New kit from Kong

[Marc]

ok Rupe - I'll be in touch as soon as I know more.

 

I feel cheated! Nobody ever thinks of marky mark maybe he'd like to demo some new kit:closedeyes:

[Sevsafe]

I feel cheated! Nobody ever thinks of marky mark maybe he'd like to demo some new kit:closedeyes:

Sorry! you just haven't got Rupe's cheek. I'm not really promising anything - Kong are a bit tight with samples! There are none of these new things in the country yet - could be in about 3 weeks. The new twin ascender will sell for something like £120.00 + VAT (which seems a lot!) Please let me know if you need prices on any other Kong items. We are going to be doing more in conjunction with the importers - that's High Places as mentioned in a previous post.

[Will Hinchliffe]

Cant see many people parting that much for the kongs.

 

Its to much seeing as the original ones are about 80 quid.

 

Dont incourage them find a differtent dual acender to stock.

[Rupe]

Cheek? Yes, I guess so, but I will probably buy some too!

 

I use kongs all the time, sometimes back them up for akward or exposed ascents but backing them up is a pain. If the new ones really are safe to use without back up then I would want a pair and insist that employees switch to them also.

[Will Hinchliffe]

We don't back up our kongs but only use them on appropriate ascents. When I first started using them I would fore them through frith and ascend right up to the anchor point then branch roll on to it even on branches with v. large diameters. I now know that this is a really bad way to use them. I welcome the addition of the plate on top but I feel that kong have a duty to either accept old models in part exchange or offer a retro fit kit for them.

[Bundle 2]

We don't back up our kongs but only use them on appropriate ascents. When I first started using them I would fore them through frith and ascend right up to the anchor point then branch roll on to it even on branches with v. large diameters. I now know that this is a really bad way to use them. I welcome the addition of the plate on top but I feel that kong have a duty to either accept old models in part exchange or offer a retro fit kit for them.

 

Yes...this is very bad practice and will result in an accident at some point imo....Backing them up is easy enuff mate....place a suitable clevis in the unit above the cams ( top hole )...using two legs of hitch cord, connect the system to both legs ( assuming Ddrt ) with a distil or other suitable running knot.....Also put an alpine hitch ( butterfly whu ) midline to secure the static line against failure, this can be easily removed from the ground when U done.

I started using Blaze as an access line...I wasnt climbing on it having replaced it but wasnt going to bin it as it had just been passed loler fit for purpose...just about.....! The point being, the cams regularly slide down the line when loaded, being an 11mm rope....The ascenders are not good enuff to handle the smaller ropes imo.( manu' specific )

I agree that the manufacturers appear to side step an important issue here....whilst they do not recall a contreversial bit of gear, they do offer a safer alternative but at considerable cost....I guess they know which side their bread is buttered so to speak??

[Amelanchier]

In their defence though, they were never made for arb work. Mine have glow in the dark handles...

[Bundle 2]

In their defence though, they were never made for arb work. Mine have glow in the dark handles...

 

In which case i would have thought they might have covered themselves with a caveat to that effect but instead we are offerred a more expensive alternative as I said....They are infact manufactured to a fairly low standard imo....The safety features have been an after thought also, resulting from exposure of cases of injury from their use in arboriculture arguably, you cant tell me they dont understand the market potential or indeed the implications of the adjustments which make a device, not intended for treework, all the more an obvious choice for arborists.....We lose out on every side imo.

Admitting liability is not what Im saying. although it is implied perhaps not just by me but also the product designers...It would be a churlish view to undermine a products evolution in such a way.....Perhaps they need to rethink the way it looks tho'. I still think they " appear to sidestep " serious issues with regards not only to the design of the gear but the standard of manufacture and its intended application by default....?

Enuff said.....

[Rupe]

We don't back up our kongs but only use them on appropriate ascents. When I first started using them I would fore them through frith and ascend right up to the anchor point then branch roll on to it even on branches with v. large diameters. I now know that this is a really bad way to use them. I welcome the addition of the plate on top but I feel that kong have a duty to either accept old models in part exchange or offer a retro fit kit for them.

 

Yes, we are agreed that this is bad practice so no need to go discuss further. Used carefully they are ok. The original kongs were made for caving (hence the glow in dark handles) and were designed for use on two seperate fixed lines so no need for back up, each one backs up the other.

 

The new ones are designed for arb work. Why would kong part ex somethings sold for caving for something sold for arb work?

 

It was our choice to use them for arb work and kong have never accepted any liability for injury whilst used in this way unless used on two seperate fixed lines. We have therefore had to come up with methods of back up right from the start. I have used two pairs of kongs at once to this effect and it works well.

 

A purpose made set of kongs would be a great addition to my kit and I would hope that they would be approved for use in TCC's.

[mixedangased]

high places stonehouse,stroud 07970493656