evo
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- My Island, WA
I think wesspur sells them for about $15 per. I dont think they list it online or in the catalog, but I do know they carry replacements
Ring Failure
- Thread starter 1bigtree
- Start date
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
[ QUOTE ]
I wonder what paolo has to say about it all....
Until I find out I won't be suggesting his saddle
[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting how he popped in, danced around Nick's question without ever answering it, gave Nick crap about bringing it up and then disappeared. You'd think he was interested since his harness has two integral, unmarked, polished aluminum rings.
Not exactly stand up behavior for a gear manufacturer.
But with that said, the rings are not his fault, that belongs on Kong's doorstep. We should never forget that Kong was the manufacturer in charge of QA on these rings whether they out-sourced them or not.
I wonder what paolo has to say about it all....
Until I find out I won't be suggesting his saddle
[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting how he popped in, danced around Nick's question without ever answering it, gave Nick crap about bringing it up and then disappeared. You'd think he was interested since his harness has two integral, unmarked, polished aluminum rings.
Not exactly stand up behavior for a gear manufacturer.
But with that said, the rings are not his fault, that belongs on Kong's doorstep. We should never forget that Kong was the manufacturer in charge of QA on these rings whether they out-sourced them or not.
- Location
- UK
Hi guys,
Just a quick post from all at Safety Technology who manufacture the TreeFlex harness.
Sorry for the delay in posting this; but I deal with this kind of technical info have been away in various places running training courses and have not been on the Buzz for a while. Paolo (Laz2) has been fielding some of the posts but in fairness to him he is not responsible for the items used in production.
In short the Alu rings used in TreeFlex are not from Kong and never have been - they are produced by CT (Climbing technology) who are now know as Aludesign. The rings are tested to 25kN for both the small rings in the leg risers and also the large ring on the bridge.
If you would like any specific questions answered, please contact me via email info@safetytechnology.co.uk
Many thanks,
Ben
Just a quick post from all at Safety Technology who manufacture the TreeFlex harness.
Sorry for the delay in posting this; but I deal with this kind of technical info have been away in various places running training courses and have not been on the Buzz for a while. Paolo (Laz2) has been fielding some of the posts but in fairness to him he is not responsible for the items used in production.
In short the Alu rings used in TreeFlex are not from Kong and never have been - they are produced by CT (Climbing technology) who are now know as Aludesign. The rings are tested to 25kN for both the small rings in the leg risers and also the large ring on the bridge.
If you would like any specific questions answered, please contact me via email info@safetytechnology.co.uk
Many thanks,
Ben
After making enquiries with manufacture and supply, I can confirm that the rings on Treeflex are made by CT (Alu designs) in Italy.
Apparantly these are batch tested (both small & large) to 25kN.
I have asked Safety Technology to confirm the details.
The notion that each ring should be proof loaded is ridiculous - I would never trust my life to a product that had actually been proof loaded.
Apparantly these are batch tested (both small & large) to 25kN.
I have asked Safety Technology to confirm the details.
The notion that each ring should be proof loaded is ridiculous - I would never trust my life to a product that had actually been proof loaded.
TC
Participating member
[ QUOTE ]
I use the locking steel snaps myself. I never use any kinda biner for lifeline attachments, like Scott Prophett did.
[/ QUOTE ]
Have you ever tried Biners for climbing? Whose Scott Prophett and why is he significant? did he invent the Portawrap by any chance?
[ QUOTE ]
Funny, 1973 is when I first began climbing trees commercially!
jomoco
[/ QUOTE ]
I dont know much about 1973 as I wasnt even born then. Seriously.......do a lot of people still use leather cambium savers? did they ever?
I use the locking steel snaps myself. I never use any kinda biner for lifeline attachments, like Scott Prophett did.
[/ QUOTE ]
Have you ever tried Biners for climbing? Whose Scott Prophett and why is he significant? did he invent the Portawrap by any chance?
[ QUOTE ]
Funny, 1973 is when I first began climbing trees commercially!
jomoco
[/ QUOTE ]
I dont know much about 1973 as I wasnt even born then. Seriously.......do a lot of people still use leather cambium savers? did they ever?
chris_girard
Branched out member
- Location
- Gilmanton, N.H.
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know Paolo, but from this thread he sounds like nothing more but some factory rep. There are some very passionate folks here about safety and I like that ALOT! .
[/ QUOTE ]
If you don't know Paolo, than you should not be assuming negative things about him by what you read.
I consider Paolo a friend and someone who has tried to help the safety and health of his fellow climbers.
Give the guy a chance to do some background research and be sure of the technical info before he posts and before labeling him as some factory rep, which he is not. He happens to be a very fine, highly skilled arborist.
I don't know Paolo, but from this thread he sounds like nothing more but some factory rep. There are some very passionate folks here about safety and I like that ALOT! .
[/ QUOTE ]
If you don't know Paolo, than you should not be assuming negative things about him by what you read.
I consider Paolo a friend and someone who has tried to help the safety and health of his fellow climbers.
Give the guy a chance to do some background research and be sure of the technical info before he posts and before labeling him as some factory rep, which he is not. He happens to be a very fine, highly skilled arborist.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
My assumptions about Paolo were based on my history with him and the surprising absence of a response. He's obviously in the clear and I'm as happy as anybody about that. I don't want to see anyone's small business take a huge hit or fail altogether... because I've been there.
If you read back, I stated that I think the Treeflex is a great harness design. My problem was the deafening silence, not the product.
Paolo,
So it was Tobe rather than Nick... big deal. I stand by that statement. Tobe was the leader in getting the crappy Kong rings OFF the market. I'm very happy he shined that spotlight and you should be as well. Now there are no questions, your harness is verified as being built with high quality components. CT makes great products.
I still don't understand why your immediate reaction was defensive though. This could have all been MUCH easier with just a wee bit of information.
If you read back, I stated that I think the Treeflex is a great harness design. My problem was the deafening silence, not the product.
Paolo,
So it was Tobe rather than Nick... big deal. I stand by that statement. Tobe was the leader in getting the crappy Kong rings OFF the market. I'm very happy he shined that spotlight and you should be as well. Now there are no questions, your harness is verified as being built with high quality components. CT makes great products.
I still don't understand why your immediate reaction was defensive though. This could have all been MUCH easier with just a wee bit of information.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I use the locking steel snaps myself. I never use any kinda biner for lifeline attachments, like Scott Prophett did.
[/ QUOTE ]
Have you ever tried Biners for climbing? Whose Scott Prophett and why is he significant? did he invent the Portawrap by any chance?
[ QUOTE ]
Funny, 1973 is when I first began climbing trees commercially!
jomoco
[/ QUOTE ]
I dont know much about 1973 as I wasnt even born then. Seriously.......do a lot of people still use leather cambium savers? did they ever?
[/ QUOTE ]
I repeat, I never use any kinda biner for lifeline attachments.
Scott Prophett was, and I believe still is a tremendously talented climber, who unfortunately rolled out of a biner in the early 90's and broke his back on the job.
I know of atleast one climber who uses leather cambium savers exclusively to this very day!
jomoco
[ QUOTE ]
I use the locking steel snaps myself. I never use any kinda biner for lifeline attachments, like Scott Prophett did.
[/ QUOTE ]
Have you ever tried Biners for climbing? Whose Scott Prophett and why is he significant? did he invent the Portawrap by any chance?
[ QUOTE ]
Funny, 1973 is when I first began climbing trees commercially!
jomoco
[/ QUOTE ]
I dont know much about 1973 as I wasnt even born then. Seriously.......do a lot of people still use leather cambium savers? did they ever?
[/ QUOTE ]
I repeat, I never use any kinda biner for lifeline attachments.
Scott Prophett was, and I believe still is a tremendously talented climber, who unfortunately rolled out of a biner in the early 90's and broke his back on the job.
I know of atleast one climber who uses leather cambium savers exclusively to this very day!
jomoco
I'd rather climb on stuff that was proof-tested individually to some safe level, than anything batch-tested.
- Location
- Haddonfield, nj
Witch hunt eh?
You were rightfully thrown under the bus for mis handleing the situation. I suggest you brush up on some of your people skills if you plan on doing well in business.
You act like we had no reason to act the way we did. Give us a straight answer the first time and nothing else would have been said. Don't know the answer? Say so right from the start, let everyone know that you are working hard to find out (which you did and we appreciate) and then let us know what you find.
As blink said, I had high hopes for you and was in your corner the whole time. My friends climb on that saddle of yours and I'm glad to find out that they haven't been let down.
You were rightfully thrown under the bus for mis handleing the situation. I suggest you brush up on some of your people skills if you plan on doing well in business.
You act like we had no reason to act the way we did. Give us a straight answer the first time and nothing else would have been said. Don't know the answer? Say so right from the start, let everyone know that you are working hard to find out (which you did and we appreciate) and then let us know what you find.
As blink said, I had high hopes for you and was in your corner the whole time. My friends climb on that saddle of yours and I'm glad to find out that they haven't been let down.
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
You haven't seen a witch hunt Paolo. That was a kid glove treatment if I've ever seen one. You got every the benefit of the doubt... it won't happen again.
All you had to do was keep the channel open, Nick nearly cut the rings of his very expensive harness because you behaved like a coward.
If you weren't logging in, which I seriously doubt, you should have been. This is life safety equipment, action is critical and time is of the essence. You blew it.
All you had to do was keep the channel open, Nick nearly cut the rings of his very expensive harness because you behaved like a coward.
If you weren't logging in, which I seriously doubt, you should have been. This is life safety equipment, action is critical and time is of the essence. You blew it.
- Location
- Louisville, KY
[ QUOTE ]
Hi guys,
Just a quick post from all at Safety Technology who manufacture the TreeFlex harness.
In short the Alu rings used in TreeFlex are not from Kong and never have been - they are produced by CT (Climbing technology) who are now know as Aludesign. The rings are tested to 25kN for both the small rings in the leg risers and also the large ring on the bridge.
If you would like any specific questions answered, please contact me via email info@safetytechnology.co.uk
Many thanks,
Ben
[/ QUOTE ]
Thank you Ben for the informative response. You've addressed the load rating issue...now can you address the labeling issue with CT? Both name and load rating, please.
Hi guys,
Just a quick post from all at Safety Technology who manufacture the TreeFlex harness.
In short the Alu rings used in TreeFlex are not from Kong and never have been - they are produced by CT (Climbing technology) who are now know as Aludesign. The rings are tested to 25kN for both the small rings in the leg risers and also the large ring on the bridge.
If you would like any specific questions answered, please contact me via email info@safetytechnology.co.uk
Many thanks,
Ben
[/ QUOTE ]
Thank you Ben for the informative response. You've addressed the load rating issue...now can you address the labeling issue with CT? Both name and load rating, please.
RogerM
Carpal tunnel level member
- Location
- Louisville,KY USA
I can feel the heat from the torches, are you kidding me? "the future of tree buzz comedy" is quite fitting. Blinky, I respect you and your opinions. Have you ever had a conversation with Paolo, other than this forum? I am far from perfect but damn, This has gotten out of hand quickly. What's so funny is we are all fighting for the same thing. Many a glass house with broken walls.
- Location
- Louisville, KY
[ QUOTE ]
After making enquiries with manufacture and supply, I can confirm that the rings on Treeflex are made by CT (Alu designs) in Italy.
Apparantly these are batch tested (both small & large) to 25kN.
I have asked Safety Technology to confirm the details.
The notion that each ring should be proof loaded is ridiculous - I would never trust my life to a product that had actually been proof loaded.
[/ QUOTE ]
Paolo- would you care to state why proof loading is ridiculous? It may be, I don't know. What is the protocol for other life-support articles? Are carabiners proof loaded? or tested?
Also, I am puzzled by your "witch hunt" analogy. We're questioning your words, not you as a person.
After making enquiries with manufacture and supply, I can confirm that the rings on Treeflex are made by CT (Alu designs) in Italy.
Apparantly these are batch tested (both small & large) to 25kN.
I have asked Safety Technology to confirm the details.
The notion that each ring should be proof loaded is ridiculous - I would never trust my life to a product that had actually been proof loaded.
[/ QUOTE ]
Paolo- would you care to state why proof loading is ridiculous? It may be, I don't know. What is the protocol for other life-support articles? Are carabiners proof loaded? or tested?
Also, I am puzzled by your "witch hunt" analogy. We're questioning your words, not you as a person.
- Location
- Everywhere
I am glad to hear the TreeFlex is safe. I also learned: do not piss off Blinky!!!
- Location
- Chapel Hill, NC
The only people I'm pissed at is KONG! I don't know Paolo personally but my past interactions with him have been, shall we say, less than productive. I wish we could meet and get to know each other as I rarely meet someone I don't like.
But his BEHAVIOR on this issue has been VERY unproductive... it makes no sense. This is a SAFETY issue. Eery unmarked, polished aluminum ring needs to be either traced to a reliable source or destroyed. That's not all that difficult to grasp.
I'm really pissed that Kong has made me question my gear and throw some of it away. A climber at height HAS to be ABSOLUTELY confident in their equipment to work safely and efficiently. That's why I'm on a tear... not because Paolo left everybody hanging... I don't own a Treeflex... but I have friends that do.
Chris,
I can't say for other manufacturers, but Chouinard tested EVERY carabiner they sold... hopefully Black Diamond continues that policy.
I can't see a reason to NOT load test every piece of safety hardware... other than, it's cheaper.
But his BEHAVIOR on this issue has been VERY unproductive... it makes no sense. This is a SAFETY issue. Eery unmarked, polished aluminum ring needs to be either traced to a reliable source or destroyed. That's not all that difficult to grasp.
I'm really pissed that Kong has made me question my gear and throw some of it away. A climber at height HAS to be ABSOLUTELY confident in their equipment to work safely and efficiently. That's why I'm on a tear... not because Paolo left everybody hanging... I don't own a Treeflex... but I have friends that do.
Chris,
I can't say for other manufacturers, but Chouinard tested EVERY carabiner they sold... hopefully Black Diamond continues that policy.
I can't see a reason to NOT load test every piece of safety hardware... other than, it's cheaper.
- Location
- Louisville, KY
[ QUOTE ]
What's so funny is we are all fighting for the same thing. Many a glass house with broken walls.
[/ QUOTE ]
We're arguing because we're not fighting for the same things. Here are the cliff notes:
Paolo stated that load rating is impractical:[ QUOTE ]
The notion that all components of a harness carry a load rating is impracticable, and sometimes impossible (i.e the thread!). Proof testing is a similar issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
My platform is that while it may well be impractical to place a load rating on every component, certain components (such as rings) may warrant individual labeling and load rating <u>because</u> they are modular and unchecked in climbing system (if a leg strap fails, you're probably not going to fall. But if a ring or a carabiner fails, you just might fall) .
Instead of addressing this issue, Paolo insinuated that the ring failure may well have been the fault of the climber: [ QUOTE ]
2. The situation that led to the failure has been entirely overlooked (in this thread at least). I have stated before that certain competition maneuvers appear to me to expose the equipment and climber to fall arrest forces for which work positioning equipment is not designed.
[/ QUOTE ]
The tone of Paolo's response was that the fault was with the climber and competitions, not the equipment. That is why he was addressed so bluntly.
I hope I haven't offended you, Paolo. But to be perfectly honest, I am more concerned in finding constructive ways to make sure this doesn't happen again.
What's so funny is we are all fighting for the same thing. Many a glass house with broken walls.
[/ QUOTE ]
We're arguing because we're not fighting for the same things. Here are the cliff notes:
Paolo stated that load rating is impractical:[ QUOTE ]
The notion that all components of a harness carry a load rating is impracticable, and sometimes impossible (i.e the thread!). Proof testing is a similar issue.
[/ QUOTE ]
My platform is that while it may well be impractical to place a load rating on every component, certain components (such as rings) may warrant individual labeling and load rating <u>because</u> they are modular and unchecked in climbing system (if a leg strap fails, you're probably not going to fall. But if a ring or a carabiner fails, you just might fall) .
Instead of addressing this issue, Paolo insinuated that the ring failure may well have been the fault of the climber: [ QUOTE ]
2. The situation that led to the failure has been entirely overlooked (in this thread at least). I have stated before that certain competition maneuvers appear to me to expose the equipment and climber to fall arrest forces for which work positioning equipment is not designed.
[/ QUOTE ]
The tone of Paolo's response was that the fault was with the climber and competitions, not the equipment. That is why he was addressed so bluntly.
I hope I haven't offended you, Paolo. But to be perfectly honest, I am more concerned in finding constructive ways to make sure this doesn't happen again.
- Location
- Haddonfield, nj
I think paolos point to not load testing each individual piece is because you are going to put a ton of stress on a product (that we would be very unlikely to put on) then sell it to consumers.
Batch testing really is key. That way they can test 1 out of the 1,000 rings produced, make sure it's solid and tested, then disguard the now tired and beaten ring. They could cut the batch number down from let's say 1,000 to 100 (theoretical numbers here folks) but I'm guessing that a "batch" undergoes all of the same procedures for manufactoring so it might be more of a redundant test. (I am not a smart man so take these words for what they are worth)
For instance, when Jim beam sells me a product, they guarentee it by sampleing the batch. If they sampled every sip well then dammit what would I drink. The bourbon batch (or in this case the barrell) underwent the same distilling process so a small sample is all that is needed to ensure the quality. If it does not pass inspection then they sell it to jack daniels (kong) and they pass it off as crap (that was a joke, and a damn good one so start laughing Rodger)
Oh god I love Jim beam
Batch testing really is key. That way they can test 1 out of the 1,000 rings produced, make sure it's solid and tested, then disguard the now tired and beaten ring. They could cut the batch number down from let's say 1,000 to 100 (theoretical numbers here folks) but I'm guessing that a "batch" undergoes all of the same procedures for manufactoring so it might be more of a redundant test. (I am not a smart man so take these words for what they are worth)
For instance, when Jim beam sells me a product, they guarentee it by sampleing the batch. If they sampled every sip well then dammit what would I drink. The bourbon batch (or in this case the barrell) underwent the same distilling process so a small sample is all that is needed to ensure the quality. If it does not pass inspection then they sell it to jack daniels (kong) and they pass it off as crap (that was a joke, and a damn good one so start laughing Rodger)
Oh god I love Jim beam
New threads New posts
-
test
-
-
KBNest -Midline Attachable SRS Canopy Anchor.
- Started by TreeSteward
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
-
