CMI Mickey Mouse Pulley

I have not seen the hitch climber...but from what I have heard, it is not really all that different from the cmi mickey mouse pulley, no?

Anyone know of any specific advantqages of the "hitch climber" ovber cmi "mickey mouse" hitch tender?

BTW, nice post crazy jim, but what do I know...I'm just a rookie!

-Chris
 
Having only seen and had a play with the Hitch Climber once, I can't speak with any authority on the pulley.

I would however say, that from my limited experience, the machining and construction of the HC are superior to that of the CMI MM. In the sense that there is little or no play in the cheeks and they have a bevelled edge so as not to provide a sharp surface on which to cause abrasion to ropes or karabiners.

In addition to this there are three attachment points rather than two and importantly it was designed with hitch tending as a primary function where the CMI MM was designed as a sliding attachment point for the bridge on the Buckingham Glide harness.

Not that my opinion is of any consequence, but it would appear that your posts Laz2, can come across quite supercilious on occasions so I can understand Mark Bs' sentiments.
 

Attachments

  • 62970-HC001.webp
    62970-HC001.webp
    14.3 KB · Views: 113
Gentlemen! Put your shirts back on, remove the veil that is forcing what I (understandably) see as a mis-interpretation, and re-read my post:

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see any advantage of that system; places the legs of rope too close together, interferes with your hitch as you've found and prevents the hitch karabiner rotating to the direction of pull when tailing slack.
tongue.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Those were my comments regarding the problems that MattB had found with the mickey mouse pulley. I am entitled to my opinion that I don't find the technique helpful. If some of you find me supercilious, opinionated and full of myself, I can understand that. It doesn't necessarily make it true. If I posted on TB soley to try and make friends and influence people, I might be concerned. But I don't, and I'm not. I'm not seeking applause because of some deep seated insecurity. I know that some observers find my posts informative and/or entertaining. I am only putting out an opinion the same as anyone else, based on hard won (and often expensive) experience. Take it or leave it, and please don't be offended. In that respect, I sincerely hope we are all singing off the same hymn sheet - the advancement of the science, philosophy and art that is Arboriculture.

Yes, the technique shared by the mickey mouse, is the same as the hitch climber. That doesn't mean I am attacking a particular product. FWIW, I think the hitch climber is a well designed and manufactured piece of kit. If the advertising stated a WLL, I could think of several rigging uses for it.

I will not be drawn into an unprofessional feud, when I can't see what there is to feud about.
 
Nicely said Paolo. Thanks for "coming clean" with your intentions.

As for the advantage of the Hitch Climber over the MM, one that hasn't been well publicized is the rounded side plates. I hate feeling friction caused by a rope running over a harsh surface. Thanks for that! Having three holes instead of two might also have more advantages? I never used either, but like Paolo said, I'm just sharing my opinion.
 
I wonder if on the Hitch Climber, since the eyes are not right on top of eachother, if there will be more of a space between both ends of the line?

Does that make sense?
 
LOL. That was me there lumberjack. I messed with the hitch climber at the expo but the cord wasn;t set in the way or the length I would climb with but found no problems with it. Way I see is buy it and try it. If you don't like it then sell or trade it. Like they say one mans trash is another mans treasure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom