Why use dyneema for anchors instead of nylon?

Dyneema definitely still freezes in the right environment.

Mikey Schaefer wrote:Dyneema definitely still freezes in the right environment.

Oh I see I guess it's inevitable sometimes. Btw, big fan of your photography.

RangerJ wrote: I just think that it's funny you used that term. The SPI is not in the AMGA 'guide' track. It's part of the 'instructor' track. Specifically, aspirant refers to someone who has taken the aspirant exams. It's not just someone who has taken the class.

I just used the term as I heard my instructor use it when he described to me how he employs "SPI aspirants" so he can mentor them before they take their final exam.

Mikeybarro wrote: I just used the term as I heard my instructor use it when he described to me how he employs "SPI aspirants" so he can mentor them before they take their final exam.

I'm curious. Who was your instructor and where did you take the class?

RangerJ wrote: I'm curious. Who was your instructor and where did you take the exam?

Jim Taylor, New River Gorge. I would like to make the point that we are discussing mere semantics. While as you say the AMGA refers specifically to aspirants as individuals havig earned the status of "rock guide aspirant" it is perfectly sensible to say "SPI aspirant" as a simple matter of simplifying language. An aspirant is one who aspires to achieve a goal. I aspire to be a Single-Pitch Instructor. "SPI aspirant" is a hell of a lot easier to say than "dude who took an spi course but hasn't yet passed the exam." I don't mean to come off as defensive, but why should we care so much?

There are no absolutes in climbing except that the law of gravity is strictly enforced.

Mikeybarro wrote: Jim Taylor, New River Gorge. I would like to make the point that we are discussing mere semantics. While as you say the AMGA refers specifically to aspirants as individuals having earned the status of "rock guide aspirant" it is perfectly sensible to say "SPI aspirant" as a simple matter of simplifying language. An aspirant is one who aspires to achieve a goal. I aspire to be a Single-Pitch Instructor. "SPI aspirant" is a hell of a lot easier to say than "dude who took an spi course but hasn't yet passed the exam." I don't mean to come off as defensive, but why should we care so much?

1) You are correct the word aspirant is applicable in the sense that you are one who aspires to something.

2) I don't want to hijack your thread in which you asked a perfectly valid question.

As for why we should care - As Matt Zia, rgold, and gunkiemike pointed out it matters how the AMGA talks about best practices in climbing, so I was curious where 'SPI aspirant' came from in terms of who taught the phrase to you. Even more so, it matters how people with these trainings represent themselves to others. AMGA/IFMGA certification is a significant achievement. An 'aspirant guide' to the AMGA has a substantial amount of training - perhaps even attaining full certification in 1 or 2 disciplines when they are only an 'aspirant' guide in say the ski discipline, for example. The point is that they are qualified. Even in just the rock discipline an aspirant would have 20 days of training (plus all the time in between courses) to the SPI's 3.

'SPI aspirant' conflates some terminology that perhaps makes it sound like taking an SPI class is more than it really is (plus it sounds a little strange). In reality, the SPI is very basic training and not even part of the AMGA guide track. While there are lots of people out there "guiding" with SPI certifications, the questions about what kind of terrain they should be working on would be better discussed in a different thread. My point is that 'SPI aspirant' means that you have no certifications, so saying that you are 'a guy who took an SPI class' is probably the best representation of your credentials.

Honestly, I don't want to sound harsh. I think others have given you good answers on dyneema vs nylon, and I wish you good luck for when you decide to take your SPI exam. Hopefully, it gives you a good starting point to move forward should you choose to go on with AMGA training.

EDIT: It seems like there is a new update to the AMGA terminology that specifically addresses this. amga.com/amga-technical-bra…

Jim is probably one of the few SPI instructors who will tell you that. I would say nylon is the better choice in most situations for guides, but to say dyneema should never or can't be used is not very informed IMO. I like to use nylon when guiding because it takes a lot of abuse and is a lot cheaper when I have to replace it. Also I'm usually using cord instead of runners when guiding.

Mikeybarro wrote:So I'm an AMGA Single Pitch Rock aspirant and in my teaining, one of our biggest points about building anchors is that nylons is the best option over dyneema due to its higher stretching capacity. In fact, my instructor insists that the only thing I should use dyneema for is draws. Anyway, in the little ice climbing I've done and onserved, I've come under the strong impression that ice climbers much prefer ro build belay anchors out of dyneema. Why?

Seems like your question is primarily focused on guiding? If so, while MP is great, the AMGA Single Pitch Instructors Facebook page may be a better place for feedback focused on what you're looking for.

Lots of great replies here already, but I thought I'd share the 2cents of a humble SPI who's been doing if for a humble 2 years after the exam. Take the following with as many grains of salt as you like.

As you mentioned below, it seems like the main point your instructor was making is what is the 'best method' for setting up a top rope in a typical single pitch setting (commonly a group TRing for a few hours off one anchor with limited supervision of the material used).

'stretching capacity' is such a non-issue in this application that it shouldn't be part of the material consideration. (With a rope in the system, any impact forces on the anchor are minimal).

I rarely use dyneema when setting single pitch anchors for one reason alone: I'd rather have more bulk at the anchor to combat abrasion. More bulk = more that has to wear through for catastrophic failure. IE: 11mm static rope with a BHK is bulkier than 4 strands of 7mm cordolette, is bulkier than a nylon sling, is bulkier than a dyneema sling, etc.

The only time I've used dyneema at an anchor when guiding was when I was running low on other materials and the bolts were on the top of a small bulge so that the dyneema sling was hanging freely with limited to no contact with the rock. In this scenario, I am perfectly confident with the use of dyneema for program use.

For ice climbing and recreational use, I use dyneema for anchors all the time simply because it's lightweight and fast.

Here are some videos related to this topic that highlight some different ways of using dyneema slings at anchors.
youtube.com/watch?v=qYvaJaD…
youtube.com/watch?v=XpwY4vL…
youtube.com/watch?v=ZSTjlq7…
youtube.com/watch?v=Vrgadjo…

And for a real world horror story where a dyneema anchor still worked just fine and did it's job...
Hanging By a Thread