The Master Builder: Mike Flanigan in His New Workshop

Last week we visited the new A.N.T. Bikes workshop in Holliston, Mass., and the Co-Habitant took a series of black and white photos of the excellent Mike Flanigan. My job was to take the digital test shots, which were mostly to meter light and try out compositions before the "real thing". So here are a few of these test shots, which A.N.T. fans might find enjoyable.

For those who are not familiar with Mike Flanigan, I do not think it is an exaggeration to say that he is a legendary figure in the bicycle industry. Not only does A.N.T. put out a truly unique product, but Mike's background is impressive in itself. He started out in 1989 at Fat City Cycles - one of the early pioneers in mountain bike design, based in Somerville MA. After Fat City was sold in 1994, Mike went on to co-found Independent Fabrication, another Somerville bike manufacturer that has attained international fame. And finally, in 2002, Mike branched out on his own with A.N.T. to pursue his unique vision of "not sport, transport".

Since discovering A.N.T. a year ago, I keep asking myself what exactly makes these bicycles so interesting and unusual? Others make TIG-welded frames. Others offer custom colours. And now that the concept of "city bike" has taken off, others build up bicycles designed for fenders, front and rear loads, and upright sitting. So what does A.N.T. offer that's different?

Ah yes - Personality. And I am not talking about Mike's own great personality. The bicycles themselves have a distinctly ANTian character that transcends the sum of their parts. A.N.T. bikes are the Meryl Streeps of bicycles, if you will. Yes, they are beautiful and their performance is impeccable - but there is something more, isn't there? And that elusive "more" is what we really find captivating.

And then there is the fact that Mike himself is a kind, generous and creative person, who sticks to his principles and follows his philosophy. It is endearing to hear the younger framebuilding generation in the Boston area speak of him. Everyone seems to have a story about Mike having helped them out at some point, or taught them something; he is somewhat of a patron saint around these parts.

So that is the man we had the privilege to photograph last week, and we thank him for the opportunity.

The Co-Habitant is a photographer, and he is now working on a project that documents different aspects of the Boston bicycle industry - from independent manufacturers, to bike shop owners, to bicycle collectors. It is an interesting thing to help him with and I hope he exhibits the photos when the project is finished.

I enjoyed looking at all the tools and machinery in the A.N.T. workshop, and more than anything I loved examining this fork. It is a segmented fork that I believe goes on the Light Roadsters. There is something about the look of these that I find very cool.

Here Mike explains something to the Co-Habitant, as his Antique Scorcher poses in the foreground. To see some of the other bikes A.N.T. has made recently, have a look at their flickr sets. I wrote a test ride report of a Boston Lady's Roadster here, and I think the latest series of mixtes (especially the gold and the white one) are particularly beautiful. And of course I am very curious to see what Mike will be building for the North American Handbuilt Bicycle Show . I think he knows what my fantasy A.N.T. bike is, but that is another story entirely!

Leavenworth Trip ...

Adam and I did a three day weekend in the Leavenworth area finishing with helping out Matt with field trip on Sunday.

We took a midday ride out on Friday for some cragging at Clem's Holler. Arrived around Noon and headed up the steep trail. We had lofty goals of climbing some nice sport climbs, but decided to warm up on the first two pitches of Playin' Possum. Doing only the first two pitches keeps it at a reasonable 5.8 instead of the .10a rating it has for continuing onto the third pitch. I led the first pitch, and Adam led the second. While the climbing was not particularly difficult, my head wasn't totally in the lead, and I had to hang a bit at one point (mostly to rest my feet) before continuing upward. After completing the climb, I was not exactly ready to tackle the harder projects, so Adam and I went searching for Arselips and Elbows (5.8) a 14" wide top rope crack.

According to the book, Arselips is "up and left" of The Hatchet. We found it to be generally left, and that dropping down into a meadow was a more sane way of reaching said climb. We first attempted with some exposed moves on grassy ledges before dropping to the meadow and coming back up. I'm pretty sure we were mostly following goat trails. The terrain was sometimes steep, and had a thick coating of ponderosa needles on it adding to the slippery factor. Plenty of sticker bushes in the area too. You have to persevere to get to this climb. Once there, we had an easy hike up to the bolts to set up a top rope. Then it was time for the groveling to begin.

Looking up from the base

The opening moves were on the face while stepping on boulders to gain the crack. Once at the top foothold on the outside, it was time to move in. I found the chicken wing very secure, but it took a fair amount of trial and error to get some sort of secure leg into the crack. The left side of the crack is also a loose corner, with a small finger crack, but I did not feel too comfortable grabbing on it as I was afraid to pull it off. Inside the crack it was narrow, and a deep breath could mostly keep my in my place. I realized after some struggling that I had to exhale to make moving up easier. In my first attempt, I managed to gain the crack and move a few centimeters off the outside rock before needing my left foot to do something. I took a rest while Adam gave it a shot.

About to leave the outside world

Adam gave the crack a try and made no further progress than I did. He tried it first in his trail runners figuring that would give him an advantage. After his attempt, he decided his next attempt would be with rock shoes. I gave it a second go with a result of getting about six inches higher than my previous attempt. I was able to successfully use my left arm and leg in the attempt, but found the upward progress too much of a struggle to continue further. Adam gave it one last try and it looked something like this:

He's in there

After getting to roughly the same height I did, Adam melted out of the crack and I lowered him to the ground. We both agreed that that was the most effort we have ever put forth to move two inches! I thought I could get up any 5.8 in Leavenworth on top rope. Apparently, this climb proved me wrong. After our struggles, we called it a day and headed back to the car. Our sport climbing objectives at Clem's Holler could wait for another day.

We awoke late (8am) on Saturday, and had breakfast in camp. By the time we packed up camp, it was about to rain and when we arrived at parking for our intended destination for the day (Peek-a-Boo Tower) there was a light rain. Looking west made us concerned so we drove to the mouth of the canyon hoping for better weather. We stopped in the Snow Creek parking lot and by the time we rolled out of there, it was raining as well. So we headed to Peshastin again.

It appeared that others had the same idea when it started to rain in Leavenworth, and many small parties of climbers dashed out of the parking lot to get to climbs quickly. We were in no rush and decided to climb Windward which we figured no one was running to. When we got there, I was not too enthused about leading it and we decided to walk around to see if we could get on something else. When we arrived at Dinosaur, and saw no one on Potholes, we jumped on it. Adam had me lead the first (5.8) pitch and he said he would decide at the belay about leading the second (5.7) pitch. I personally have always found the second pitch harder, but that may just be me. No real surprised on Potholes except for me having more difficulty this year with the crux of the first pitch. And Adam getting a good chuckle from watching me struggle with the final moves to the anchor. We rapped off and headed to Grand Central Tower to climb the West Face.

Adam past the first bulge on Potholes second pitch

It was nice to finally lead the West Face and not have any trouble on it. Well, no trouble climbing it. There was a party that was off route on Nirvana Ridge that kept raining sand down onto us. It does not make for a comforting lead. Adam followed, and even got hit by a slightly bigger rock on the way up. We rapped off to find the wind had died off and it was downright warm out. We decided the clouds cleared enough to the west to try the Icicle again.

We drove back and watched the outside temp drop from 68°F to around 60°F by the mouth of the Icicle. We stopped there to head to Surf City to climb a few moderate cracks. We started on Paydirt, a nice 5.7 finger crack that I would revisit. I was a bit too tentative on the lead on this one, and I am not sure why. (Must have been the theme for the weekend.) I had a minor slip and even opted not to place gear at one point. Hopefully I can revisit that one with a better head.

Stepping into the finger crack

Adam then led Blunt Instruments which was one of those cracks that does not really require crack climbing technique. It was a bit dirty at the top and also finished with a slab like Paydirt did. (Although the Paydirt slab was a bit more runout.)

After that I attempted to lead another route there called Undertoe. I couldn't get a decent first piece in and so we called it a day. This time we were at The Mountaineers group campsite and had a feast. Ben Evans showed up and cooked a huge pan of bacon chorizo paella.

Sunday I was pretty spent from the weekend (and sleeping on a Z-Rest) that I had the student I was with lead all pitches on Midway. I did not climb well, and even used a piton as a foot hold before attaining Jello Tower. It was nice to sleep in a bed last night.

Toroweap

I do believe that I've just had what I will consider to be the best experience of this trip. From a photographic standpoint, the conditions were a little "too" perfect (a more interesting sky would have been nice for the sunset/sunrise photos), but the experience overall was one that I will never forget. I must admit that the Grand Canyon and the southwest in general at one time held no interest at all for me. Well... now that I have been to this part of the country a number of times, my feelings have changed and I've really come to love it in the southwest.





I had first heard of Toroweap while browsing the website of Marc Adamus, one of my favorite photographers. On his website he has an image titled "Flaming Canyon" that, more than anything else, was my sole inspiration for wanting to visit Toroweap. (To see Marc's image, click here: http://www.marcadamus.com/photo.php?id=63&gallery=canyon). Toroweap is part of Grand Canyon National Park, but resides on the north rim, and not the tourist over-run south rim. Toroweap is easily one of the least visited areas of Grand Canyon National Park. While the area is vehicle-accessible, you must drive down 60 miles of dirt road, the last 10 miles of which are VERY rough. I made it just fine in my Honda Element with all-terrain tires, but a passenger car certainly would never make it.





Toroweap is a Paiute term meaning "dry or barren valley". The views from Toroweap Overlook are 3,ooo feet above the Colorado River and take your breath away. Due to the remote nature of the Toroweap area (it takes a minimum of 2.5 to 3 hours to drive the road one-way) I decided to spend the night at the Toroweap campground, a lovely little 9-site (FREE!) campground that is one mile from the canyon rim. This would also enable me to shoot a sunset and a sunrise at the location. To my surprise the campground was about half-full, and I saw a half-dozen other vehicles along the last few miles of the road.





Everyone knew that this was a quiet place, however, and once the sun went down it was hard to tell there was anyone else camping there. None of the usual campground noise.... just pure, un-filtered silence. I was in heaven. Being that Toroweap is so far from any signs of civilization, the sky that night over the campground was one of the most amazing that I've ever seen. The stars seemed close enough to reach up and pluck them out of the sky. Surprisingly, none of the other campers were interested in the comings and goings of the sun. As such, as I shot the sunset and the sunrise, I was completely alone on the canyon rim. What a lovely place!

(Below: 1 hour, 30 minute star exposure, taken directly over my campsite)

Ruffino Wine Bottle

These cheep wine bottlew were very popular in California when I was there in 1969 and 1970. Couldn't find any of them on line for a price now.

On Bicycle Reviews

Once in a while I get an email from someone who bought a bicycle after reading positive things about it on this blog, only to discover that I also had other, more critical posts about the very same bike. When this happens it is only natural that the reader feels some degree of betrayal, and that I in turn feel guilty. I start to think that maybe I should wait until I've owned a bike for years before reviewing it, and that I should generally try to tone down the enthusiasm in my posts. But frankly, I don't think that would help matters. Having started this blog as a beginner, my preferences are in a constant state of evolution, making me an inherently untrustworthy reviewer. And I think the bigger issue is that all bicycle reviews are to some extent unreliable for these same reasons, and that reading them at face value is a mistake. Just consider the myriad of factors that can shape a bicycle review. Do you keep them in mind when interpreting the author's feedback?

Reviewer's physical characteristicsThis one gets overlooked a great deal, but I think it's an important place to start. Consider, for example, that a cyclist's size and weight are going to affect their experience of any given bike. Unless you are similar in these characteristics to the reviewer, you may not experience the same bike in the same manner: a bicycle that feels perfectly comfortable to them may feel overly stiff (or overly flexible) to you; a bicycle that is perfectly proportioned for them may feel ill-proportioned to you. Physical strength and degree of fitness plays a role as well.

Reviewer's cycling backgroundHow experienced is the reviewer at the time the review is written (that last bit is especially crucial to pay attention to when reading old reviews from bloggers who have since gained more experience)? And what type of cycling background are they coming from? An evaluation of a bicycle as fast/responsive by a seasoned racer is going to have very different implications than the same evaluation from someone whose experience has been limited to beach cruisers. Same with the notions of comfort, stability, and so on.

Basis for comparisonWhat other bicycles has this person ridden and owned? If someone has never ridden a Dutch bike before and they review, say, a Batavus, their impressions are likely to be of Dutch bikes as a general concept rather of Batavus specifically, simply because the whole category is so new and striking to them. Same with racing bikes, mountain bikes, and so on.

Duration of experienceBeware of statements such as "The bicycle felt great as soon as I started riding it," or "I knew right away that I loved it." And yes, I am probably guilty of making them myself - we all are. But the truth is that our impressions of bicycles change as we experience them across different contexts, and to experience them across different contexts we need time. How often and for how long has the reviewer been riding the bicycle? How long are their individual rides compared to yours? If a bicycle causes pain or fatigue after 50 miles, the reviewer whose rides are limited to 20 miles will be unaware of it.

ApplicabilityDoes the reviewer use the bicycle for the same purpose, or in the same way, as you would use it? The author's feedback is only truly applicable to the reader when that is the case. But if a bicycle is praised for loaded touring, whereas you are planning to commute on it or use it as a roadbike, chances are you will not experience its ride quality in quite the same way as the reviewer.

Value systemEvery reviewer is different in terms of what it is they value about a bike. To some it is important that they feel no road vibration, whereas others could not care less. For some toe overlap is unacceptable, whereas others won't even notice it. Some care mostly about how a bicycle handles loaded, some have distinct seat tube angle preferences, some take note of how cleanly filed the joints of the frame are, some are concerned about the quality of the paintjob. There are loads of issues like this that a reviewer may omit simply because they don't care one way or the other, at least at the time of the review.

Pattern of biasOnce you read a handful of reviews by the same author, a pattern of bias will usually emerge. Some reviewers criticise the heck out of all bicycles as a matter of course, so a "positive" review from them still looks pretty negative. Conversely, there are those who are enthusiastic about all the bikes they review, and then you have to carefully read between the lines and try to determine what they might be omitting. There are those reviewers who are prone to the "honeymoon effect" and those who keep a cool head. Reviewers' impressions can lean toward the emotional, the technical, the superficial, the overanalytical - you name it. Whatever their specific pattern may be, it holds clues for how to interpret that reviewer's feedback.

No doubt there are many more factors worth considering, and I invite you to share your own strategies for interpreting bicycle reviews. More than anything, I think it is crucial to read as many reviews of the same bike as you can find - and if a common thread emerges, that's when it becomes truly informative. Also, for those bicycles we don't get a chance to see in person, the images offered by reviewers can be more telling and detailed than those provided by the manufacturer. Reviews are usually useful, no matter how biased. But to "trust" a single reviewer because you like their blog or find their narrative style entertaining is, in my opinion, asking for trouble. There is no such thing as a reliable narrator, and bicycle reviews are no exception.

Wham Bam Thank You Lamb!

So, did you know that Mary had a little lamb? No, seriously. That there once was an actual girl, named Mary, who kept a diminutive pet sheep? The girl in question(Mary Sawyer, to be precise)lived in Sterling Massachusetts in the 1800s. And according to historical scholars, some time in 1830 she brought her pet lamb to school - an act that caused such mirth among the other children, that a local poet was inspired to immortalise it in verse. On the Sterling Town Green, astatue now standscommemorating the event.



This statue also marks the halfway point and only control stop of theNew England Randonneurs Populaire - a timed 107 km ride that heralds the official start of the local brevet season.



"But at least take a picture next to the Lamb!" someone exclaimed when I mentioned there would be no pictures on this ride. A kindly volunteer did the honors. My few lucid memories of the Populaire revolve around the stone rendering of the famous Victorian pet.



Having already done two "Permanents"earlier this month (this one and this one), I hoped the official Populaire would not be anti-climactic. I needn't have worried.



Some notes, while it's all still fresh and I am too tired to feel self-conscious:



I must remember that rides with similar overall elevation gain can be very different. The climbing on this one was intense and draining, even though the elevation gain (3813ft over 68 miles) was the same as in the previous (easier!) 100Ks I did this year.



But perhaps much of that had to do with howI did this ride. Straight through, minimal stopping, really pushing myself to get it done. Particularly on the return leg, I just basically raced through the course, inasmuch as I am capable of such a thing. I do not know what possessed me to do it this way; I certainly did not have to as there was plenty of time left before the cutoff. But it felt in the spirit of the event: Everyone seemed focused on making good time. I finished well (for me), certainly better than expected. But it was tough. At some point,everything was a blur, attempts at conversations became babbling nonsense.



For some of the time I rode in a group.This proveda novel experience compared to previous group riding.While the group's average speed was similar to my own, their rhythm did not match mine - a situation I found extremely difficult to deal with. I tried a few times to cycle ahead of the group, so as to go at my own pace. This did not work, as they'd always catch me. Falling behind did not work either, as I'd eventually catch up, yet again be unable to pass them. I seemed destined to ride in this group and adapt to its rhythm; it was as if a magnetic field held us together!



The start of the Boston brevets is in a middle-of-nowhere location - an airforce base some distance from my house. By the time I got home, I had ridden 105 miles, and felt every single one of them. A Century is not quite a casual distance for me, yet. This is disappointing.



Because of the Boston Marathon bombings and their aftermath, the Populaire took place one week later than initially planned. The 200K brevet is next Saturday, not leaving much time for further training. Considering how I feel after this ride, I am not sure it is a good idea to embark on the 200K so soon. But I will see how I feel mid-week.



Finally... Despite this depriving me of photo opportunities, it felt good to put in an effort and try to make decent time. By mid day it was all over, and afterward I felt oddly over-emotional. I wasn't happy, or sad, or proud or frustrated exactly. Rather, it was as if so many miles and so much intensity packed in a fairly short time was too much for my system to cope with. But in a good way... I think.



My thanks to the New England Randonneurs for putting on this event, and to the wonderful volunteers who made it happen. I hope to see you again this summer.

Two Cadillacs and a Chrysler

New Video from Wildfilm Productions

Amphitheater II



Our good friend Ray Burnsworth of Wildfilm productions put together a short clip of Upper Meadow Amphitheater. A huge thanks goes out to Rayman for the efforts and great clip. Follow the link from here to view or click on the image above.

A group of Horses

More Unfinished Business: Alpine Diversions (5.8), but not Insuhlation (5.9)

(Photo: Just over the big roof on pitch two of Alpine Diversions (5.8).)



As I've worked my way through a bunch of 5.9 routes at the Gunks this past year, a certain route has been hanging out there in the background, taunting me. It is a two-star route that is supposed to be really good. It also happens to be the route on which I broke my ankle in : Insuhlation (5.9).



A part of me has really wanted to go back and climb it-- to slay the demon, as it were. To put it behind me. And to find out what I think of the route, two years later. Who knows, maybe if I climbed it now I'd find it to be no big deal.



But another part of me wants nothing to do with Insuhlation. I worry that I'd become a shivering wreck if I led it again; that I'd be so in fear of a repeat injury that it would become a self-fulfilling prophecy. And a repeat injury on Insuhlation would be absolutely ridiculous. I can't let that happen. I'd never forgive myself.



Perhaps the thing that makes me most wary of Insuhlation is that I don't really know why I fell off of it when I did. I am also unsure of whether I could have done anything to better protect myself. I recall a little roof, and a (wet) keyhole-like hold that I tried to use briefly while reaching for a chalked-up, bigger hold above that I thought would be a jug. I remember grabbing this jug and finding it to be not so juggy. I had a green Alien below the little roof and I was looking around for more pro (but finding none) when I went flying.



Did my hand slip off? Did my foot? Was there better pro available than what I had? I'd feel better about going for it again if I had answers to these questions.



I had a brilliant idea about halfway through the season. It suddenly occurred to me that I should have one of my partners lead the route, and then I could follow it. It is such an obvious idea, I don't know why I never thought of it before. I could, for example, send my reliable guinea pig Adrian (who seems always willing to lead anything) up there and then as a second I could suss out whether I thought I could safely lead it at a later date.



But then Adrian led the route with another partner before I had a chance to suggest it to him. It didn't seem right to try to make him go right back to do it again. Adrian's impressions seemed to be that the last bits of the route were totally straightforward, and well-protected too. Hearing this only deepened the mystery for me.



As the year came to a close and the climbing season extended into an unseasonably warm December, I came up with another idea. I decided to lead the route right next to Insuhlation, a 5.8 called Alpine Diversions. Dick Williams gives the route a single star and calls it "surprisingly good." It seemed worth checking out in its own right. And it goes very close to Insuhlation. The second-pitch crux roof is only a few feet to the right of the Insuhlation crux, or so I believed. I thought I could lead Alpine Diversions and get a good look at the exact place where I fell. I might even get some ideas for some placements I missed. Maybe it would help me decide whether to lead it again, and if I felt good on Alpine Diversions I could do Insuhlation immediately thereafter.



So on December 4 when I climbed with Liz I suggested we try Alpine Diversions. Liz was game to try it.



I thought both pitches were just okay. Each pitch has one interesting crux moment and not too much else to offer.



On pitch one the interesting moment comes right off the ground. The pitch follows a thin, steep vertical crack running a few feet to the left of a little gully. One hold, a sidepull, is easy to reach. A jug sits above. If you are tall enough to reach the jug from the ground, you will probably find the opening moves to be a breeze. If, however, you are short like me, you will have to boulder up to the jug. And this boulder problem is a puzzler. I don't want to spell it all out but I will tell you to look around to either side of the crack. I found another crucial hold off to the left which made all the difference for me. This hold allowed me to get on the wall and reach up to the jug. And once I had the jug, I threw in a piece and made another step up to find that the pitch was essentially over.



Dick Williams suggests in his description that you continue directly over a blocky overhang and then up to the belay ledge past the big pine in "the steepest way." What this all means (I realize in retrospect) is that the route is contrived. After the opening boulder move, there are ways to force yourself to continue making 5th class moves. But in order to do so you have to deliberately avoid easier climbing just a step to the left or right. I didn't really see the point. It just seemed silly not to scamper up the stair-like blocks past the tree to the belay ledge.



On pitch two, the main attraction is a rather large overhang. Nice moves up a corner take you directly underneath it. Then an easy move left might deceive you into thinking you've already escaped the crux. But no. You still have to move right and pull the roof. It is a big reach. I really enjoyed this crux move. And there's great pro at the lip of the overhang.



After the roof, you again have the option to force yourself to keep climbing. You can move left and up to another roof, this one smaller and dirtier (and from the looks of it easier) than the first. On the other hand, if you just continue straight up you are basically done. Some easy low angle moves will take you to the belay tree. I chose the easy way, again not seeing much point in contriving a harder path to the finish.



When I reached the top I realized that I had forgotten to look at Insuhlation! The roof on Alpine Diversions had captured my full attention. Once above the roof, I probably could have glanced over at the exact spot where it all went wrong two years ago. But as obsessed as I am, as much as Insuhlation haunts me, I still didn't think to do it.



I had already decided I didn't have the stomach for doing Insuhlation, anyway. But still I was bummed to have missed out on the chance to look over the route up close.



On rappel I attempted to scope it out. To my surprise, I couldn't spot the line at all. Maybe I was too far to the left, but I had no luck in finding it. I thought I'd immediately see the roof, the keyhole, the jug. But I saw nothing I recognized. It was baffling.



I'm pretty sure that if I ever get back to climbing Insuhlation the whole experience will seem new to me. I want to go try it. But I don't want to approach it in an unhealthy state of mind. I don't want to climb it to prove anything. I don't want to climb it all stiff and scared. I think the whole accident thing is still too much in my head, even two years later. Better to wait.

A critical look at crampon fit and design (repost)

I wrote thisAprilof . With the current thread on "your crampon fit" I think it worth revisiting for anyone that hasn't seen it.



Jan



In the past8 months we have seen the situation get worse not better imo. Scarpa delivered both the Phantom Ultra and the Phantom 6000, the late summer and fall of . Exceptional boots no questionbut with some of the lowest profile soles in mtn boot history. The Phantom Guide is not far behind them.Scarpawasn't the only ones off the charts on innovative boot design last year.



Next week is the Winter OR Show. Products displayed there will first be delivered in the fall and winter of . It will be interesting to see what is new this year. At the moment the only company I know working on the issue is Black Diamond who has a new bail (and a new mono point crampon!)in the works.























April



There are many different crampon manufactures. I am not so much interested in manufacturer or style of crampon as I am in the actual boot to crampon interface, in other words the "fit" of the crampon.



If you have ever lost a crampon on technical ground you know the surprise and general helplessness that goes right along with it. That is if you live through the experience.



I've only done it once. For the sake of documentation I was attempting to show a novice climber what not to do and some how literally kicked my right crampon off. As I watched it tumble down the waterfall I too started to topple over and slide.



The only thing that caught me was the dumb luck of catching my tool's pick on his buried pick as I went buy. Thankfully his placement held and I didn't knock him off as well. Other wise? It would have been a 500'+ foot tumble and most likely death, certainly serious injury.



Humbling and just as sobering. I had soloed some difficult terrain in those same boots and crampons. To this day I am not sure if my set up was bad or just my adjustments on the straps.



I was damn lucky and it cooled my jets for soloing (or just climbing) ice for awhile.



Either way it is not something I ever want to repeat.





Not everyone will recognize the crampons in the picture. But in 1980 they were one of the models that were putting up the first of the WI6 routes. They were a rigid model by SMC. Chouinard's rigid design while revolutionary always had a durability/reliability issue. The earliest clip on Salewa/Chouinards were the crampon of choice for many of us who disdained the weight of Lowe's Footfang. Foot Fangs were a quick glimpse into the future of crampon and not all of it was good news imo.



Back then we used Beck neoprene coated nylon straps (also sold by Chouinard) to hold the crampons on. Clip on crampon bindings were still new to climbing. While that turned out to be a great idea 10 years years later. (mid 1980s) I had seen two different brands of a single crampon with the early clip on binding still attached before we hit the first ice field on the Eiger in '78. Crampons sitting in the rumble mid way up a big north face gives one a moment to pause and consider the consequences of that gear choice.



Part of the fit process on the older crampons (not Foot Fangs however) was to adjust the crampon to the sole pattern of the boot. And most importantly it seemed to me was to make the fit tight enough that you were unlikely to loose a crampon if you broke a strap or a crampon post.



The more rigid the crampon and boot interface the better the combination will climb. Actually let me go farther in that comment, the more rigid the boot sole and the more rigid the crampon the better the combination will climb on pure ice given a solid interface between the boot and crampon.



Looking at currently available equipment with 7 pairs of La Sportive boots (Spantik, Baruntse, Batura, Nepal Evo, Trango Extreme Evo, Trango Ice Evo and the Nepal Evo GTX all size 45) and 4 different brands of crampons ( Camp, Black Diamond, Petzl and Grivel and 7 models) ) it is interesting the observations you can make on crampon fit and how the difference in boot construction even between models in the same brand affect that fit.













































With the popularity of mixed climbing I am actually shocked at the sloppy interface between boot and crampons across the board. I don't claim to be a "M" climber but I understand how to hook a tool on rock and what it takes to climb at Hafner or on hard alpine mixed.



If you weigh in at 125 and have a size 7 foot not a lot is going to ruffle your gear if it is fit right. Hit 200# and have a size 12 foot and you can easily do things to a crampon that a 125# M12 climber has yet to dream of. An example is a front bail that turns into a shock absorber and can literally bounce off the lip of a boot. That might get anyone a little cranky. Add to a bad design, as a way to fix, the other bad design...with bail "laces" and you go from bad to worse.



I replace the Grivel "round" bails with something else and simply cut the additional retaining straps off the front bail of the BDs.



On the mixed terrain pictured below I noticed more than once I was climbing on the "ring" of a Grivel front bail. Not a comforting feeling. Just as bad I think is the large diameter wire and over size bails that BD uses. Bails hitting rock before your crampons do is a bad thing. Yes most every boot will fit BD crampons but precise they aren't. Of the three big manufactures only Petzl seems to have the front bails fit squared away. But then Petzl has the only front bails I know of that break. So may be "squared away" is a not really the right word. Crampons need to stay on the boot. Black Diamond has never had a breakage problem. I'll take reliability first, thank you! Everything is a trade off. And that is just a quick look at the front bails!



DT photo credit to DanielH and DaveB.







To be fair the crampon manufactures are hamstrung when it comes to boot fit. What is really needed is a DIN norm for rigid soled climbing boots. Then every crampon manufacturer would know exactly what they have to design to/with. After all the hard-goods guys are only half the real product on ice/mixed. You have to clamp a crampon to a boot sole to make a usable tool. I have 7 pairs of boots, all the same size and from differentmanufactures. None of them fit the crampons I own exactly the same. Imagine the nightmare the crampons manufacturers go through every season as the boot technology and sole profiles change. Is it no wonder they build on the conservative side?



I'll repeat myself. We need a rigid sole mountain boot DIN norm.



I'll let you decide what is a good front bail/crampon fit for your style of climbing and what is not. My answer was to add Petzl bails to my BD crampons for a better fit and trust in the Petzl spiel that their bails are now reliable. It is a trim set up that fits all my boots well and drops a few oz. in the process.

















There is nothing easy. cheap or guaranteed in all of this. I understand that. But I also get to point out the bad designs and ask that it be done better. More of us should! Speak up!



















These are just shots of the front bails. While some front bails might not be the best set up, we should also be looking at the bottom of the crampons. To be specific just what the crampon covers on the bottom of the boot.



















Most of us don't want to be climbing in "fruit boots" with no heel piece and only front pointing. It is a good direction for design to get lighter gear as long as we don't forget its real use. As important as the attachment system is and how much clearance the bails have from the boot, the real reason we use crampons is to "stick" us to ice and snow. How many points you have going down is even more important as those going forward if you want to climb with the least amount of effort on difficult terrain.















To my way of thinking the more down points the better. I'd rather have the weight and additional of traction that is the end result of skipping down points in a design. To lose weight, crampons have also lost "sole". By that I mean the crampons have lost surface area on the front half of the crampon generally. Less and less of your boot is being covered by the crampon. A quick look at the old Chouinard/Salewa rigid shows a crampon that almost perfectly covers the entire sole outline of the boot. Makes climbing on the crampon precisely, a lot easier.







More importantly we use a alpine/ice climbing crampon to "cut" steps when you want to rest from a front pointing position or help clear out a chopped ledge by kicking. How the down points are positioned and how many of them are on the crampon define how you can use your crampons to accomplish "cutting". Down points facing backward tend to skate your foot off when driving the foot forward with power to "cut" and don't allow you to kick efficiently to clear a step or a ledge.



(My perspective from Jan is there are some really messed up crampon designs from all the major players. It is like the knowledge simply dissappeared as to what is really needed here)



The next selection of pictures is a grab bag of old and new crampons. Double click the photos and take a look at the difference in boot sole surface area coverage, the number and location of the down spikes and their obvious resulting traction or lack of traction.



















































































































































































The difference between lever lock heel bails is small but not without need for comment. Black Diamond and Grivel use a fairly large plastic lever. Both are comfortable on the back of a soft boot like the Trango Series from Sportiva. The Petzl lever? No so much. Painful in fact. Bad enough that I don't use the Petzl lever on anything but the heaviest boots. Nepal Evos and my dbl boots don't have an issue with the Petzl levers but I can't wear them on any of my Trango Series boots. It is just too painful.



Grivel and Black Diamond also use their retaining straps to give an extra safety feature by locking the levers in place with the added leverage and a tight strap. Not Petzl however. Hard to image a worse design for a crampon lever lock than what Petzl uses. Not only is the lever hard to get off when required but the retaining strap will"retain" the crampon only if you are extremely lucky. The "safety" strap DOES NOTretain the lever against your boot. Take a look at the last picture in the next series. The lever down is with a TIGHT safety/retaining strap in place and you can still flip the lever into a down and unlatched position. Both Grivel's and Black Diamond's heel piece will retain the lever in the correct up position until that "safety strap" is unbuckled orcut completely into. It is a simple leverage issue. Petzl missed that. Black Diamond and Grivel did not. Weak......on Petzl's part. However you can fix the Petzl rear bail to make itmore reliable. You'll have to cut the adjustment ball on the top of the lever and then thread the safety strap through the top of the flip lever. Solves the problem but why are we required to fix it?



Their is an easier answer. Thankfully both Black Diamond and Grivel heel levers and locks will fit easily on the Petzl crampons. You can order up a pair from BD's customer service for a small fee and they snap right on.





























With miles of ice climbing it is easy to look both backwards and forwards. The majority of pure ice lines were climbed with basic boots, ice tools and crampons. Some times I laugh at what we are using now and not in a good way. Most pure ice lines could be climbed with a club with a nail through it and hob nails.



What we have now for ice tools, boots and crampons makes ice climbing trivial in comparison to 30 years ago technology. The newest ice climbing gear is stellar in comparison so while I may sound like I am simply bitching, I am not. Ice tools are amazing these days. I am the perfect example of just how good they are. No question I am climbing harder ice now than I ever have because of the current hand tools. But boots and crampons have fallen behind the advances in ice tools. And in many ways boots and crampons have fallen behind some of the 30 year old technology! My 30 year old plastic boots and chromoly crampons will climb pure ice as good or better than anything available currently and they weight LESS!



Lucky for the manufactures that almost any crampon will work, as will almost any boot.



Call it a wake up call to the industry. And a invitation for you to join me in asking for better products. If nothing else take a critical look at your own gear and sort it out as required.



I'd like to see lighter weight boots and lighter weight crampons. Both with better over all traction all the while keeping the ability to front point with less effort. I'm not asking for much :)



To do that it is going to take a rethinking of basic designs and may be a critical look back to look forward.

Roe-Dee-Oh :: Bull Riding

Sunday, August 21st - - The “main” event, the one that we waited nearly four hours to see, was the Bull Riding. There was only one rider that was able to go the full time but it was an exciting event, definitely worth waiting around for....