- Location
- NSW, Australia
i love my sequoia
treeMotion Wear-n-Tear
- Thread starter Hutch
- Start date
- Location
- Bay Area, California
[ QUOTE ]
i love my sequoia
[/ QUOTE ]
Me too.. I switched from a treemotion and never looked back!
I sold the TM to my friend, and I looked at his the other day. Guess what?? The webbing is looking mighty frayed. That is what I would call a SERIOUS design flaw. Glad my body is not tied into that saddle anymore.
i love my sequoia
[/ QUOTE ]
Me too.. I switched from a treemotion and never looked back!
I sold the TM to my friend, and I looked at his the other day. Guess what?? The webbing is looking mighty frayed. That is what I would call a SERIOUS design flaw. Glad my body is not tied into that saddle anymore.
Hutch
New member
- Location
- Suburban Philadelphia, PA
- Location
- AZ
That dont look good
Hutch
New member
- Location
- Suburban Philadelphia, PA
Yeah. The other side is not as bad. I'm disappointed. It did last over a year. I'm not sure if anyone would know the life span of these saddles but, you know, it is kinda fun thinking about just what to try next.
[ QUOTE ]
i love my sequoia
[/ QUOTE ]
I love mine too
i love my sequoia
[/ QUOTE ]
I love mine too
- Location
- Haddonfield, nj
[ QUOTE ]
I have both the TM and the Sequoia. My TM shows a little wear as others have mentioned. For the last 6 months Ive been in the Sequoia. It is a good saddle and more durable I think, but the TM is alot more comfortable.
[/ QUOTE ]
forget the trade then, i was wondering if it was more comfortable than my tm but ya nailed it, thanks for saving me the shipping costs
I have both the TM and the Sequoia. My TM shows a little wear as others have mentioned. For the last 6 months Ive been in the Sequoia. It is a good saddle and more durable I think, but the TM is alot more comfortable.
[/ QUOTE ]
forget the trade then, i was wondering if it was more comfortable than my tm but ya nailed it, thanks for saving me the shipping costs
- Location
- Rannoch, Scotland
Chaps
It is very difficult to get honest feedback on products, so on one side, I read your comments and see them in a positive light, even though on first reaction the feeling is otherwise! I would like to comment on a few of the points made here on behalf of Treemagineers Ltd. and the harness manufacturer Teufelberger Ges.m.b.H.
A number of my comments will centre on the language used and whether it has been correctly applied. I want to do this because I think it is important to concentrate on facts, and so that treeMOTION is represented in a fair light. I hope that no-one will feel picked upon, I just want to respond directly to the points made. In no way am I trying to distract from the issue(s) being discussed or make light of anything, but I am keen to put these comments into context and offer solutions. Please bear with me……
Hutch and Crazy Jimmy. You have said that the webbing was ‘tearing’ and had ‘started to rip’. Webbing used in Category 3 PPE products must be of the generic type called ‘System 3’. This generic construction is such that the failure of one fibre will not lead to the failure of subsequent fibres. Abrasion damage will lead to a loss of strength but it is not possible for System 3 webbing to rip or tear.
Jeremy9 - ‘found some wear’. When two components move across each other wear is, at some point, inevitable. The MOTION in treeMOTION comes from the wide range of movement extended to the user by the design. This is, in part, a function of the webbing constantly moving through the Front D hardware as the climber work positions. Any webbing loaded via hardware will always be subject to wear/abrasion. Abrasion will always be accelerated when the webbing runs across that surface, such as in the treeMOTION Front D hardware, in particular when the surface area is reduced as in the 25mm webbing used in treeMOTION. There is however a significant performance advantage in using that narrower textile element, which passes more efficiently through the hardware.
Hutch - ‘I'm sure the webbing is not as strong as it should be’. In order to gain CE Certification for Category 3 PPE, the product must pass through the independent assessment of an approved notifying body. In this case, TüV Vienna has overseen the construction principles, testing, product marking and user instructions for treeMOTION.
Returned harnesses with accelerated webbing abrasion have been subjected to the static strength tests of the relevant EN standards. All of these harnesses have passed those requests and subsequently an increased force for a short period before the load was removed. There is a robustness with treeMOTION, that is perhaps not initially apparent.
I would like to reassure you that the webbing is strong enough.
Treebing. Is the treeMOTION a 'lemon'? One thing is for sure, no harness will ever please everyone. Maybe this harness is a lemon for you, but perhaps not for the next person.
MTCInc and Treebing – ‘design flaw’. After 20 months experience, a very low percentage of harnesses have shown accelerated webbing abrasion. A design flaw would have shown up with problems in many more, if not all, harnesses. Whilst every design can be improved upon, the issue here is not that of a design flaw, but a result of difficulty in finishing the front hardware to specification. Minor amendments have been made to the tooling and the finishing process, so that we are confident that the hardware is consistently finished to specification.
Hutch, you asked about 'replacement parts'. In the next few weeks, the adjustable link in the upper webbing slot of the Front D hardware will be a replaceable part. Both leg loops will be replaceable too. In effect, because the bridge can also be renewed, the whole of the front of the harness will be end-user-replaceable.
From the beginning of the treeMOTION, we knew that webbing abrasion would need to be addressed. We have perhaps been guilty of taking too long to get these replacement parts through the certification process. Please accept our apologies for this.
At the same time, I would also ask that you recognise how much new ground has been covered in the development of treeMOTION and the philosophy behind it…..and that perhaps the path isn’t quite as simple as it might look from outside.
Chris
It is very difficult to get honest feedback on products, so on one side, I read your comments and see them in a positive light, even though on first reaction the feeling is otherwise! I would like to comment on a few of the points made here on behalf of Treemagineers Ltd. and the harness manufacturer Teufelberger Ges.m.b.H.
A number of my comments will centre on the language used and whether it has been correctly applied. I want to do this because I think it is important to concentrate on facts, and so that treeMOTION is represented in a fair light. I hope that no-one will feel picked upon, I just want to respond directly to the points made. In no way am I trying to distract from the issue(s) being discussed or make light of anything, but I am keen to put these comments into context and offer solutions. Please bear with me……
Hutch and Crazy Jimmy. You have said that the webbing was ‘tearing’ and had ‘started to rip’. Webbing used in Category 3 PPE products must be of the generic type called ‘System 3’. This generic construction is such that the failure of one fibre will not lead to the failure of subsequent fibres. Abrasion damage will lead to a loss of strength but it is not possible for System 3 webbing to rip or tear.
Jeremy9 - ‘found some wear’. When two components move across each other wear is, at some point, inevitable. The MOTION in treeMOTION comes from the wide range of movement extended to the user by the design. This is, in part, a function of the webbing constantly moving through the Front D hardware as the climber work positions. Any webbing loaded via hardware will always be subject to wear/abrasion. Abrasion will always be accelerated when the webbing runs across that surface, such as in the treeMOTION Front D hardware, in particular when the surface area is reduced as in the 25mm webbing used in treeMOTION. There is however a significant performance advantage in using that narrower textile element, which passes more efficiently through the hardware.
Hutch - ‘I'm sure the webbing is not as strong as it should be’. In order to gain CE Certification for Category 3 PPE, the product must pass through the independent assessment of an approved notifying body. In this case, TüV Vienna has overseen the construction principles, testing, product marking and user instructions for treeMOTION.
Returned harnesses with accelerated webbing abrasion have been subjected to the static strength tests of the relevant EN standards. All of these harnesses have passed those requests and subsequently an increased force for a short period before the load was removed. There is a robustness with treeMOTION, that is perhaps not initially apparent.
I would like to reassure you that the webbing is strong enough.
Treebing. Is the treeMOTION a 'lemon'? One thing is for sure, no harness will ever please everyone. Maybe this harness is a lemon for you, but perhaps not for the next person.
MTCInc and Treebing – ‘design flaw’. After 20 months experience, a very low percentage of harnesses have shown accelerated webbing abrasion. A design flaw would have shown up with problems in many more, if not all, harnesses. Whilst every design can be improved upon, the issue here is not that of a design flaw, but a result of difficulty in finishing the front hardware to specification. Minor amendments have been made to the tooling and the finishing process, so that we are confident that the hardware is consistently finished to specification.
Hutch, you asked about 'replacement parts'. In the next few weeks, the adjustable link in the upper webbing slot of the Front D hardware will be a replaceable part. Both leg loops will be replaceable too. In effect, because the bridge can also be renewed, the whole of the front of the harness will be end-user-replaceable.
From the beginning of the treeMOTION, we knew that webbing abrasion would need to be addressed. We have perhaps been guilty of taking too long to get these replacement parts through the certification process. Please accept our apologies for this.
At the same time, I would also ask that you recognise how much new ground has been covered in the development of treeMOTION and the philosophy behind it…..and that perhaps the path isn’t quite as simple as it might look from outside.
Chris
- Location
- tulsa oklahoma
Chris, I can not speak from owning a TreeMotion, Because I dont, but I own several saddles that have been used daily in production climbing, Some were used daily for 2 or 3 years, maybe longer. They are not ripping due to wear. It makes no sense to me to say that that is normal for a saddles webbing to rip due to daily grind. I am not by any means stating that TreeMotion is a lemon, just saying that I cant understand that.
- Location
- Haddonfield, nj
[ QUOTE ]
Trade?
[/ QUOTE ]
i was looking to trade out my treeflex for a sequia saddle for a month to see how comfortable the saddle was but if its not as comfortable as my tm then there is no reason to try it out
Trade?
[/ QUOTE ]
i was looking to trade out my treeflex for a sequia saddle for a month to see how comfortable the saddle was but if its not as comfortable as my tm then there is no reason to try it out
- Location
- Central Florida
I'll have to agree w/ Flash. Add the same usage to another saddle for comparisons. Sounds like it wouldn't list that well on a Consumer Reports trial. After an experience w/ the carbon fiber geckos, I've stopped living by the motto "you get what you pay for". I had mine for only two months and experienced a 1.5" vertical tear from the top of the cuff. I did contact Danny at Sherrill, with no resolution. Only help I received was "at least it's not at the shaft".
treebing
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Detroit, Mi.
forgive me. design flaw was definitly the wrong term. production flaw would be more correct. the saddle is obviously awesome and comfortable and I came with in seconds of laying out the money to buy one. I pulled back and I guess have been looking for reasons to justify not buying it. But I really do think a saddle should last well over a year.
treebing
Been here much more than a while
- Location
- Detroit, Mi.
as for replacement parts, that is great. I just hope that they are not ridiculously expensive like replacement parts to chainsaws.
treehumper
Carpal tunnel level member
- Location
- Ridgefield, NJ
[ QUOTE ]
the issue here is not that of a design flaw, but a result of difficulty in finishing the front hardware to specification. Minor amendments have been made to the tooling and the finishing process, so that we are confident that the hardware is consistently finished to specification.
[/ QUOTE ]
You have seemed to find the source of the problem here. So, after your explanation what is the company prepared to do? What about a free repair to swap out the offending pieces with properly finished components? At the end of the day what you've got is a PR problem. Are you going to explain it away or step up and take care of these early adopters?
the issue here is not that of a design flaw, but a result of difficulty in finishing the front hardware to specification. Minor amendments have been made to the tooling and the finishing process, so that we are confident that the hardware is consistently finished to specification.
[/ QUOTE ]
You have seemed to find the source of the problem here. So, after your explanation what is the company prepared to do? What about a free repair to swap out the offending pieces with properly finished components? At the end of the day what you've got is a PR problem. Are you going to explain it away or step up and take care of these early adopters?
- Location
- Austin, TX
I agree. I am also not familiar with this saddle, but I've been climbing on floating-bridge saddles for about 12 years. After five or six years, I replaced my first Buckingham because of wear similar to what is shown in this thread (I'd still climb on it in a pinch). My next saddle was stolen before showing any damage like this. My last two Sierra Morenos have not shown any such wear (one is only a few months old, but the other has been in use by me or another climber for over three years).
I can see where this is a natural place for wear and it's the place I most closely inspect when I look over my saddle, but a year is too soon for this damage to start showing up, IMO. Especially for a saddle that pushes six bills (over twice what I paid for my Ultralights).
But thanks to Chris Cowell for stepping up and telling us what is going on with this saddle. I hope you find a solution to the problem that works out for everyone.
k
I can see where this is a natural place for wear and it's the place I most closely inspect when I look over my saddle, but a year is too soon for this damage to start showing up, IMO. Especially for a saddle that pushes six bills (over twice what I paid for my Ultralights).
But thanks to Chris Cowell for stepping up and telling us what is going on with this saddle. I hope you find a solution to the problem that works out for everyone.
k
- Location
- Victoria, BC
I'd have to agree with this. The Bontrager mountain bike company has a slogan "Strong, Light, Cheap...Pick two" I think this motto can be applied to most high end products. While I do like some aspects of the treemotion (don't own one) I would be very uncomfortable accepting increased wear as simply a fact of life, especially with that price tag.
- Location
- tulsa oklahoma
Well Babberney, in my mind Chris Cowell being one of the developers and onwers of the co. he should have stepped up and offered a clearcut solution, which he did not. I guess it is great that he "stepped up" to let us all know what is going on, but my 10 year old nephew could take a look at the saddle and tell me what is going on. It is a little harder to come up with a solution.
- Location
- Austin, TX
fair enough, but at least he didn't hide and hope this thread went away.
k
k
easyphloem
Branched out member
- Location
- Louisville, KY
I heard the TreeMOTION is a testicle-taker.
SZ
SZ
