Hitch hiker/2/x thread

Joeybagodonuts · Oct 13, 2019

Brocky said:
A section of True Blue has permanently flatten even after numerous attempts to correct it, I imagine Arborplex would be worse with the memory it has.

I think i recall seeing a post from you about that.

JTree said:
Arbormaster lives to fight another day.

That it will.. It's tuff stuff!

JeffGu said:
I think it's just something we have to live with.

Right.. this is basically the conclusion I've always thought.. it just is what it is..

Brocky · Oct 14, 2019

An interesting concept that might improve the initial gripping of this hitch by wrapping the cord further around. If nothing else it gives two additional wear surfaces on the dogbone.

Joeybagodonuts · Oct 15, 2019

Brocky said:
An interesting concept that might improve the initial gripping of this hitch by wrapping the cord further around. If nothing else it gives two additional wear surfaces on the dogbone.
View attachment 62816

Oh.. look at you! That's an interesting trick right there.. i betchya it works pretty good for it's intended purpose!

Is that cordage on the small side of 8mils or is that just an optical illusion.. I picked up some 6mm Ocean Vectran to mess around with & I'm rather suprised ive got it working as a lanyard/climb system with 11m. Especially considering my weight. Obviously its super tiny to grab & manipulate but it's definitely working like any other cordage would.. Just suprised is all, I'm a 10mm guy usually.

Brocky · Oct 15, 2019

It Robline’s Pro Racer cord, it’s 7mm in the picture, but there’s also a 9mm. Polyester, dyneema, and Technora blended together. The stopper knots came about while doing other playing, haven’t had time to try it, hoping someone will give it a try.

JTree · Oct 16, 2019

Can anyone tell me why it is so highly recommended that the hhx be used with a swivel? I'm sure this is covered *somewhere*, but my search ninja skills are failing me.

rico · Oct 16, 2019

Quick update on the HHX. My HHX is now broken in and I can report that it is wonderful tool that is super smooth on ascent and descent, tends slack EXTREMELY well, is a fucking dream for spar work, and IMHO functions better in DdRT mode than the HH2. Well played Mr. Mumsford!

Joeybagodonuts · Oct 17, 2019

JTree said:
Can anyone tell me why it is so highly recommended that the hhx be used with a swivel? I'm sure this is covered *somewhere*, but my search ninja skills are failing me.

The swivel is recommended for a few reasons. One- you get the benefits of a swivel. Two- It's more so the captive eye of it that makes the HHX function the best..
It don't have to be a swivel per say, just anything captive that you can thread the long quikie through.. the swiva-eye from RE makes for very easy on & off your bridge.

The most compact way to go while keeping the spine aligned correctly, is a small smc ring, hence the reason it's an option. There's nothing saying you couldn't use a regular swivel there either, it's just a matter of how much you want to fiddle with when detatching.

rico said:
Quick update on the HHX. My HHX is now broken in and I can report that it is wonderful tool that is super smooth on ascent and descent, tends slack EXTREMELY well, is a fucking dream for spar work, and IMHO functions better in DdRT mode than the HH2. Well played Mr. Mumsford!

Damn..i thought you said it was broken at first glance..
How are you running yours?
Still HRC? Backwards 4wrap?

Is it the captive ring/swivel on the quikie that makes the Ddrt better in your opinion, or something else?

rico · Oct 17, 2019

I have been using a standard Hitch Hiker hitch with 3 wraps and HRC. Its lightning quick, tends like a mofo, and I love it. I dont use the supplied swivel/biner and just attach the quickie directly to my bridge ring. The Quickie is kind of a pain in the ass compared to the biner on a HH2 but I like a very compact setup. The supplied swivel/biner just made things too long for me and I fucking hate swivels anywho.

The quickie on the HHX seems to function better than the carabiner on a stock HH2 when in DdRT mode, but if your a running a pulley under your HH2 all bets are off.

JTree · Oct 18, 2019

Joeybagodonuts said:
The swivel is recommended for a few reasons. One- you get the benefits of a swivel. Two- It's more so the captive eye of it that makes the HHX function the best..
It don't have to be a swivel per say, just anything captive that you can thread the long quikie through.. the swiva-eye from RE makes for very easy on & off your bridge.

The most compact way to go while keeping the spine aligned correctly, is a small smc ring, hence the reason it's an option. There's nothing saying you couldn't use a regular swivel there either, it's just a matter of how much you want to fiddle with when detatching.

Damn..i thought you said it was broken at first glance..
How are you running yours?
Still HRC? Backwards 4wrap?

Is it the captive ring/swivel on the quikie that makes the Ddrt better in your opinion, or something else?

Thanks for that reply. What would be the argument against a captive eye biner or a corner trap? Just curious.

I was sort of envisioning a corner trap doodad on the shackle directly to the bridge ring. I just haven't gotten around to putting a California or hydra on my bridge.

Joeybagodonuts · Oct 18, 2019

JTree said:
Thanks for that reply. What would be the argument against a captive eye biner or a corner trap? Just curious.

I was sort of envisioning a corner trap doodad on the shackle directly to the bridge ring. I just haven't gotten around to putting a California or hydra on my bridge.

"I think".. it's more a matter of connector shape argument. The swivel & ring connections may allow more clearance for the long shackle to rotate upwards.. vs a corner trapped biner... is that what your asking?

Also, bridge ring or swivel, the HHx is still using a little round donut trap to keep everything aligned & unbinding. It's sent out like this with extra little donuts. I think what your envisioning, is exactly how it's sent out with the smc ring.. I'm just losing you with the whole hydra/cali swivel part as you can't connect anything captive to them.

RBJtree · Oct 18, 2019

If you want easy and quick on and off the harness with the hhx, you need a biner between the shackle and the bridge ring. If you just have a ring on the bridge and but a regular fixed biner between the shackle and the ring, the hhx will be sideways. It works fine like that, but not ideal positioning especially if you want to tend with either hand. With a swivel on the bridge or a swivel biner, it can orient correctly. Or with the shackle straight to the ring it is oriented correctly, but if you need to unclip from the harness for a redirect, ect, you have to remove the shackle and reinstall, which is a bit of a pita in a tree and unless you have everything tethered, there is a chance to drop something and be left with a non functioning device, and possibly no easy way out of the tree. Hence the strong recomendation of the swiveleye. Plus for self tending durring asscent, the ring on the swiveleye makes a good attachment point for the tending system. At least as I understand it.

RBJtree · Oct 18, 2019

A swivel on the bridge allows you to connect the hhx with just a biner between swivel and shackle, but not great for tending device because the biner will be either getting bound up and possible cross loaded, and increased sitback if you tend to the bridge swivel. So once again, swiveleye is the best all around solution.

JTree · Oct 18, 2019

Other than the decreased bend radius, is there any argument against just clipping the swiveleye directly to the bridge? I can't imagine it would be that much different than the usual bridge ring. At least not the one's I've been using.

climbstihl · Oct 18, 2019

You could also clip a regular biner from the shackle to the bridge if you don't need the swivel. I do remember reading that the TM instructions tell you not to clip directly to the bridge.

Joeybagodonuts · Oct 18, 2019

JTree said:
Other than the decreased bend radius, is there any argument against just clipping the swiveleye directly to the bridge? I can't imagine it would be that much different than the usual bridge ring. At least not the one's I've been using.

Yes that's the intended purpose.. either the ring version or the swiva connected to your bridge..
Have you happen to see any of the informationals by Richard? There pretty dang informative covering A-Z & the reasoning behind the hardware used.. Watch all of them & you'll have the majority of your questions answered in a manner better than we can do for you... You know what i mean? They are spread throughout his channel by date, but if you search his individual channel, all of them will populate below in the results. There's at least 4 or 5.

rico · Oct 19, 2019

JTree said:
Other than the decreased bend radius, is there any argument against just clipping the swiveleye directly to the bridge? I can't imagine it would be that much different than the usual bridge ring. At least not the one's I've been using.

When I do use the swiveleye with the HHX I attach it directly to my rope bridge. Its too long in this configuration so adding a ring just makes it even longer. One of the greatest selling points of the HH is that it is the most compact unicender out there and absolutely kicks ass on a spar. Thats where I make my living!!!

JeffGu · Oct 19, 2019

rico said:
...ass on a spar. Thats where I make my living!!!

On an ass, or on a spar?

JTree · Oct 19, 2019

Joeybagodonuts said:
Yes that's the intended purpose.. either the ring version or the swiva connected to your bridge..
Have you happen to see any of the informationals by Richard? There pretty dang informative covering A-Z & the reasoning behind the hardware used.. Watch all of them & you'll have the majority of your questions answered in a manner better than we can do for you... You know what i mean? They are spread throughout his channel by date, but if you search his individual channel, all of them will populate below in the results. There's at least 4 or 5.

*sigh* yeah.....I guess I'll just have to go through them. I watched a couple of them. It's not that I dislike the fact that the videos exist, but they are time consuming. I figured it would be faster to pull the collective, but if there is real benefit to watching them, I guess I'll plow through them when I get time.

Joeybagodonuts · Oct 19, 2019

JTree said:
*sigh* yeah.....I guess I'll just have to go through them. I watched a couple of them. It's not that I dislike the fact that the videos exist, but they are time consuming. I figured it would be faster to pull the collective, but if there is real benefit to watching them, I guess I'll plow through them when I get time.

Nahh bruuuuv! Don't plow through them..! Watch em a few times.. I'm serious.. most of which your asking is covered or the reasoning behind them explained. If you plow through, you'll miss the tidbits. Public feedback here is great & all, but watching those videos is a lot less time consuming then punching out q & a's here. Especially considering this shits hard to put into text half the time.