CMI 2 handled ascender

ChuckR

ChuckR

Location
Minneapolis
Was wondering if anyone has tried the CMI expedition 2-handled ascender. Seems like it would make climbing with the Texas system a little easier.
 
I have been using it for a couple of months. I like it alot for single rope. I had to change my backup a bit. A prussic over top is hard to get to work well with this ascender.

Tony
 
[ QUOTE ]
I had to change my backup a bit. A prussic over top is hard to get to work well with this ascender.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Tony. How are you backing it up?
 
A buddy of mine got one so we rigged up a kit for him. On the first hitch up the rope he dropped off and fell. Well, fell isn't really the right word because he was only inches off the ground. He whooped from the surprise. After trying to figure out how the CMI came off we concluded that he must have choked up on the right handle when he pulled up, slipped his thumb up and opened the cam. It was fortunate that this was learned on the ground. We did setup a backup attached to his front d-ring on his bridge. I think we used either a Rocker or a Microcender. If the CMI would have come off a bit higher the backup would have held him.

We spent time talking about the CMI. It's too bad that the double motion lockout that's used on the heavier, I think they're called Ultracenders???, wasn't used. With that lockout the cam would have stayed on the rope but there might have been some slippage.

My buddy is going to cut away the end of the release tab to make it flush with the shell of the ascender. Oh, and he is very disciplined now about keeping his hands and thumbs down on the handle away from the releaes tab...

A backup to an upper ascender should be seperated by some distance. Attaching the backup to the bridge of the harness works really well. There are many options for the lower backup.

Using a chest ascender system makes ascending really comfortable and not much more complex.
 
The bolt on handle can be modified. I cut the top bar off so you can hang a connecting link for a prusik back up. I have a photo of it some where around here. Check floating anchor or something like that. It worked great.
 
Tod K wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
I cut the top bar off so you can hang a connecting link for a prusik back up. I have a photo of it some where around here.

[/ QUOTE ]

This one?
 

Attachments

  • 77740-tods_floating_false_crotch(2).webp
    77740-tods_floating_false_crotch(2).webp
    486.6 KB · Views: 271
You could also do this. The climber is attached to the cord only, not the ascender, and the cord has to be on the side of the ascender that is away from the cam.
 

Attachments

  • 77742-dsc02433_resized_25%.webp
    77742-dsc02433_resized_25%.webp
    66.6 KB · Views: 261
I have also tried this setup, but it kinks the rope when the climber puts their weight on the tether (here the tether is the orange line).
 

Attachments

  • 77744-dsc02296_resized_25%.webp
    77744-dsc02296_resized_25%.webp
    37.4 KB · Views: 254
[ QUOTE ]
I have also tried this setup, but it kinks the rope when the climber puts their weight on the tether (here the tether is the orange line).

[/ QUOTE ]

Why can't the tether use a lower hole? Also, I'm not sure I understand Tom's comment about the backup for an upper ascender needing some seperation.
 
My feeling is that ascenders should be seperate from each other by as much space as possible. If something like a accidental bump, twig, rope movement or bark flake were to cause one of the ascenders to fail it could cause a nearby backup to fail at the same time. Keeping them seperate reduces this possibility.

Another reason that I don't like to see friction hitches combined with an ascender is that the two seem to become dependant on each other rather than acting independantly.
 
Mahk,

I dont see a problem with using the croll as a back up in STR. I how could you ever load 12 KN's. If the primary ascender failed, the croll would grab before any shock load.
 
Mahk,I did think about the ratings on the croll and am in the process of finding a better option that will work with the same ease.However is the croll not used in the frog sytem ? and yes I know that it can be done with prussics as well.I am refering to the package that sherrill is selling .
 
Tom wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
Another reason that I don't like to see friction hitches combined with an ascender is that the two seem to become dependant on each other rather than acting independantly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ummm...I don't understand....



Jeremy wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
I dont see a problem with using the croll as a back up in STR. I how could you ever load 12 KN's. If the primary ascender failed, the croll would grab before any shock load

[/ QUOTE ]

My point is that the ratings are below what is required by ANSI.


Roachy wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
However is the croll not used in the frog sytem ? and yes I know that it can be done with prussics as well.I am refering to the package that sherrill is selling .


[/ QUOTE ]

The Croll has been sold with the Frog system. It is still an issue that needs to be worked out.
 
Years ago when I read ON ROPE and some other books on safety issues the discussion is about backups and safety systems. An ideal backup is two systems that are completely parallel and independant of each other. The connection goes from the rope to the climber by two seperate paths which have nothing to do with each other. That made a lot of sense to me.

In many of the backup systems that have been developed using DdRT especially the primary and backup systems are not as seperate as they could be.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not condemning any of the other systems. Having any backup during ascent is better than none. There are many solutions for this issue. My preferance is to start with SRT which, to me, is much easier to have a backup system.

The issue of breaking strength of equipment is likely to be an issue for the Z133 committee during this go around. This won't be an easy one to solve either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom