Petzl ZigZag Pro vs Plus
- Thread starter IIIDaemon
- Start date
JeffGu
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Osceola, Nebraska
The setup is more compact if you have the swivel version, eliminating the need for the bridge swivel (unless you need it for other systems/devices.). I've had ROOK pulleys and swivels on the bridge in the past, but didn't like the extra weight and clangy setup, so I don't use them, anymore. Instead, I use swivels or swivel pulleys elsewhere in the system (canopy anchors, for example).
Raven
Branched out member
- Location
- Northwoods
Wecome aboard matey 
Might I suggest looking to spend your hard earned dough on other devices that work more better. Something midline attachable that excels at both MRS and SRWP. Something adjustable for different ropes and climbers. Something new and blue.
Might I suggest looking to spend your hard earned dough on other devices that work more better. Something midline attachable that excels at both MRS and SRWP. Something adjustable for different ropes and climbers. Something new and blue.
climbstihl
Branched out member
- Location
- Germany
How do you put a swivel on a canopy anchor? One that is retrievable from the ground?
JeffGu
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Osceola, Nebraska
Mine look like a ring-and-ring friction saver on steroids. Very large steel ring on one end, and the other end has a rope connected with or without a swivel (SRT) or a swivel/biner/pulley combo or an Omni-Block swivel pulley... they install very similar to a R&R FS but retrieve from a retrieval line (usually Yale Classic Slickline or 3/16" Dacron Poly or 550 Paracord) but almost anything will work just fine. I've never had any issues with the retrieval line being a problem or in the way of anything, and it's the quickest, easiest way to retrieve the anchor.
climbstihl
Branched out member
- Location
- Germany
I can't quite picture how it can swivel when installed like a R&R. I could see it working well in a pulleysaver type configuration though.
.
...thx for the reply,, which version do you have..? And do you use a ring on your bridge..?
.
Or skip the akimbo bc it's not time tested and the zig zags work on all ropes in the listed range (11.5-13mm) and I've had mine work on ropes thinnner and thicker than that range with no adjustments.Wecome aboard matey
Might I suggest looking to spend your hard earned dough on other devices that work more better. Something midline attachable that excels at both MRS and SRWP. Something adjustable for different ropes and climbers. Something new and blue.
I love mid line attachability but if you Kno what your doing, you'll be fine.
Reead up on the akimbo bc lots of guys do have problems using the ropes the manufacturer suggested.
My zz has a swivel but I believe I'd like the version without the swivel bc it's definitely stronger and I think I would be fine without it
.
...thx for the reply.. as I said, I have looked at all, and have narrowed my choice dwn to the zigzag (jus don't think spider jack is worth nearly 2x as much).. I'm basically looking for actual hands on exp with this device and the perspective from persons that own and use it.. I appreciate your view.. I'm leaning toward the Pro version more due to it being a more compact unit overall and think that a swivel on the bridge to be more practical.. i.e. it's removable, or can be used as another attachment point & the diff in weight btwn swivel and the aluminum ring I use is 0.7oz/20g, which is negligible.. also if I add the chicane I'll still have the other attachment point like the hitch-hiker pulley.. not having any exp with this device was questioning in case there was other view point I haven't considered...
.
..re: the new blue one, IMO, it looks great on the drawing board..
.
IIIDaemon
Last edited:
Chicane is a horrible idea
JeffGu
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Osceola, Nebraska
I have a version 2, 3 version 3 ones, and a version 4 one. I use an SMC ring on one harness.
I don't have a PulleySaver, but maybe it resembles that more than an RR FS... in any case, it installs very much like a RR FS. I install it with a throwline through the pulley, because I don't see the point in dragging the rope through the TIP during install if you don't need to. I install the anchor, then pull the rope through the pulley. To retrieve, I attach a retrival line during the install, and it pulls the very large ring down over the swivel/pulley/rope to bring it down. I pull the climb line out, first, and if I don't want to bomb the anchor down, I use the climb line to put a throwline back through the pulley to guide the anchor down slowly.
This is in the MRS mode. For SRS the climb line gets dragged through the TIP during install and retrieval, but at least it isn't loaded. Installs by pulling it up and through the TIP with throwline by attaching it to the retrieval line attachment point (large ring end). A throwline needs to be attached to tail of rope that is the same length as the rope, when using shorter ropes or high TIP. Once large ring is down, feed the tail end throwline through the ring, replace the first throwline with retrieval line, and use the tail end throwline to pull the anchor/rope up into position. Retrieval is the same as in MRS mode, just pull it down over the swivel/rope and down to the ground... reattach the tail end throwline if you don't want to bomb it down.
Stupid simple, works every time, nothing to break or go wrong. If a log lands on the retrieval line (which I've done many times) It does nothing. You can feel a little twitch in the rope, but it doesn't yank anyone out of the tree. Worst case scenario is that the retrieve line breaks and you have to replace it with something else or manually retrieve the anchor.
The Chacane is actually a very nice device, works exactly as it is supposed to, and works far better than trying to use a RopeWrench on the ZigZag.
climbstihl
Branched out member
- Location
- Germany
Is this sort of what your describing? The hitch cord is the climbline, the hammock is your TIP limb. Obiviously in SRS configuration. Sorry for the bad picture quality
.
...Agreed, I like this guys videos, I was considering the total package dimensions.. at least initially I'll be using it with the RopeWrench (stock @Height Tether) & the total length.. I've got short arms.. No offense meant to the maker, I think the RopeWrench is good idea but only addresses half of the 'controlling friction solution', whereas the ZigZag/Chicane addresses it all (IMO)... again thx for all the replies...
.
IIIDaemon
.
...Sounds similar to my sys the except for the swivel haha, I'm new to this and just can't get past a single piece of rope as an anchor up btwn the crotch of a tree not to mention the tight radius of rings.. i use a round sling with steel oval carabiners and a Naiad pulley.. yeh it takes another step to retrieve and its relatively heavy but once installed 'I' can forget about it...
.
IIIDaemon
climbstihl
Branched out member
- Location
- Germany
I guess he means that it engages right away, unlike the RW.
And it should work how it's supposed to.
I've never heard of any problems from anyone using a rw above a zz?
Look at the manufacturer and the money backing them and how long they took to watch the rope wrench do it all and finally come out with their can of shit that I don't see is any better above a zz except that you can install it and remove it easier than you can a rope wrench with say a fix tether.
Many guys made their own tethers that solved that issue which I can only see that petzl stole too.
All That and certifications might make it work better for you, idk.
Aside from that I just don't see how it behaves better on rope, (nor have I heard anyone make the claim yet) than a Rw above a zz.
And not that strength or time is a good test of any product, but I'd love to see how they compare in pull tests.
I'm not trying to start arguments already had that are senseless but it blows my mind petzl couldn't improve on the design at all really.
I'm not really a petzl hater, I own and use both a zz and Rw and have tons of respect for the brands.
My Rw engages Everytime . No issues ever
climbstihl
Branched out member
- Location
- Germany
Not that it doesn't engage, I meant the time it takes to set, or rotate down to add the friction. Not saying using the RW with a ZZ is a problem and doesn't work well, just that the Shitcan does work a little better.
JeffGu
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Osceola, Nebraska
The RW rotates the ZZ housing so that the swivel attachment shaft is forced against the housing rivet. This is the issue that Petzl had with using the RW with the ZZ... in a fall situation, the impact forces can break the shaft (there goes your connection to the device) or wedge it into the housing, forcing it apart.
ZZ customers kept hounding them to produce a SRT brake for the thing that could be certified, and they did. Anyone else could have stepped up and produced a working device and put it on the market. Petzl preferred to keep it in house so that it could be certified with the ZZ and the liability issues were theirs, and they could control production quality and testing. There's nothing stopping anyone else from bringing a similar product to market. If the device uses existing techniques and methods, so what? So does everything else in this industry. Which rope company made the first double-braid... or kernmantle? Did all the others "steal" their shit and copy it? Or were the construction techniques too general and common to qualify for a patent? There is probably no company out there in the climbing industry who has had their products copied more than Petzl. Why on earth would anyone apply a different standard to them than they do for the rest of the companies making gear? Every pickup truck looks like every other pickup truck.. do you only buy trucks produced by whoever made the first one?
I'm all for crediting people for their ideas... but I also know that the corporate mentality is not, and never has been, real gung ho on that idea. They pay people in marketing departments that are cut-throat bullshit artists who have only one job... increase sales so they can buy a yacht. I don't like it, but if I want stuff, I have to deal with it. If you don't like their politics or their business model, then by all means don't buy their shit. But to bad mouth their products and call them complete shit is hardly the same thing. Sala, ISC, Petzl, Camp, CMC, SMC and a dozen other companies make rescue descenders that all work on the same principles and have relatively minor differences. One of them must have been on the market before the others. I don't see anyone screaming about how all the other ones are a piece of shit and "stole" all their ideas.
Really, this is like listening to people rant about chem trails and phony moon landings.
ZZ customers kept hounding them to produce a SRT brake for the thing that could be certified, and they did. Anyone else could have stepped up and produced a working device and put it on the market. Petzl preferred to keep it in house so that it could be certified with the ZZ and the liability issues were theirs, and they could control production quality and testing. There's nothing stopping anyone else from bringing a similar product to market. If the device uses existing techniques and methods, so what? So does everything else in this industry. Which rope company made the first double-braid... or kernmantle? Did all the others "steal" their shit and copy it? Or were the construction techniques too general and common to qualify for a patent? There is probably no company out there in the climbing industry who has had their products copied more than Petzl. Why on earth would anyone apply a different standard to them than they do for the rest of the companies making gear? Every pickup truck looks like every other pickup truck.. do you only buy trucks produced by whoever made the first one?
I'm all for crediting people for their ideas... but I also know that the corporate mentality is not, and never has been, real gung ho on that idea. They pay people in marketing departments that are cut-throat bullshit artists who have only one job... increase sales so they can buy a yacht. I don't like it, but if I want stuff, I have to deal with it. If you don't like their politics or their business model, then by all means don't buy their shit. But to bad mouth their products and call them complete shit is hardly the same thing. Sala, ISC, Petzl, Camp, CMC, SMC and a dozen other companies make rescue descenders that all work on the same principles and have relatively minor differences. One of them must have been on the market before the others. I don't see anyone screaming about how all the other ones are a piece of shit and "stole" all their ideas.
Really, this is like listening to people rant about chem trails and phony moon landings.
