The NEW skylotec passo-pl karabiner whats your view???

[High Scale]

It can’t fail if it operates within its parameters. It also didn’t fail if the inspector said it should only be used for “only to be used for tool attachment”.

 

Yes but apparently it did fail as a PPE attachment but was passed as a tool attachment, it would be nice to know why it failed as a PPE attachment, it's pretty confusing, if the product was faulty in some way then it should have failed altogether and been taken out of service, if however it had failed for some other reason then it would be good to know that other reason.

Edited January 18, 2012 by High Scale
sp

[treequip]

Yes but apparently it did fail as a PPE attachment but was passed as a tool attachment, it would be nice to know why it failed as a PPE attachment, it's pretty confusing, if the product was faulty in some way then it should have failed altogether and been taken out of service, if however it had failed for some other reason then it would be good to know that other reason.

 

Well there is the key word, neither of us know for sure but as a LOLER inspector I can tell you that it either passes or fails, what use you put it to is your business.

 

Anything else is just advice

[DrewB]

After seeing the carabiner, I think it's good tht the loler guy failed it for ppe, as I see it it's definitely not 3 actions to open it. It's a good carabiner just not a 3 action opening irrespective what it's been certified too. Just my 2 cents...

[Tony Croft aka hamadryad]

nope, I will never buy one, period, ever.

[Bergen]

Yes but apparently it did fail as a PPE attachment but was passed as a tool attachment, it would be nice to know why it failed as a PPE attachment, it's pretty confusing, if the product was faulty in some way then it should have failed altogether and been taken out of service, if however it had failed for some other reason then it would be good to know that other reason.

 

My query was, and still is, WHY it had not been passed as fit for purpose for precisely those reasons in High Scale's reply.

Still - I'd like to know who it was 'failed' the item & get the opinion of an experienced assessor to see if there is more to this than just a knee-jerk reaction to summat a bit different.

I swear if it was up to some folk out there we'd still be on 3-strand and using Danarms - I wonder if the inertia chain-brake was viewed with suspicion and ridicule when it was first launched.

[Amelanchier]

Having just read this thread from start to finish for the first time I'd just like to ask out of pure interest:-

 

Of those climbers that would refuse to use this biner out of concern of the possibility of friction causing accidental opening, how many use four way biners?

 

I suspect I already know the answer. Which is odd really 'cos if accidental opening was a real risk worth worrying about then you'd think that you'd want to reduce the probability as low as possible? Right?

[Amelanchier]

nope, I will never buy one, period, ever.

 

I'd buy one just to scare children with.

[Nigel]

just as a reference this is part of the user instructions for the Pinchlock.

[raafbeard]

Brought one of these on Friday...is a real nice looking karabiner....I thought it would be perfect for side strop attachment... although now I have it...I would also consider one for attaching the static end of a main line....

 

However will see how it fairs in the real world.

[Treegeek]

I may be missing the point (I apologize I.was.up.late) but the video shows a floor that the rope could with out human intervention open the gate.

Yes yes I completely understand the the karb would normally be loaded so the chance of a sliced eye sliding down the gate is debatable ???

Plus your more traditional karbs the barrel of the gate impedes that scenario so what.

Just my opinion wouldn't personaly have it on my climbing line but for saw lanyard yer ok