orient my Ushba Basic on my harness in a way to replicate that.

Madies and Lentelmen,
Installment #2 of Mr. Rogers goin down the LRS backup rabbit hole. Results are muy bueno.
Part 3 will be on the rock, in addition to any other garage testing.

Cool…but…that’s a Soviet Era collector’s item.  They’re not exactly on the rack at the local gear shop.  I’m not crazy about the redirect either.