Talk:Belay device

Commercial comparison ?[edit]

Some pieces of text in this page sound more like a comparison test in a climbing magazine than like an encyclopedic comparison, dont' you think ?

Below are some examples : "(the reverso) is more complicated to use, though. The Black Diamond ATC-Guide can also perform all of the functions that the Reverso can."

"The currently manufactured Reverso is no longer made of sheet metal, as it was found that one of its surfaces could potentially wear down to a sharp edge that could cut a rope. The current Reverso looks more like an ATC belay device, but with the same functionality."

"it is more difficult to pay out slack on a Gri-Gri than on an ATC"

"Using a Gri-gri to bring up a second on a traditional anchor is however less favorable than other belay devices such as the ATC guide or Reverso" Boristeph (talk) 08:57, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

=> the presentation of the belay devices has to be cleaned up to meet Wikipedia's neutrality policy Boristeph (talk) 09:35, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reverso³?[edit]

should i update the picture, to show the newer Reverso³? --76.172.251.196 (talk) 09:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Say what?[edit]

"Belay devices generally have two modes of operation: In the first mode, in case of a fall, functions by forcing the rope(s) into tight bends where the rope rubs against the belay device and/or against itself. This rubbing slows the rope, but also generates heat. Some types of belay devices can transition between these modes ..." what's the second mode? 79.138.189.253 (talk) 18:31, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that's very confusing, and it's been like that for over a year... Added a "clarify" template tag. I expect it might simply be to allow a controlled descent by feeding rope through, but hopefully someone with the requisite knowledge can enlighten us about the mysterious second mode, or fix the text. Destynova (talk) 00:46, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mammut Smart[edit]

Does this warrant a new entry? It certainly doesn't look like anything else in this article and, in my experience, doesn't work in quite the same way either. 71.229.198.78 (talk) 08:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actual Usage of Devices?[edit]

With no images or diagrams, the actual function of the belay devices isn't very informative. The method each device uses should be listed, rather than compared to how the ATC works. I agree that it appears to be an ad "for climbers" by Black Diamond/ATC, as most of the devices are only compared against the ATC line, and not the other devices listed.

I suppose the page may be useful information if you already have a good deal of experience, though this page isn't needed, could be reduced and merged with the belaying article.

8r455 (talk) 04:09, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Attempted Fix[edit]

I made an attempt to correct some of the problems that were outlined previously. I think that there is some more work needed. I do think that it would be nice to put some diagram pictures of the way the devices work on there instead of just simple pictures of the devices. Where possible I tried to disassociate devices with brand names. But I do think that there could be more info added. Lundberry (talk) 10:07, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the additions. In the beginning of the article, is the loop of rope supposed to be a bight or bite? I'm not familiar with climbing verbage/publications, however. I also agree that images of the devices "in use" or with the ropes through them and maybe some arrow overlays to hint at operation would help somebody new to the concept understand the function better.

Example from article would be this sentence: "Many belay devices can be used to control either one rope, or two ropes in parallel." Maybe a picture on how each of those rope configurations would be set up? 8r455 (talk) 05:59, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Citation for not using grigris on trad anchors[edit]

I'd stumbled across this page before, and it's the best info I know on the subject: http://www.geir.com/mythbuster.html Someone want to wikify that as a cite for that paragraph? Anholt (talk) 09:35, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Belay device. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131020033013/http://belaydevice.co.uk/belay-device-buying-guide/belay-device-characteristics/ to http://belaydevice.co.uk/belay-device-buying-guide/belay-device-characteristics/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:45, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

sent directly to contributor, duplicated here[edit]

re Belay Device @ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Belay_device&oldid=935927255 The previous (through 14 Oct 2019) "A variety of belay devices" picture was far more comprehensive, and less of an extended ad campaign for Petzl. Now there are *three* Petzl Reverso images. The page now seems to have an unfair over-representation of one manufacturer, coupled with explicit removal of a multi-vendor image depicting a diversity of devices. Do you work for Petzl ? WordSurd (talk) 17:20, 15 January 2020 (UTC) WordSurd (talk) 17:24, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Suggesting a rewrite based on basic principles rather than model[edit]

The article currently reads as a list of examples of devices. The article would be more useful, and will less quickly become obsolete, if we write it in terms of the various types of devices instead, based on the engineering principles, usage applications, and requirements involved. The article could still mention various well-known models as examples of each design. I would suggest something like: plates (eg Sticht), tubers (eg ATC), figure eights, geometrical assisted-braking devices (eg Edelrid Gigajul), mechanical assisted-braking devices (eg Petzl Grigri) and Centrifugal brakes (eg Revo). I would be happy to make these changes, but they would be substantial, so please provide feedback. Jliungman (talk) 08:18, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Intro focused only on classic (tube, plate) devices[edit]

The intro talks about hand position. This is highly dependent on the type of device, and does not apply to for example Revo and Grigri. I suggest removing this from the intro, and instead describing belay devices in terms that apply to all types of devices, in other words, the general purpose of belay devices and what type of problems they solve. Specific information on how various devices work can be placed under each device type.Jliungman (talk) 14:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]