Brand/company Q's...Is Notch owned by Sherrill? What brands are worth/not-worth buying from?

[eyehearttrees]

"Drama thread" - No!! I don't want 'drama' I simply want to do right by the people I should be, I'd sooner Dave Driver gets $ when I buy a ring, I see this as a "necessary evil" to understand which companies do, and do not, deserve support....the way we purchase literally does shape the market, it's one of the biggest ways most of us will ever influence the industry-at-large, IMO it is important topic and, while people's choices may be different as to who they want to support, I wanted this thread not to be drama but simply objective reasoning about brands that lets people decide who they'd like to support, IE if I find that the same rope I climb is also available from a retailer that's buying it from Yale and re-labelling it, I'd want to hop-ship immediately and get it directly from the people who knew what they were doing (Yale, not their licensee), no drama needed for just stating objective stuff although you're right the drama is going to be pretty inherent to that....oh well, ignorance isn't bliss I'd sooner hash it out, have already spent thousands and don't see the spending-rate going down (just different purchases being made as capabilities expand) so want to do things right!



~~~

So many great replies, want to add a couple things before replying to some things!

#1 - Does any company have rights, now or in the past, to exclusivity with the PortaWrap? Wesspur says theirs is an original Buckingham product, while Sherrill lists it as Notch....they appear to be machined in the same factory (amazing that devices like a Porta are copied while Weaver is attacking Mumford over his knee-ascender!)

#2 - Re blocks- I've read far, far more than I'm really comfortable having read, got sucked-into the drama from 2013-2014 of Dave trying to defend his rebranded x-rings (happy he brought them to popular-usage, hope he profited, *hate* that there was deceptive practices in trying to disparage non-branded rigging-rings, actually I'd love to hear what became of that drama as Sherrill seems to have all rights to the lineup yet as late as '17 Dave was still trying to disparage non-branded rings) Blocks are a super expensive way to set an anchor compared to rings, I obviously think the rings are superior - prices aside - but however much good-faith I'm ready to grant people in-general, I find it hard to believe that the "blocks are the best rigging anchor" mindset wasn't something that was pushed by retailers who knew quite well that rings were superior. I mean, these companies aren't run by people who aren't into what they're making, and it's not like the concept of rigging-rings is new, I'd initially thought their "main origin" was Antal's 2009 intro to marine applications, however I've since found multiple examples of old, 1" thick 3-stranded slings with giant thimbles, the concept wasn't recently realized - I find it next to impossible to believe that the relative-usefulness of rings wasn't realized by those making blocks, I can imagine being in their shoes and realizing that the rings mean there's really no market for expensive stuff anymore, while DD didn't 'create' their usage in arboriculture his proselytizing for them certainly made people realize that blocks were unnecessary for downward-rigging, I wish he could've made more $$ but am happy to know how much $ is saved & made by our peers by utilizing rings instead of blocks, this is a great thing that block-manufacturers could've easily pushed ages ago if blocks weren't so lucrative.



Ropes - I've found Yale to be incredibly reputable, I'm curious about whether:
- anyone's got any negative opinions on Yale, and
- what rope manufacturer(s) do you think are the best?

Yalex/Tenex- Who made this line first? I'm calling loopies 'yippies' (what their creator- Yale- designated them), and in looking-through Yale's site I'm seeing some amazing stuff that I've never once seen offered by an arboriculture retailer like their Loupes or even the obvious Yalex, was annoyed to find tenex wasn't anything special it was simply 12-strand hollow-braid made with a specific type of poly fibers ("HMPE" and "UMWPE", 'High Modulus' and 'Ultra-high Molecular Weight' polyethylenes are used synonymously to describe the fibers of yalex/tenex cordage) Samson made a better marketing decision to have tenex&tenex-tec, versus Yale's yalex/ultrex designations (IE samson makes them two varieties of the same, with Yale it's not as obvious) Will be getting some Yalex, eager to see how it is when right-beside my tenex-tec sling, would very much like to keep everything Yale at least until I find a reason to deviate!

~~~~~~~~

Wish I'd put the following in my OP but better late than never: I'm not just looking for brands to support but also interested in people, for instance I tried supporting Driver but XAS is defunct (should be taken-down as it's so old....wish he'd push the Safebloc to the position it deserves to be in but can see being beaten-down after all the drama over the rings/branded-rings!) I've found, for instance, an old video that clued me into the RC line of 'portawraps' to be a collaboration between Reg Coates and Stein, I owe Reg a ton (watched every vid of his at least once or twice, taught me a ton) and would be a serious premium for the RC units over the Porta units if I knew he was still getting even a penny of royalties (hell even if not, simply because it promotes his name in a small manner - his initials at least lol - in fact it's that concept, long-term association with a product, that I'm thinking is Dave Driver's best 'reward' for his proselytizing of the rings, to have the colloquial phrase for rigging rings be 'x rings' which I do see people do, had me boggled when I saw a '17 youtube comment from Dave where he's chastising someone for calling an All Gear ring an X-ring, would think he'd want the notoreity for his introduction of the rings I can't fathom Sherrill is giving him much I mean they're already selling non-X-branded rings right-beside the x-rings in their newest catalogue...

 

[eyehearttrees]

You could also pay treestuff of Richard Mumford to break it for you and give you the data.

Thank the gods for Mumford, his break-tests were what allowed me to stop being afraid of trusting my gear (I find it hilarious, in hindsight, that I was afraid of trusting Blue Moon, I guess it's instinctive when you're starting but now I'd throw it through the roughest crotches at any height and have zero concern what-so-ever for my line's integrity)

Just to clarify CMI has acted very reputable e in my opinion. We were not able to come to a deal, but I am very happy with the work that they do on the Rope Runner and the way they have treated me in general. Petzl on the other hand I have no love for.

Gah it IS you!! The avatar kept making me think it was, but I'd remembered you using your full name as username, must be masterblaster threads or something!

1st, thanks a ton for all you've done, you're close to the epitome of "doing things right" in many of the important ways I'm trying to tackle here (and, off-topic, but thanks for lamenting on the concept of removing logs only to introduce off-site mulch later, after hearing you mention that in a podcast I've since tried selling every last client on chipping-to-mulch on-site, have gotten some takers!)

I'm surprised to hear you stand-up for CMI here, in the podcast (either Climbing or Educated, have heard both way too many times ) you said that CMI wanted to produce your Wrench, but wouldn't pay you a penny for it - I wouldn't be upset over that, but after the Wrench was a success, you said that CMI still *wanted* your Runner IP, but wouldn't offer a penny....IE they'd be happy to take from you. How is that reputable?
Petzl....you literally commented in the podcast about how they were open about it, ie "don't let your IP out / protect yourself", you seemed to be of a very different mind in the podcast..

 

[eyehearttrees]

You can build a go-cart in your garage for a few hundred dollars. A Lamborghini Aventador is hundreds of thousands of dollars.

What a scam. They should sell the Aventador for a few hundred dollars.

This is an unfair analogy, borderline deceptive analogy. The supercar v shitty car is apples-to-apples of varying qualities, rings-v-blocks is like motorcycle-v-cars. But let's run with it:

The rigging rings have some advantages... and some disadvantages...

What disadvantages should I be expecting to see with my rings-only systems? I've got a heavy duty pulley for lifting, however for 99% of rigging - IE where the load is moving downward - please tell me what disadvantages you speak of?

and if the market decides they're a superior alternative, then the DMM blocks will go out of production when all of us decide that the rings are the best way to go. I wouldn't hold your breath.

jeebus....yes, this is what an econ-101 textbook would tell you, but in real life markets don't function that smoothly. In any event, I'd bet anything that the blocks are seeing a dent in their sales due to the rings and fully expect this trend to continue. When experts like Reg Coates have lost interest in using blocks it is pretty telling.....that isn't going to stop some from sticking with blocks, however your implication of using the market to gauge validity isn't remotely the 'rule' you think it is, more of a general-trend in markets, there will ALWAYS be someone selling something that's unnecessarily over-priced, and there'll ALWAYS be someone ready to be sold that item- that's got no bearing on whether it's a superior product or not.

... all while competing with companies that would rather farm all of that out to a factory in a country with horribly low wages and work safety conditions that are deplorable.

This type of sentiment factors-in to my overall wish for this thread, if I knew a rigging-ring manufacturer was producing in china, and another in germany, I'd pay a 25% premium for it - I hope that once I've read all the posts I'll have some idea of who's producing in-house and who's farming-out to china/asia, or who's sourcing from all-over and then putting homogenous branding on it as-if it were all from the same factory/operation/minds (looking at Notch..)

Yeah, they're very expensive. This isn't them pulling any kind of a scam... it's what happens when customers get so spoiled on cheap crap from Walmart and the Dollar Store that they expect to be able to buy high quality products made in a western democracy for the same price.

lol, nice attempt at a dig but no that's not it at all. May sound crazy but, yeah, you actually can evaluate relative values w/o being the mouth-breathing walmart lurker you're hyperbolically trying to paint me/others as. I probably would've said something similar in the past but now it just seems a lame attempt at an ad-hominem, "you must just be a cheap-ass if you question the relative-values of blocks-versus-rings" is the take-away of your line there, which is obviously a silly sentiment that'd be said as an insult, not as a genuine attempt at explaining why someone would rather have 3 X-ring-slings than 1 block.

I hate the negativity in your post but still would genuinely like to know where you find rings to pale compared to blocks when downward-rigging, I find people make this type of argument but then don't support it, so would love to hear just one single reason you'd prefer a block for regular rigging (not lifting/hauling/mech advantage, we know pulleys are useful there, I mean 99% of tree-dismantling where you're attempting to control downward loads) Mid-line attachable is the sole reason I have found that people can come up with when they take the 'blocks make a better terminal-anchor for rigging' mentality you do.

 

[eyehearttrees]

If you ever want a conduit friction saver and want the high quality one look for, "the original Dan House....". There is a big difference between the knock offs and the original.

If you care about your climbing gear, life, and how you would be treated should there ever be a failure, search the thread(s) on Kong products here.

Thanks!! If I'm not messing-up names, are you the guy who'd travelled out to do those trial-videos with Dave Driver and August Hunicke? Those vids were great, funny to think of them after my prior ^ post was making the (obvious-to-me) point that blocks are utterly unnecessary for downward-rigging of any sort and their proper place is for lifting/hauling/mech advantage, not controlling downward-loads.

Will check re Kong, they've always seemed an oddity company to me in that they have an Est. date of like 100yrs ago, yet very few products pushed through retailers (though I'm getting the impression that retailers are being very selective about brands they allow, not in a manner of providing the best selection to the customers but in the manner of 'blocking' certain companies, there's one major retailer that doesn't have a single Stein product in their mag which I found real bothersome..

And Re caring about gear/life/property in-general, that's actually part of why I made this thread, will re-state an example I gave but if I'd bought a climb line based on its rated-specs, only to later find out that it was a Yale line that a company re-branded, I would want to get the Yale version. A company's reputation is incredibly important when it comes to trusting your life, or your career (rigging failures/etc), to hardware/textiles, it's why I spent an inordinate amount of time when buying my climbing line - at the same time though, I'm happy/proud to have a $15 hand, and $13 foot, ascender from ebay, they're clones of the Petzl versions and are still performing flawlessly! But, were they to break, I'd have a rise in heartbeat not medical bills, when it comes to lifelines, rigging gear etc I certainly wouldn't take unnecessary risks, but, really, who would?

 

[eyehearttrees]

Don't have much to contribute, but petzl has a corporate pricing policy... ever wonder why zigzags were $275 everywhere? Because petzl said thats what they needed to be sold for or you couldn't buy them for resale. The idea is to make the market "fair' so you can shop where you want, rather than the best deal, but it really boils down to inflated prices and higher profit margins.

Neat idea!

I expect Petzl gear to be really good (like DMM gear) due to their operation's nature, they're a long-term, large-scale company that isn't going to take risks with shoddy products. That said I've simply never found their offering to be the best fit for me in any particular case so haven't bought from them yet (my hand/foot ascenders are clones of theirs and I'm quite impressed with them!)

 

[eyehearttrees]

Ok THIS has me confused:

Also thought I'd toss in that iron street is wesspur's in house splicing department, and ABR was the in house one for treestuff, and i think they had an arrangement worked out to make x-rings that has since been transfered to notch

Wesspur is open about that, but:
ABR splices for treestuff, but
treestuff is under Sherrill, and
Rope Logic splices for sherrill......

(Upon googling it, I found that all the ABR stuff I'd seen seems to be dated, ABR doesn't appear to be an entity anymore if you look on Treehouse all their stuff is done by Rope Logic IE Sherrill's in-house)

 

[eyehearttrees]

Ok so here is the deal. Sherrill is treestuff, notch and some other splicing company. They are like the Walmart if tree gear. They have a few exclusives such as the sole importer of Silky. They some how have their hands all over the big shot, and have “stolen” a few other inventions.
Kong sucks they made life support rings, which Sherrill sold. They broke and hurt or killed a few folks, both companies left much to be desired in how they handled this.
CMI is US MADE. Not cutting edge stuff, but pretty damn solid. They have been in the game for a long time, and not too long ago, if you wanted a block, it was pretty much a CMI or the clunky but bomb proof one that ISC now makes. Their micro pulleys always have left a little to be desired, but the price point is pretty spot on. Ever try production in the US? Never heard a peep of complaining about them.
Petzl well kinda sucks. A little more than a little bit.
DMM is pretty bomber, and makes great gear. I’ve found many of the carabiners get a little weak in the gate.
ISC is little used in the arb world but makes great gear. Snappy bomb proof gear.

Love ISC, can't picture buying carabiners from anyone else and they'd be my go-to for blocks!

Gonna have to find this Kong thread, and hearing you say that the handling of the situation wasn't respectable doesn't surprise me a single bit. I'd actually been thinking "This Nick Bonner guy seems to run Treehouse, I like him I should support his retail-op" so am all the more upset to know that it's just another Sherrill outfit, to be honest while their re-branding of products (Safebloc, for instance) bothers me insofar as it's deceptive, gives one the idea that a company Notch is innovating when they are not, that isn't nearly as deceptive as a retailer having 2 "storefronts", Sherrill & Treestuff, that they keep distinct as-if it were two companies, that is incredibly deceptive I wouldn't spend a penny after hearing that...)

Do you know if Sherrill has actually produced / funded-production of any gear, or actually brought any innovations to market themselves? I'm guessing they don't but with how many games they're playing I figured it's worth asking, wouldn't be surprised. Gah this was a real bummer to hear, Treestuff seemed like a 'fresh upstart' type of company, would love links to anything on that transfer that anyone's got, am particularly interested in whether Nick Bonner is still in a position of authority at treestuff or if he sold it and now it's 100% sherrill and they're simply utilizing the good-faith he'd built around treestuff..

 

[SomethingWitty]

That was a lot all at once.

I have an argument for blocks. We have a yellow ISC block that has been through the ringer. It's been beat up and left in felled trees and tossed from canopies and run hard for years. It is all kinds of dinged up. It's still performing. The sort of longevity that I expect from rings just isn't as long or tough as what I expect from blocks; your workhorse double ring setup should be good for years. A good block shouldn't give you pause for decades. Being midline attachable is nice for spready removals where you're working multiple stems down and changing rigging points a few times. I like ultras just because they're so freaking fast, but it makes moving as anything but a terminal point hard with a ring.

 

[Jonny]

ALUMINUM RING FAILURE

It has been brought to my attention that several Aluminum Rings that I have sold have been independently tested and have FAILED at extremely low strengths. I have no idea if the rings in question are the same ones as TLHamel's post...

www.treebuzz.com

 

[eyehearttrees]

They source US made when and where they can. They don’t (for the most part) go for exclusives (blue moon).

Wait I didn't know this, could you elaborate? That's what I climb, got it from Bartlett's (was very green at the time and went with it because I saw enough others doing the same, have since fallen in love with it and have trouble picturing a swap, I contemplate "this thing is kinda overkill, I could have Blaze or something else that's lighter" but at the end of the day I want to trust my line like I do Blue Moon!)

Weaver, well they have been pretty ok for 1980. They had a shitty rope bridge issue, and didn’t handle it well. Shoulda sent notices and recalled much sooner. Now there is the HASS thing. I can see both sides of this story and have some strong opinions. I think weaver is taking it too far.
Fuck lead shot in throw bags fwiw

WOW! The way they're attacking Mumford was enough for me to not even consider supporting them, ever...if I'm reading you right there was a bridge issue that wasn't IMMEDIATELY acted upon? How on earth could **anyone** trust a piece of gear from such an outfit ever again?
[And lead.....WTF?!? I saw a cheap sling with a label that advised the product exposes you to *arsenic*, I mean we hold these things while we're sweating, and people inherently touch their face/lips through the day, heavy metals/poisons should be nowhere near our textiles just hearing that lead is in-use in their production facilities would be enough for me to shun them....lead, hesitating to let people know their lifelines(bridges) are faulty, attacking an industry-innovator's(mumford) attempts to further SRT.....It's hard to imagine arborist-companies that weren't initially founded by arborists/ex-arborists, it's sad to see one get big and adopt practices that are beneficial to them *at the expense* of the industry they serve. Maybe they'll buy a plucky up-start company in the next decade and re-brand themselves, like Sherrill, and I'll get tricked-into buying from them ;P ]

 

[eyehearttrees]

That was a lot all at once.

I have an argument for blocks. We have a yellow ISC block that has been through the ringer. It's been beat up and left in felled trees and tossed from canopies and run hard for years. It is all kinds of dinged up. It's still performing. The sort of longevity that I expect from rings just isn't as long or tough as what I expect from blocks; your workhorse double ring setup should be good for years. A good block shouldn't give you pause for decades. Being midline attachable is nice for spready removals where you're working multiple stems down and changing rigging points a few times. I like ultras just because they're so freaking fast, but it makes moving as anything but a terminal point hard with a ring.

Your argument for blocks is that they're MORE-DURABLE than rings? That is nonsense, obviously, c'mon just because you have a block that's old /= blocks having more longevity than rings.....how, exactly, do you picture a broken (or "worn-out") rigging-ring to look anyways? The rings should be for-life, it's their slings you replace, if you broke a ring it wasn't being used right (and was almost surely an absurdly dangerous situation, hell the smaller rings on my x-sling have a WLL of over 50% the break strength of the 3/4" tenex they're on....actually, for comparison, the WLL of just one (of the 3) rings on my sling, one of the smaller ones, is actually higher than DMM's largest block!!

The slings are what you replace not the rings, the idea that a block has more longevity than rings is silly.

 

[JeffGu]

This is an unfair analogy, borderline deceptive analogy.

Oh, give me a break... the analogy was fine. It referred to your insistence that blocks were overpriced junk made from a few dollars worth of aluminum. Context, my friend. They're labor intensive items with a demand for absolute reliability, and the markup reflects that. It isn't any higher than any other similar manufactured device. The markup on the rings isn't exactly low, for an item that can be mass produced from a billet of aluminum in a single operation.

...what disadvantages you speak of?

A block doesn't have a habit of falling out of the sling when hit with an impact load. Friction at the TIP comes at a price... it's the first thing to feel an impact load and wear on both the rope and device is high. You'll replace rings much sooner than blocks. Since they're still used with a friction brake, the entire rope gets heated up with not as much chance to cool down. If the redirects are also rings, this is compounded. Over time, that will likely result in shorter rope life. Not a big deal for some people, but a consideration for others.

I hate the negativity in your post...

Perhaps you should review your own posts before giving me a bad rating for negativity.

...the 'blocks make a better terminal-anchor for rigging' mentality you do.

You spend energy defending against people making assumptions about what you mean, then say things like this? I use both aerial friction devices and blocks. I have an AFB, more than one Rig 'N Wrench setup, rings from four different OEMs, and a multitude of blocks from several OEMs. I have never once found any of them to be terribly overpriced, just expensive. I have dealt with many OEMs concerning their products, and haven't experienced any of the Evil Empire stuff you're going on about.

 

[SomethingWitty]

Your argument for blocks is that they're MORE-DURABLE than rings? That is nonsense, obviously, c'mon just because you have a block that's old /= blocks having more longevity than rings.....how, exactly, do you picture a broken (or "worn-out") rigging-ring to look anyways? The rings should be for-life, it's their slings you replace, if you broke a ring it wasn't being used right (and was almost surely an absurdly dangerous situation, hell the smaller rings on my x-sling have a WLL of over 50% the break strength of the 3/4" tenex they're on....actually, for comparison, the WLL of just one (of the 3) rings on my sling, one of the smaller ones, is actually higher than DMM's largest block!!

The slings are what you replace not the rings, the idea that a block has more longevity than rings is silly.

I've never gotten a genuine XRR, but the blue ones have all sorts of dings and wear from rough handling and rope running through them over the course of the last year.
I bet that the hard anodizing makes them resist rope wear more.
Our hardware's WLL is always absurd. There is no reason to break any of it.

 

[SomethingWitty]

I will show a picture of what a medium ring looks like after it was used as a 90° redirect for the mini to drag a log down the hill using a 1/2" arborplex.

Once I get back to my gear.

 

[Crimsonking]

Your argument for blocks is that they're MORE-DURABLE than rings? That is nonsense, obviously, c'mon just because you have a block that's old /= blocks having more longevity than rings.....how, exactly, do you picture a broken (or "worn-out") rigging-ring to look anyways? The rings should be for-life, it's their slings you replace, if you broke a ring it wasn't being used right (and was almost surely an absurdly dangerous situation, hell the smaller rings on my x-sling have a WLL of over 50% the break strength of the 3/4" tenex they're on....actually, for comparison, the WLL of just one (of the 3) rings on my sling, one of the smaller ones, is actually higher than DMM's largest block!!

The slings are what you replace not the rings, the idea that a block has more longevity than rings is silly.

Don’t expect much consideration if you ask for opinions and then shoot them down as “silly”. Perhaps you’ve not considered why a block may last longer. Personally, I’ve retired more rings from service than blocks,

 

[eyehearttrees]

if you broke a ring

quoting myself but is there even a single documented case of ring failure? Dave says they'd stretch/deform, I'd always thought aluminum would snap but this application isn't just the aluminum you have the strength of the rope that's spliced on it "reinforcing" the circle....I suck at circle/triangle geometry/trigonometry but, if one were to get like 2" dyneema to splice the large(28x20mm) x-ring into, then just kept loading it til failure, am very curious how failure would present itself (dave's account of the ring's stretching/deforming is comforting but again it's contrary to how I understood aluminum, especially when shock-loaded, I thought it fractured but his account is that it deforms like steel)

At any rate my point stands insofar as the rings are so many times stronger than the slings that you're simply not in a position to overload your rings, you'll tear the slings apart way before hurting the rings, so genuinely surprised you're trying to make a 'sturdiness'/longevity case for moving-aluminum-parts blocks versus spliced-aluminum-rings, it's so clear/obvious from where I'm sitting..

 

[eyehearttrees]

Don’t expect much consideration if you ask for opinions and then shoot them down as “silly”. Perhaps you’ve not considered why a block may last longer. Personally, I’ve retired more rings from service than blocks,

Fair judgement, my apology I just honestly took that notion as less of a statement you believed in and more of a statement you were making to try and come-up with a block-advantage over rings. If you believe a block will have more long-term reliability than solid-state rings, I apologize for calling the notion silly, but would be eager to resolve the confusion because it's simply not the case and it'd be a shame for anyone reading to think "well, I was going to go for rings but I can accept paying $550 for that block since it'll be a lifetime item"

Will await your answer on what you expect a failed-ring to look like, or an example of a use-case that could destroy a ring. I stand by the position that rings are both a stronger option as well as longer-lasting hardware and do apologize for calling it silly I genuinely thought you were making an 'off-hand obsevation' and passing it as objective fact, IE "I've had one for a while ergo they're more resilient", I wasn't trying to shoot you down just trying to convey I thought it short-sighted to use a personal-anecdote that's only looking at one of the two items (your block) and using it as a form of 'evidence' in the blocks-v-rings discussion. Am happy your block lasted a while but surely you realize that doesn't mean rings would've lasted a shorter amount of time (or that your block's longevity has zero bearing on rings' longevity)

 

[eyehearttrees]

what are the inventions that Notch has stolen? I hear this all the time but never any examples. they only sell throw bags, carabiners, micro pulleys, a saw scabbard, rigging rings (they work with David Driver on those) a huge log carrier thingy, pole pruners, pole saw, a very unique foot ascender, pocket wedges, chainsaw files, quickies, rope runners, (they work with me on those) a great line up of storage solutions. I can't think of anything else. much less something stolen. I guess you could say they ripped off the Harrison rocket, and the faltheimer, but they were like the eighth entity to do so. Not the top of the line quality, but affordable, and Really, Notch is the only company that focuses exclusively on arboriculture. Tobe Sherrill is the patented inventor of the big shot so thats why they have that.

I could write a lot here but they present the portawrap as a Notch piece of equipment and it seems that's a Buckingham creation, they're also putting Notch on the Safebloc now (mine's just got the sherrill logo but newer ones are now "Notch") It's the charade of positing Notch as a producer, alongside DMM/petzl/ISC, when in fact "Notch" doesn't have a facility or make products it's a badge that Sherrill puts on an array of products they've sourced.

Why does this matter? Look at the rigging line they offer, Kraken - I'm in that market right now, I look at their 5/8" line and my first thought is "Wow, 18k on 5/8, that's right up there with Polydyne and Atlas, yet it's cheaper than either- I should get this rope!" That'd be the right way to think about it IF I had faith in Notch as an entity, like I do Yale....would you put your faith in Kraken actually being as-strong, yet cheaper, than Yale's/Sterling's offerings (and WAY better than Samson/Tflbr's), I can't imagine you would yet there it is on their page, if I take their word then they just out-did Samson and Yale, I have an impossible time buying that notion :/

In your personal opinion, can you think of honest/valid reasons to re-label products from myriad companies under 1 label, then list those products alongside other (legitimate) companies as-if Notch were its own entity? Or a valid/honest reason for having two 'store-fronts' (sherrill + treehouse)? Isn't that analogous to me setting up 2 usernames on this forum and posting from both w/o acknowledging it's 1 person controlling 2 accounts? It's obvious why it's deceptive in that context, I don't know why a pass should be given when it's being done in a commercial venture (and, in commercial ventures, it's always a more appealing offense because it can be made profitable and people always act on their incentives, Notch's - and Weaver's, for that matter - incentives are abundantly clear IE profits > advancing the industry)

 

[Crimsonking]

Fair judgement, my apology I just honestly took that notion as less of a statement you believed in and more of a statement you were making to try and come-up with a block-advantage over rings. If you believe a block will have more long-term reliability than solid-state rings, I apologize for calling the notion silly, but would be eager to resolve the confusion because it's simply not the case and it'd be a shame for anyone reading to think "well, I was going to go for rings but I can accept paying $550 for that block since it'll be a lifetime item"

Will await your answer on what you expect a failed-ring to look like, or an example of a use-case that could destroy a ring. I stand by the position that rings are both a stronger option as well as longer-lasting hardware and do apologize for calling it silly I genuinely thought you were making an 'off-hand obsevation' and passing it as objective fact, IE "I've had one for a while ergo they're more resilient", I wasn't trying to shoot you down just trying to convey I thought it short-sighted to use a personal-anecdote that's only looking at one of the two items (your block) and using it as a form of 'evidence' in the blocks-v-rings discussion. Am happy your block lasted a while but surely you realize that doesn't mean rings would've lasted a shorter amount of time (or that your block's longevity has zero bearing on rings' longevity)

To clarify, I wasn’t the one who replied with the block story. However, I’ve witnessed good blocks that have been going strong for 8 years. The block vs ring discussion has one major flaw- the “vs”. If you believe rings are the best thing ever, fine. Enjoy your work, be profitable, and keep learning.

Challenging others to defend the value of blocks is worthless, unless you are hoping to find efficiencies to add to your systems that you may have missed. So far your tone has not given anyone here the idea that you want to learn. Way more statements than questions, and most questions seem to be more challenges than inquisitions.

I use both. I find aerial friction to be an advantage at times, and a disadvantage at others.

Don’t confuse tools with best practices- the latter requires a more polarized stance, while taking such a stance on the former is foolish. Why restrict yourself from having more ways to be productive, except to challenge yourself?

 

[eyehearttrees]

Notch does have an arb trolley, but I don't feel like they "stole it" stole it... Wheeled carts have been around since before walls, 'parrently... @Reg was just a bit smarter and faster off the line from his time as a playground seesaw engineer (that was after his hot dog stand apprenticeship)...

Yeah the idea of trying to patent trolleys is like trying to patent "tree-climbing-harness" or "climb-rope" lol (or 'x-rigging-rings'? lol) Some things are just obvious and will come to use no matter what, whether trolleys or rigging-rings, and therefore totally unworthy of any IP protection (regardless of whether it's granted or not, our IP system is beyond broken but that's another story)

And thanks for reminding me about that I'd forgotten it was Reg Coates to bring Stein's trolley to market, do you happen to know if Reg is getting revenue from the RC bollards or the trolley? Tagging @Reg ;D I've watched your entire library, many videos I watched several times, any product I buy that has an option to kick funds to you I'd be sure to get that version!

(this idea of trying to patent/'own' a trolley/cart, and how silly the idea of trying to do that would be, is so analogous to the knee-ascender example where Weaver is abusing the legal system's shitty IP laws - or threatening to - to prevent Mumford's tiny improvements to the knee ascender, "protecting" their 'haas' version AS-IF it were novel when in reality there's black&white pic of J.Beranek using such configurations decades ago......would be funny if someone turned around and tried suing weaver over making spurs or belts because, hey, they didn't originate that concept!)