UKH

Hi all, just a word of caution. My mate was seconding me on some steep ice and placed an axe above him while removing a screw, his foot slipped, his weight came on to the tether attaching him to his axe before the rope caught him and the bottom of the axe snapped off and the axe bounced down to the ground. We abandoned the climb and abbed off. Fortunately managed to find his axe in the scree. The tether was clipped to the clip in point at the base of the pommel, the tether was a partially bungee one designed for the job and he was on two half ropes. After fitting a replacement we got some flat tape and fixed it through the shaft with a tape knot, from then on only used this tape to attach the tethers. I don't think the built in clip in point is much use for anything. The need to make the grip adjustable means it has two separate pieces of metal encased in plastic, to my mind this creates a likely fracture point.

Stay safe and happy climbing 

In reply to maninblack:

I doubt this could be considered as a design fault as tethers are intended to catch a dropped tool not a falling body. Nevertheless, it would be an improvement if the clip points were stronger and your tape bodge is good. Tape knots can work loose, consider girth hitching a shortish sewn loop instead. 

In reply to maninblack:

I think this is a fairly well known issue with the new Nomics, it's been discussed on here before.

Beats me why they can't make one that works.

In reply to DaveHK:

Agreed it surprises me that petzl/Lyon didn't suffer more reputation al damage from the wobbly head issue.

To my mind petzl have 2 flagship products, the nomic and the gri gri. Lucky for us they seem to have taken more care over the latter. 

In reply to maninblack:

As Dave says. Was a a big issue on the net when they were first released. The pommel will break at about 150daN load. As PW says tethers aren't designed to hold a fall and themselves will break at 2kn anyway, see: https://www.petzl.com/sfc/servlet.shepherd/version/download/0681r000006zWy9...

Some info here: https://www.thealpinestart.com/2019/01/22/tech-tip-impact-forces-during-a-f...

In reply to maninblack:

Section on this in the review

https://www.ukclimbing.com/gear/snow+ice/ice_axes/petzl_nomic_and_ergonomic...

and chat in the associated forum thread

https://www.ukhillwalking.com/forums/gear/petzl_nomic_and_ergonomic-701911?

I think there were several other articles about it as well.

In reply to maninblack:

That's why I love how DMM show their axes being used as part of a belay, clip in points at the top and bottom. You know it's bombproof

In reply to DaveHK:

Weight and adjustability I’d guess? Personally I’d not want to be taking a fall and it being held by my axe tether anyway, even if the clip in point is solid. Better the tether fails than the placement, with the latter cannoning an axe towards you somewhere you really don’t want (speaking as a male, and for absolute clarity, the dick). 

In reply to purplemonkeyelephant:

Unfortunately they are significantly less nice to climb with IMO. Switches are ok axes but not a patch on Nomics in terms of feel. You pays your money...

In reply to ianstevens:

I'd like to think they had some sound reasons for the design choices they made but I've never heard them.

The head issue was a straight design fault and making a solid head fixing would not have affected the weight in a meaningful way. I've fixed the wobble in mine and don't notice any difference in the swing. The extra rivet weighs about 10g.

The attachment point on the old pommels didn't fail in this way so it's obviously possible to have a robust adjustable pommel too.

We wouldn't be discussing this if they weren't lovely to climb with or if there were a few, readily available alternatives that came close.

In reply to Presley Whippet:

I think it is a design fault because it puts the failure point in the wrong place. The failure point should be the leash or the attachment to the axe not the axe itself as that renders it unuseable or at least very difficult to use.

Edit: The problem is partly that there isn't a 'system' as such, just a whole load of different bits from different manufacturers, axe, leash, clip etc.

In reply to maninblack:

More worrying is the number of people who clip the pommel eye when using the axe as part of the belay. Whilst there are strong ways to use your axe, this is certainly not one of them! 

In reply to DaveHK:

Yeah, fair point but not as negligent as the head issue.

In 30 years of winter climbing, axes have never been perfect, they have always been tuned by users. I am beginning to wonder whether this lies with the tinkering nature of winter climbers rather than manufacturers.

Have you tried the casdin x dreams? I replaced my wobbly headers with these and I am impressed. There are bits that I would tinker with but see above. 

In reply to Presley Whippet:

I haven't used them but they're top of the list for when my much bodged Nomics finally die.

In reply to DaveHK:

Yes, this. Nomics climb and swing much better. Why Petzl can't fix the wobbly head, have a sensible bottom of the handle solution and basically then have the perfect axe is beyond me.

In reply to LakesWinter:

I'm not convinced by the plastic insert. There seem to be some encouraging reports but it's still too early.

In reply to DaveHK:

Honestly, do you need to unless you work in the Petal development, design and/or marketing department? They provide instructions on how to use the tool, and it is very clear that the pommel is not load rated and shouldn't be used as such. If you really want a load rated pommel, as per this thread, there are other options on the market. 

The heads were terrible. Not defending or even attempting to justify those. 

The pommels on the nomics have never been rated for the use the OP describes as far as I can recall, on any version. 

Honestly I don't get the need for a rated pommel. In a belay I'd much prefer to clip into the head (better angles, generally speaking), and if I was to fall I'd want either my leash or pommel to fail before the placement, so, as described above, my axe doesn't come hurtling towards me*. I'd be very unsurprised for a placement not to rip when shock loaded vs being one of three or four with static load. Clearly people here desire them, so perhaps I'm in the minority!

*caveat to this is that I used leashes approximately twice before deciding that they were too much faff, and climb leashless whenever I do winter bits

In reply to ianstevens:

You've missed my point, the pommel doesn't need to be rated. If the leash is going to to be attached to it the pommel just needs to be stronger than at least one other element in the leash system so that what fails is the leash or clip. A failed leash or clip can be bodged or done without for the rest of the climb, a burst pommel much less so.

Previous Nomic designs were like this or could be made like this. Looking at the new ones, the OPs solution of tape through the handle probably does the same job but I can't say for sure having not had a good look at them.

It's also very clear that the pommel is the intended attachment point for a leash system and as we can see that can lead to failure of the pommel. Obviously that's going to depend on the leash system as well as the axe but a piece of kit that fails under normal use isn't up to scratch.

It's frustrating that a piece of equipment that is so nice to use otherwise has gone through several flawed versions.

In reply to DaveHK:

The attachment for the old pommels is the same as the new ones. Only they never had a spike you could clip into like the new ones do. There was however a cord hole you could thread for adding leashes that is no longer on the new axes.

In reply to GarethSL:

Sorry if I wasn't clear, I was referring to the attachment point for the leash rather than the way the pommel is attached to the handle. The former has changed, the latter hasn't.

I take it the wee hole you could thread has gone?

In reply to DaveHK:

Yes its gone, but do agree its an oversight that the pommel breaks below the rating for leashes. As this leads to situations like that in the OP. 

I did however just discover that the full strength hole in the handle of the new Nomics still takes a number of carabiners, so there is that if anyone is looking for a quick full-strength attachment (without having to thread a sling). As per Luca C's point above.

In reply to DaveHK:

I spoke to a guy at Lyon after my older gen nomics started wobbling and his explanation was that if they made the head stronger it would make it heavier and change the swing and no one would buy them anymore. Thought that was a sort of funny justification and he might’ve been joking but was in fact being serious. 

Mine lasted eight routes before wobbling, not fit for purpose if you ask me and the new ones even less so. 

In reply to maninblack:

I put my 5mm cord through the handle and I have found no problems. A plus actually is when daggering the tethers are out of the way.

In reply to Nathan Adam:

That's just cobblers. A stronger head might have added a few grams but no one would have noticed.

One of the reasons the 2nd gen ones failed so quickly was that the top of the shaft was machined into a bevel with the top of the shaft narrowing to about 1mm. That made it vulerable to dents and any damage at all in that area lead to play in the head with the single rivet acting as a pivot point. The movement of the head then progressively crushed the top of the shaft allowing more play to develop. 1st generation ones had a broader cross section at the top of the shaft so were far less likely to fail in this way. Thinking about it, the plastic insert may work by giving a larger surface for the head of the axe to sit on and protecting the top of the shaft from damage.

In reply to DaveHK:

The reason the head came loose was purely down to the thickness of the shaft wall. On the first gen it's is thicker and you can find examples with distinct bulges in the wall at the front bottom of the head.

If the material was thicker it wouldn't flex so much and cause wear on the 12 point interference fit of the head. All that talk of two rivets v one rivet / the champher at the top are minor or irrelevant.

Glueing the head back on increases the contact between the head and the shaft and stops the flex around the head preventing the interference fit from failing. 

In reply to DaveHK:

I tend to agree. My OP wasn't to complain that the tether attachment wasn't fully rated, simply that it is pretty obvious people will clip it, accidentally fall on it and it will break. It shouldn't be too difficult to make it stronger than the tethers, a broken tether is likely to be less of an issue than a broken pommel.

My own 2nd gen Nomics have been threaded with flat tape for several years and I hardly notice them, never had any knot slippage with my tape knots, but then I did bounce my lardy ass on them in the garage before taking them out for real!

As for the wobbly head issue. I fixed mine by using a metal appropriate resin, a bigger stainless fixing instead of the piddling original rivet and a second smaller stainless fixing lower down to reduce any pivoting action. Been super solid ever since.

Live long and prosper.

(without broken pommels or wobbly heads) 

In reply to maninblack:

So if I try to use and iPhone 13 Pro Max as a hammer and it obliviously breaks, Apple needs to make them more rugged?

Howabout, people read the instructions (like they really should on PPE and such safety related stuff... which while not PPE an icetool certainly is)...  and understand what they read.

I recall the Petzl instruction were pretty clear on how fragile the clip-in point is. Now compare that to many modern mouchettes and it is evident that the tethers are more robust... Then you need to make the decission, eihter clip is and rick breaking it... or rig something that will break before the clip-in point (say a ziptie). Or do some other tweaks (a'la what LucaC has adviced and don't clip anything on the "tether" point).

That being said, Petzl has made a lot of wrong decisions with their icetools. But the tether point is at least one that they clearly mark out in their instructions (so on the current models, it is 1000% user error). The wobbly head, that is a design flaw (and not mentioned in the instruction pamphlet). 

In reply to HeMa:

That's a really poor analogy.

People don't normally use an iPhone as a hammer so it doesn't need to be rugged enough to deal with it. People do normally clip leashes to the spike of their axe so it does need to be rugged enough to deal with it.

Apple don't tell people to use their iPhones as a hammer so it doesn't need to be rugged enough to deal with it. Petzl do tell people to clip leashes to the spike so it does need to be rugged enough to deal with it.

In reply to DaveHK:

Not really. iPhones and Most other phones look like bricks. And bricks make great impromptu hammers (plus I really did use the original Nokia 2110 as a hammer).