In reply to zarathustra:
> Are the pacerpoles with their ergonomic grip worth considering?
I use pacerpoles, and they go everywhere with me. The grip is good, it means you can put a lot of weight on the pole without using a wrist loop. That means you can move your hands around, get in your pack etc. with less faff. It also means that you can drop the pole if you fall, so you're less likely to break it (or dislocate your elbow or shoulder - actually more common than it sounds). I'm happy using them on rocky ground where I would probably want to remove a wrist loop for safety's sake. Supposedly thy're more efficient/ergonomic too, though in truth I don't see much advantage over a pole with a wrist loop on that count.
The neoprene grip on the upper shaft is handy on steep uphills and short scramble/steps, especially as there is no wrist loop. Replacement parts are available and reasonably priced; I've broken and replaced two carbon fibre bottom sections over the years.
That said, they haven't kept up with the times in pole design, the lineup hasn't changes since I bought mine 7ish years ago. The twist-locks are a pain, I would prefer flick-locks or a z-pole design. They are a little heavy, even the CF version, though since the weight is in the handle not the tip they don't feel too bad. Not cheap either.
It all comes down to whether the handle is a killer feature for you and your useage. If I was buying again, I'd probably buy pacerpoles again.
Post edited at 12:09