10 or 12 points?

"Darren G" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

been looking at treating myself to a pair of crampons to save the hire
costs. Probably going to get Grivels as they seem to be designed with
Scarpa boots in mind.
As much of the use will involve ridges & scrambling, would 12 point be a
better investment than 10?

Crampons are for wimps. If you really *must* avoid falling down 300 foot
cliffs when it gets a bit icy try gaffer taping a couple of brillo pads to
your sandals.

AndyP said:

"Darren G" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

been looking at treating myself to a pair of crampons to save the hire
costs. Probably going to get Grivels as they seem to be designed with
Scarpa boots in mind.
As much of the use will involve ridges & scrambling, would 12 point be a
better investment than 10?

Crampons are for wimps. If you really *must* avoid falling down 300 foot
cliffs when it gets a bit icy try gaffer taping a couple of brillo pads to
your sandals.

To teh wellies, surely?

--

R
o
o
n
e
y

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 14:49:09 -0000, Darren G <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

been looking at treating myself to a pair of crampons to save the hire
costs. Probably going to get Grivels as they seem to be designed with
Scarpa boots in mind.

As much of the use will involve ridges & scrambling, would 12 point be a
better investment than 10?

Yup, imho 10's are, er, not worth it... only suitable for bimblies,
etc., etc ;-) With 12 points you have the added ability to tackle
snow slopes using your front points. Consider a snow slope, not a
scramble or, heaven forbid, anything steeper ;-) just a snow slope...
with 12 point crampons you can traverse/ ascend/ descend/ facing into
the slope and with your feet and ankles at a much more comfortble
angle.... imagine going up step ladders but at a much less-steep an
angle, that's the sort of body position I'm on about. 10 points make
that position and technique very much more awkward and tiring. Get
yourself on more of just a mildly-angled snow slope and Darren's a
happy bunny with his 12-points!! ;-) imho, o'course.

With 12 points you may have something that you'll never use, i.e. the
extra 2 points, but with 10's if you get yourself into a situation
when the extra two points might just have made your life a teensy bit
easier... well, you choose ;-)

Quoted message said:

Also, is the new matic step-in better than the strapped version?

pass; step-ins are much easier to put on and take off but that
significance is much less important for winter walkers (compared to
alpine climbers). Personal choice? I choose on cost... unless you
really want sexy step-ins ;-)

HTH

--
SteveO

Rooney said:

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:00:21 -0000, "AndyP" wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Crampons are for wimps. If you really *must* avoid falling down 300 foot
cliffs when it gets a bit icy try gaffer taping a couple of brillo pads to
your sandals.

To teh wellies, surely?

A la Adny? No he used instep crampons on wellies.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

Darren G said:

been looking at treating myself to a pair of crampons to save the hire
costs. Probably going to get Grivels as they seem to be designed with
Scarpa boots in mind.

As much of the use will involve ridges & scrambling, would 12 point be a
better investment than 10?

I'd go for the extra points.

Quoted message said:

Also, is the new matic step-in better than the strapped version?

Less fiddly but they need the heel lug to engage on. The new classic
bindings are a lot less fiddly than the old ones with metal rings.

In *all* cases take your boots to the shop when you buy the crampons
so they can check to see if they fit.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

Phil Cook said:

Rooney said:

On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:00:21 -0000, "AndyP" wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Crampons are for wimps. If you really *must* avoid falling down 300 foot
cliffs when it gets a bit icy try gaffer taping a couple of brillo pads to
your sandals.

To teh wellies, surely?

A la Adny? No he used instep crampons on wellies.

Oh yes, I'd forgotten about those!

--

R
o
o
n
e
y

<SteveO> wrote

[crampons]

Quoted message said:

Yup, imho 10's are, er, not worth it... only suitable for bimblies,
etc., etc ;-) With 12 points you have the added ability to tackle
snow slopes using your front points.

Why can't you do that with 10 points? As far as I can see from the pictures
the front 4 points on Grivel 10 point and 12 point crampons look pretty
identical. The extra 2 points are on the ball of the foot behind that which
should give extra grip but I can't see how it should make a difference to
what foot placement techniques you can use.

Quoted message said:

Why can't you do that with 10 points?

I didn't say you couldn't do that with 10 point crampons, did I ?

As for the 10 -v- 12 -point layout that you mention, you're right...
"classic" 10-point crampons don't/didn't have the two front-points.
Depending on the model you're looking at the above scenario wot like I
mention becomes a non-issue.

Even with front-points on your 10-pointers I'd still go for 12's...
more holes per stomp in your tent on that gale-swept night in the
'gorms when you've to dash out and peg out again!!! ;-)
--
SteveO

PS I hate Googlenewsgroupsthingydoofah, it sucketh

The message <[email hidden]>
from "AndyP" <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

<SteveO> wrote

Quoted message said:

[crampons]

Quoted message said:

Yup, imho 10's are, er, not worth it... only suitable for bimblies,
etc., etc ;-) With 12 points you have the added ability to tackle
snow slopes using your front points.

Quoted message said:

Why can't you do that with 10 points? As far as I can see from the pictures
the front 4 points on Grivel 10 point and 12 point crampons look pretty
identical. The extra 2 points are on the ball of the foot behind that which
should give extra grip but I can't see how it should make a difference to
what foot placement techniques you can use.

I now nothing about modern crampons but traditionally 10 point crampons
have lacked the forward facing pair of points that adorn the front of 12
point crampons.

--
Roger Chapman so far this year 5 summits
New - 5 (Marilyns 0, Sweats 0, Outlying Fells 5)
Repeats - 0 (Marilyns 0, Sweats 0, Wainwrights 0, Outlying Fells 0)

"Roger" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

I now nothing about modern crampons but traditionally 10 point crampons
have lacked the forward facing pair of points that adorn the front of 12
point crampons.

Ah, right. Can't see any like that in the gear catalogues I've got.

SteveO said:

Yup, imho 10's are, er, not worth it... only suitable for bimblies,
etc., etc ;-)

I use 10s, because the G10 Wide is one of the very few crampons with
easy adjustment that will fit on my telemark boots. I gave away my old
12 points after getting them because though they are a bit better in the
steep stuff (by which I mean pitched climb sort of stuff) they're not
enough better that I can be arsed with the old style straps any more.
With a modern 12 pointer with the new easy fit straps that would be a
non-issue of course, and without a telemark duckbill toe to worry about
like I have then if anything much beyond walking is involved I'd
probably go for 12, but having used my G10s on some reasonably steep
stuff I'd say it's most unfair to characterise them as for bimbling
only, even if you add a smiley!

Quoted message said:

With 12 points you have the added ability to tackle
snow slopes using your front points.

I can do this okay in my G10s, using their front points...

Quoted message said:

Consider a snow slope, not a
scramble or, heaven forbid, anything steeper ;-) just a snow slope...
with 12 point crampons you can traverse/ ascend/ descend/ facing into
the slope and with your feet and ankles at a much more comfortble
angle.... imagine going up step ladders but at a much less-steep an
angle, that's the sort of body position I'm on about. 10 points make
that position and technique very much more awkward and tiring.

Even if you're thinking of a trad 10 point without front points (not
like the G10, btw) then the "tiring" bit just isn't true. There are two
primary reasons to flatfoot, one is greater security (more points dug in
means better adhesion) and one is it takes the pressure of your calf
muscles and is much /less/ tiring. It does require more technique and
practise thereof, so the bit about "awkward" is a fair cop, but it's
easier on your legs if you get it right.

Quoted message said:

With 12 points you may have something that you'll never use, i.e. the
extra 2 points, but with 10's if you get yourself into a situation
when the extra two points might just have made your life a teensy bit
easier... well, you choose ;-)

Though the 10 points weigh less and take up less packed space and give
you a slightly lower chance of tripping over while ripping your own
trousers (and possibly more) to pieces. It isn't as clear cut as that.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Also, is the new matic step-in better than the strapped version?

Quoted message said:

pass; step-ins are much easier to put on and take off but that
significance is much less important for winter walkers (compared to
alpine climbers). Personal choice? I choose on cost... unless you
really want sexy step-ins ;-)

Step-ins should really have a fully rigid boot and are generally not
suitable for walking boots. The modern strapping systems are /sooooooo/
much better than straps, you really do want them if you've an
all-else-is-equal choice IMHO.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

I'm not up to date with what is available in the shops now, but for what its
worth I'll give my opinion!

My crampons are Grivels, 12 point, articulated semi-step ins
Being a skinflint I took both my rigid plastic boots and my 3/4 rigid
leather boots to the shop to ensure the crampons fitted both, which they do.

They are secured to the boot with a single ankle strap, They are easy to put
on, even with thick gloves.
They fit the rigid plastic boot very well, but I like the idea of having a
strap for security, it would be a jolly inconvenient if one "lost" a crampon
partway through a vertical climb (oops sorry, wrong group!)

They also fit my leather boots well, but because of the flex there is the
possibility they could "pop" off, again the strap would save them, but that
would be less of an issue on less steep ground.

I found that articulated crampons shed the snow better and didn't "ball" up
as much. My mate bought rigid "pie cutter" crampons for his plastic boots
and they were forever "balling up".

If modern 10 points have 2 forward points then i reckon they would be just
as good as 12 points, but it depends really on whether you are mainly
walking and scrambling, or doing vertical climbing.

JeffC

SteveO said:

and can see an around the houses and throught the trees discussion
developing here if we're not careful. I do recognise the situation
you're describing Pete, but I can also see situations when flat-footing
would be positively dangerous...

I can think of some, but they generally involve having to face in two
directions at once, and as you say, this is wandering away from walking
territory. But the thing to remember is that if your 10 points are a
modern design like the Grivel G10 then you've got front points anyway.
Ironically the thing they do worse than 12 point crampons is flatfooting!

Flatfooting is under used and under practised IME and HO, especially
ascending while facing at least partially out. So is using the axe in a
brace position. Front pointing easy slopes is intuitive but not as
secure as flatfooting and ultimately takes more out of your legs. Both
techniques (or a mixture) have their place, and both are possible with
modern crampon designs be they 10 or 12 point.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Dominic Sexton said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
SteveO <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I can also see situations when flat-footing
would be positively dangerous

Such as?

Steeper ground, espec with someone who was uncomfortable/ unfamiliar
with the technique; increased risk of getting yourself caught in your
own trousers ;-) Its a fluid area for discussion but there is a "zone"
where its easier to front point, where the zone is varies per
individual (obviously).

--
SteveO

SteveO said:

Steeper ground, espec with someone who was uncomfortable/ unfamiliar
with the technique; increased risk of getting yourself caught in your
own trousers ;-)

A caveat of "someone who was uncomfortable/ unfamiliar with the
technique" is they'd quite possibly be better off /getting/ comfortable
and familiar with it rather than going up that sort of slope right away!
But anyhow, on anything where you wouldn't be happy standing still
while facing out you'd probably be better off facing in on your front
points.

Quoted message said:

Its a fluid area for discussion but there is a "zone"
where its easier to front point, where the zone is varies per
individual (obviously).

And not only easier, but better as well in some cases, i.e., if you're
using a tool in each hand rather than one altogether then you want to be
square on facing in, while flatfooting steep stuff usually needs you to
be at least partially turned away from the slope. Mind you, a fair few
cases I've seen where someone hacks up a sub Grade I with twin ice picks
where they'd probably be better off with 1...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

In article <[email hidden]>,
SteveO <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Dominic Sexton said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
SteveO <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I can also see situations when flat-footing
would be positively dangerous

Such as?

Steeper ground, espec with someone who was uncomfortable/ unfamiliar
with the technique; increased risk of getting yourself caught in your
own trousers ;-) Its a fluid area for discussion but there is a "zone"
where its easier to front point, where the zone is varies per
individual (obviously).

Many snow and ice techniques require a level of skill and can be
dangerous without that skill. In my opinion that doesn't make them
inherently "positively dangerous" in situations. Sure people who have
not got the experience / skills may be dangerous trying it but that is
what practice in controlled situations is for.

People these days are far to keen on front pointing to even try other
techniques which can make travelling on the middle ground (between steep
and not) faster and less tiring.

I am fortunate enough to have had time on dry glaciers in the French
Alps to practice various techniques on lots of different ice structures.
Not only was it fun but also it laid the foundations of good technique.
I recommend it to anyone who gets the chance.

--

Dominic Sexton

In article <[email hidden]>,
SteveO <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Dominic Sexton said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
SteveO <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I can also see situations when flat-footing
would be positively dangerous

Such as?

Steeper ground, espec with someone who was uncomfortable/ unfamiliar
with the technique; increased risk of getting yourself caught in your
own trousers ;-) Its a fluid area for discussion but there is a "zone"
where its easier to front point, where the zone is varies per
individual (obviously).

Many snow and ice techniques require a level of skill and can be
dangerous without that skill. In my opinion that doesn't make them
inherently "positively dangerous" in situations. Sure people who have
not got the experience / skills may be dangerous trying it but that is
what practice in controlled situations is for.

People these days are far to keen on front pointing to even try other
techniques which can make travelling on the middle ground (between steep
and not) faster and less tiring.

I am fortunate enough to have had time on dry glaciers in the French
Alps to practice various techniques on lots of different ice structures.
Not only was it fun but also it laid the foundations of good technique.
I recommend it to anyone who gets the chance.

--

Dominic Sexton

In article <[email hidden]>,
SteveO <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Dominic Sexton said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
SteveO <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I can also see situations when flat-footing
would be positively dangerous

Such as?

Steeper ground, espec with someone who was uncomfortable/ unfamiliar
with the technique; increased risk of getting yourself caught in your
own trousers ;-) Its a fluid area for discussion but there is a "zone"
where its easier to front point, where the zone is varies per
individual (obviously).

Many snow and ice techniques require a level of skill and can be
dangerous without that skill. In my opinion that doesn't make them
inherently "positively dangerous" in situations. Sure people who have
not got the experience / skills may be dangerous trying it but that is
what practice in controlled situations is for.

People these days are far to keen on front pointing to even try other
techniques which can make travelling on the middle ground (between steep
and not) faster and less tiring.

I am fortunate enough to have had time on dry glaciers in the French
Alps to practice various techniques on lots of different ice structures.
Not only was it fun but also it laid the foundations of good technique.
I recommend it to anyone who gets the chance.

--

Dominic Sexton

In article <[email hidden]>,
SteveO <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Dominic Sexton said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
SteveO <[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

I can also see situations when flat-footing
would be positively dangerous

Such as?

Steeper ground, espec with someone who was uncomfortable/ unfamiliar
with the technique; increased risk of getting yourself caught in your
own trousers ;-) Its a fluid area for discussion but there is a "zone"
where its easier to front point, where the zone is varies per
individual (obviously).

Many snow and ice techniques require a level of skill and can be
dangerous without that skill. In my opinion that doesn't make them
inherently "positively dangerous" in situations. Sure people who have
not got the experience / skills may be dangerous trying it but that is
what practice in controlled situations is for.

People these days are far to keen on front pointing to even try other
techniques which can make travelling on the middle ground (between steep
and not) faster and less tiring.

I am fortunate enough to have had time on dry glaciers in the French
Alps to practice various techniques on lots of different ice structures.
Not only was it fun but also it laid the foundations of good technique.
I recommend it to anyone who gets the chance.

--

Dominic Sexton