I finally made the switch.

So I have finally made the change. After a year of climbing with two split tails tied in a blakes hitch, I ended up picking up a micro pulley and a BeeLine eye to eye at the climbing seminar, and I am now climbing with the Distel Hitch.

The hitch/pulley self tends like a dream unless I have put some serious load onto it. I love the change in climbing style. I think I said it best after I got the ART Positioner. It is more like climbing a tree, and less like climbing a rope. The other night I scaled up the small nubs on the trunk of my big maple, pulling the slack up as I went.

For ascent I found that I keep my weight off of the hitch for the most part during the climb by resting on a footlock (single or double). I have also found that Moss had the right idea of clipping on the carabiner with the hitch and pulley at the Leg Strap D on the Tengu. I do however like to move the hitch carabiner up to the swivel on my pear (with the rope end) after I am in the branches.

Carl

Any pics of this set up would be appreciated.
Thanks

With the hitch on an HMS biner on the Tengu legstrap D, it just rides up the rope as you climb and grabs when you load it. It does require that you tune the split tail length correctly for your climbing rope diameter. That's why I tie my own split tails so I can tune the length just right. The system excels for climbing off the tree (branch route) and works well on the trunk.

I am curious why you need to move the HMS biner/hitch off the leg strap D once you're in the crown.

Here's the HMS carabiner (blue biner) attached to the legstrap D on my Tengu


A closed split tail (8mm Beeline) is attached to the blue carabiner.

This is advanced technique, practice low and slow.
-moss

moss wrote:

I am curious why you need to move the HMS biner/hitch off the leg strap D once you're in the crown.

The top of the hitch ends up being cluttered with the other carabiner and swivel, so by moving it up it's next to only the working leg of the rope, so it seems neater and easier to get hold of and work with.

I'll take some pics next time I get it all hooked up.

Carl

P.S. The working end of my climbing line has an eye splice, and is connected to the swivel with a carabiner, that makes for a lot of metal to have your hand mingling with when hopping around the tree.

I'm sort of curious what a \"normal\" progression would be for a beginning climber... a Blake's for one or several years and then what? What is the typical path of advancement? I've never seen anyone list the various closed hitches in their order of difficulty or reliability or finickiness.

Mark Adams' articles on climbing hitches do a pretty good job.

They are in the articles section on TreeBuzz.com

Carl

Davej wrote:

I'm sort of curious what a \"normal\" progression would be for a beginning climber... a Blake's for one or several years and then what? What is the typical path of advancement? I've never seen anyone list the various closed hitches in their order of difficulty or reliability or finickiness.

Opinions will vary per climber, there is no standard. My opinion is climb on a Blake's, learn how to be in a tree safely. I don't believe a climber can safely go straight to a closed split tail climbing system. Climbers should have the Blake's system encoded in their DNA before considering alternate techniques.

It shouldn't be taken for granted that a climber will or should progress to a closed split tail system. Make modifications to your climbing technique based on need discovered through climbing.
-moss

Moss, why do you prefer your hitch that low when following branch routes? I find that I like my hitch a little higher, as I use my arms stretched along the line as a balancer when I cant get three points of contact. I'd think that working with the hitch that close to your body you may loose that advantage, is there a trade off benefit I don't see?

I do like that it's rotated 90 degrees, you can pull slack through with either hand by directing the tail away from your body. That's a problem with my setup, pulling with my left hand is pretty useless.

My hitch seems to be in an excellent position for limb walking. My hand position on the hitch and rope while going out on a limb (when you need to be putting pressure on the hitch) provides good support/balance on the rope, the hitch is not as close as you might think.

It seems like with most harness/hitch configurations there's always a battle to keep your connecting biners, swivels and hitches etc. below your face, this system solves that but doesn't compromise balance. Of course everyone has their system tweaked to their preference, what works well for me might feel very strange to you.
-moss


icabod wrote:

Moss, why do you prefer your hitch that low when following branch routes? I find that I like my hitch a little higher, as I use my arms stretched along the line as a balancer when I cant get three points of contact. I'd think that working with the hitch that close to your body you may loose that advantage, is there a trade off benefit I don't see?

I do like that it's rotated 90 degrees, you can pull slack through with either hand by directing the tail away from your body. That's a problem with my setup, pulling with my left hand is pretty useless.

Naw nothing strange about it, though I'm curious how short you tie your hitch, and I realise now too that I'm assuming a distel hitch, which could be all wrong.

Moss, do you happen to have a pic or video of your complete Hitch Climber system in use? I like the concept of attaching to the NT saddle at the D instead of on the pear, I need to try that out.

While I love the design of the Hitch Climber, I haven't yet found a setup that felt as comfortable to me as climbing with a Blake's. Perhaps I am just unaccustomed to having the hitch so low and close to my body. And when I have tried raising the position of the hitch by adding an additional bridge component, I end up with far too much metal in my face.

Maybe I need to just get used to one hand above and one hand below, with the hitch low and close...though I would like to see if that is how you are doing it (I am also using a Pantin). Until seeing your post, I wondered if a rope-bridge style saddle was simply more suited to the Hitch Climber than the NT saddles.

For now I am just using the Hitch Climber assembly on a 25' length of Chameleon for my lanyard, which works nicely.

Elrohir wrote:

Moss, do you happen to have a pic or video of your complete Hitch Climber system in use? I like the concept of attaching to the NT saddle at the D instead of on the pear, I need to try that out.

I don't use the Hitch Climber, I'll try and make a video of my system when I get a chance.
-moss

icabod wrote:

Moss, why do you prefer your hitch that low when following branch routes?

I just realized I completely misunderstood your question. When I climb a branch route DRT I like my hitch close to my waist, it just rides along as I ascend, both arms/hands pull rope continuously well above the hitch. If I need to sit back and rest the hitch grabs. Primary power comes from both legs engaged on the down rope with Pantin on one foot and single foot footlock with the other foot. Disclaimer: not a beginner technique, ie: new climbers shouldn't be configuring their system to grab the rope above the hitch.
-moss

icabod wrote:
Moss, why do you prefer your hitch that low when following branch routes?

What the heck is a \"branch route?\" What are the other \"routes?\"

Davej wrote:

What the heck is a \"branch route?\" What are the other \"routes?\"

There are two general route categories, one is a trunk route, the other is a branch route. The route is dependent on where the rope hangs from the TIP. The route will often have elements of both categories. The climber may start out climbing away from the trunk on a branch route but have contact with the trunk as they get closer to the TIP.

1. Trunk route
The rope position puts the climber in contact with the trunk

2. Branch route
The rope position puts the climber away from the trunk, the first contact with the tree is when the climber reaches the TIP.

-moss