who prefers a saddle with small D rings?

[kf_tree]

this topic has come up before and sean said sherrill orders them with the small D rings because that is what most climbers prefer. is there any one on this board that prefers the smaller D's ? and if so why? maybe sherrill needs to realize the majority of climbers hate the smaller D's. i just had one of the thin seat straps break on my pinnacle today and i broke one of the gear loops about a month ago. so i think its time to replace my saddle.

 

[Kneejerk Bombas]

I find the big rings too big and the small rings too small. The Butterfly has just the right size.

 

[treeclimber165]

I don't think I would ever buy a saddle with small D rings. Why would I want to use small D-rings just so I have to (buy and) add expensive 'biners to do what I currently do with the D-rings? You cannot snap both ends of your lanyard and a second line on one, but I can with my large D-rings. If I need to tote a handline, I just stick it through a D-ring and tie it off, hard to do with small D-rings when you already got your lanyard snapped on it. Ohhh, you say I can buy a bunch of 'biners and pay a bunch of money to have eyes braided in my ropes? Then I can sound like a school maintenance man going up the tree with all those 'biners rattling like keys! EXPENSIVE keys!
The whole setup is a lot more expensive to use on a daily basis when you have the small D-rings and required accessories. I can't afford small D-rings.

 

[Treeman14]

I'll cast my vote for BIG D-rings.

 

[Kevin]

Why limit us?
Make them so you can put what ever you need on them.
I think its called innovation.
I want a B Ring for work, large D`s for tree work and small D`s for recreation.

 

[Tim Gardner]

I vote for the small D rings. I climb with a Master II that is equipped with small D's. IMHO they are much better than the heavy large D’s on the old butt strap saddles I used. Come on! Is everyone so clumsy that they can not clip into the small rings? I assume that the people that prefer the larger rings also use a ladder snap to climb with. Why stop there? Use a one inch climb line. And why not an o66 to trim with. How about a port-a-wrap for a starter handle.

When it is hot and I am tired the last thing I want is extra weight hanging off my hips. Three small and light weight D rings are MUCH better than four large floppy rings.

I still believe people should have a choice though. Sherrill should keep some of those large D saddles on hand for the climbers that prefer them. I would not want to wait a month for a saddle.

 

[kf_tree]

so tim is your only argument for the smaller D's the weight? if i'm out of line just say so. but what is your hieght and weight? i'm a light weight fanatic when it comes to my mountaineering gear. but for tree work i realy don't count the ounce's. if its a small prune job do you only fill the gas and oil half way to save weight?

 

[seanlarkin]

I too am interseted in what the board's preference is. I also want to clear something up. What I thought I said, and meant to say, regarding our stocking of the small D-rings, was that it was what most of OUR CUSTOMERS wanted. I would not dare to assume the likes and dislikes of MOST CLIMBERS. That is far too diverse a bunch to make a claim like that.

If we see that there is enough interest in the larger D ring saddles, we will surely stock them. That goes for any tree care product. Keep the feedback coming!

-Sean

 

[Tim Gardner]

Spikey,

I am 6 foot 0 inches tall and weigh 185 lbs. I guess you overlooked the first part of my post. I have large hands and have no problem cliping into the small rings even with the large heavy snap on my wire core flip line. I have two small Petzl nonlocking keyed biners next to my D rings for my ropes and chainsaw.

Spikey do the math. Add the weight of all your gear together. The ounces turn into pounds real fast. I guess you are just getting spoiled using a bucket and can't remember what 4:00 feels like when it's 98 degres and you are spiking up your 9th or tenth pine tree of the day.

I will go one on one with you any day humping blocks of oak to the dump truck. I grew up doing tree work. I am not a weak city boy. We work hard here in the south. And take those sissy mittins off so you can clip into those smaller D rings.

 

[kf_tree]

tim i'm sure you could blow me away humping wood. i get paid to climb, not load wood into a truck. also the only time i ever climb with gloves is in the winter. but lets be serious how much more do you think the larger D's weigh than the little ones? please please don't lecture me about oz's turning into pounds. like i said when it comes to my mountaineering gear i'm a total gear whore i use frameless packs, single wall tents, custom down parkas and sleeping bags from nunatak , wire gate biners, 8.6mm double ropes, spectra slings,titanium cook ware, etc. i will not purchase a single piece of gear with out knowing the weight. it's just that for tree work when you have a saw hanging from your hip and all the other crap i realy don't consider the weight a factor. i just suck it up and climb on. i'm not trying to start a little pissing match with you or insult you, i'm just trying to figure out your rational for the little D's

 

[Tim Gardner]

spike the weight is not the main point i am trying to make here. i thought you should have gotten that the second time. lol

i don't like the large rings because they are heavy, large and flop around. why would anyone need those large rings? if a climber is that clumsy and has a hard time using the small ones he doesn't need to be climbing. i am not a caveman like some climbers. I have skills. i don't need to just suck it up. i plan my gear the same way i plan a removal, the easy and safest way possible. what kind of idiot would just load up all kinds of heavy gear and just "suck it up"? lol. come on, that is stupid. if the weight thing is not a problem then all u need to do tree removals is a 066. why would u need an 020 or 335 to climb with?

u just keep on burning all that energy dragging all that heavy gear up a tree. lol let me guess, it never gets over 70 degrees there and you only climb little trees. ROTFLMAO @ u!

get over it spikey. the weight is not the only point i am trying to make here. (the 4th time might sink in for ya)

 

[kf_tree]

actually on a big removal i go right for the 357 with a 16in bar and skip the top handle saw i prefer to lug a big saw that cuts quicker to get me back on the ground and the tree down as quick as possible. then what your saying is all people that prefer larege D's are clumsy unskilled 3 toed sloths?

 

[Tim Gardner]

pretty much. lol

ok, then u guys tell me why u need those oversized rings then?

 

[treeclimber165]

I did.

Tim, this isn't a fight, every climber prefers their own setup. Spike was just trying to get an idea of how many actually use the smaller D-rings. Up to now, you are in the minority.

 

[Tim Gardner]

spikey just kept on harping on the weight issue. at least he could have done was read my entire post. My point was that if someone needs those oversized rings they might as well use everything larger, snap, saw, rope etc.

i simply submitted my vote for the small rings and explained why. I thought that was what he was asking for. he started this pissing fight not me. if he don't like the answer he should not ask the question.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

One of the first things that attracted me to the Butterfly was the light weight. IN order to get light they have used welded stainless steel rings. They have a clever system that keeps the rings pointed to the front and in just a tiny bit but if you were to climb through some brush the rings flip back so they don't get snagged.

When I was taught to climb in the early 70s from a Bell System pole climber, he taught me that the ONLY thing that clips into the d-rings is the scare strap [his words ] That advice has stuck with me to this day. If the side dees are used to hand ropes and other gear on there is a higher chance of making a mis-clip. I've added side rings to all of my saddles to rack gear.

When I tree climb I'm not a weight fanatic. When I have a choice, I make the light weight choice though. If you don't think that weight is important, Id like to weigh each of our rigs. Then we could take the difference in weight and make up a piece of ballast to hang on your saddle like the do for horse jockies. I do believe you'd notice the difference if it was haning as one glob on your saddle.

Many years ago I read an article about a study that the US Army did about carrying gear in the patch pockets on the thighs of their pants. The conclusion was that adding ounces to the pockets added up to a lot more weight to lift everytime the soldiers lifted their legs. Much less energy was needed at the end of the day if that weight were carried in a pack. On the leg meant that the weight had to be lifted with every step. Since we lift the weight everytime we move I think the same logic comes into play for arbos.

Tom

 

[rbtree]

Ideally, guys, D rings are not supposed to be used for anything but lanyard attachments, or lifeline. use accessory loops for everything else. less chance of grabbing the wrong thing at a criccal moment.

Personally i prefer a medium sized D ring, (not the Bham lousy one) and am lusting after the Butterfly and its very optimum ring and design, as Tom says.

Brian, I wouldn't trade all my new school "bag of tricks" stuff for the world. Sure I carry a bit more on my saddle than i used to, but i usually only bring what i will likely need- minimum a couple biners and two slings, always. next will be a friction saver, then another friction saver with cord that doubles as a redirect or second split tail, figure 8, a third sling, usually a second micro pulley. My lifeline is pretied with Vt or Schwabisch with pulley fair lead, this acts as second lanyard, or for quick overhead tie ins. (Unless I've set a line via throw line)

Rog

 

[treeclimber165]

I see your words, rog, and can hear what you are saying. But I need to see something in use before i can copy it and incorporate it into my climbing methods. I've yet to meet and watch a climber with split-tails, 'biners, VT's and everything else you guys talk about. Never seen a climber work in one of the new lightweight saddles, either.
Maybe one day, but for now i must use what i can afford (what i got) and what I know to be safe and reliable.

 

[TheTreeSpyder]

i like the big ones.

If for no other reason they stick out further through all the other stuff than small ones!

Weight wise, as my evolution added 'biners, slings and pulleys; i lost the spurs. Guys around 'ere give me a hard time about my 'toyz' being heavy etc. - but wear spurs!

i like having my slings, 'biners and a cmi pulley or two; i wouldn't have figured out how to use them if i hadn't committed to carrying their weight all of the time; to have them right there. i use to leave the stuff on the ground, send it up if all that warranted that much effort; carrying them put them right with me to learn their secrets daily.

T165 can't beleive ya don't use split tail! i think that that is the simplest, most powerful upgrade. Once again, only if you have it with ya all the time, can you figure out all the ways to use it! Sometimes, without it you might not change over to another, better support for where you'll be werking in the tree next; because of the amount of time involved. With it you can break system at tail, flip around new anchor (or several), slap it in 'biner, and go. This can leave you hanging safer and more comfort-able; place you in maximum position for going out further etc.

 

[kf_tree]

tom , i totally agree with the weight studies. theres a company called http://www.northernlites.com/ their snow shoes are half the weight of most other companies. they equate the weight savings to "2,000 Pounds Less Weight To Lift Over Every Mile!"