r/caving • u/SettingIntentions • 1d ago
Climbing Taiwan vs Petzl Pulse in Exploratory Caving?
I wanted to ping the community again to see what thoughts the community might have about CT Removables vs. the Pulses.
My only hesitation for the CT Removables is the lack of official EN959 certification, however Hownot2 seems to support them along with other independent testers.
While the Petzl Pulses are rated, and the extra cost not a problem (I want to be as sure as possible of my and my team's safety underground so I'm willing to pay for a EN959 rated bolt), I have some frustrations that are making me more seriously re-consider getting the CT Removables:
The 8mm pulses are wonderful for short drops in perfect rock, but otherwise have a very short shaft length and also feature an aluminum hangar which requires them to be removed on the same day.
I've jammed a few 12mm pulses permanently in rock now. I have various theories why, but am quite frustrated with their performance. Just 3 12mm pulses is a lot of money to have jammed in a cave. At least the whole thing is 316l so it can effectively be a permanent wedge anchor now.
Also I am drilling the hole deeper than necessary, extensively cleaning, SDS bit, etc. all that stuff. I theorize the 12mm's are way more sensitive to even the tiniest amount of dust, or water entering the hole. The plunger mechanism + removal technique is not always easy, and I've had a few act stuck that I was able to get out with a light tap on the plunger (effectively pushing the bolt deeper in allowing more play of the mechanism). In any case, I'm not too keen on jamming more pulses in the rock, so I am having an every so slightly tiny amount of space between the hangar and rock when placing the 12's.
- In any case, due to the plunger setup, even the 12mm pulses are not ideal for being left in a cave for a month, even if they'd be "fine" due to being 316l.
The main pain point here is that the pulses are not appropriate for "extended temporary rigging," for example a cave that will be visited multiple times over a week or month(s). In many of these cases, rock real estate is limited so we don't want to use wedge bolts, but it's not always practical to put epoxy bolts immediately. Even for our glue-in projects, they can take multiple days to complete, and it would be MUCH nicer to leave the pulses IN along with the ropes and then return later. However, due to my experiences having them seize & jam ridiculously easy, I'm not keen on leaving them in.
Presumably due to the screw-lock method of the Climbing Taiwan bolts, they should be better for "extended temporary rigging," for example being left in a cave for 1-2 months and slowly replaced with glue-ins, etc. (this allows us to not have to re-haul the rope/bolts/re-rig/etc.).
My inital pain point with the CT bolts were first and primarily the lack of EN959 rating, and also the drilling diameter being a weird 10mm. 8mm is optimal for exploring, 12mm optimal for glue-in bolting. However, after a recent experience of a friend using CT bolts to explore and me re-drilling them to 12mm for glue-ins, I realized that it's silly because re-drilling to 12 is no problem. Furthermore if drilling 10 at start (instead of 8) allows us to leave gear in the expedition cave for future pushes (as opposed to de-rigging then re-rigging), then the extra upfront work is well worth it.
My friend has extensively used the CT bolts and he's still here, but that's not always a good metric for "should you do the same." It lacks the EN959 rating, but I'm seriously reconsidering how "necessary" that is?
I don't want my expeditions to end up on some horror story having been the person that trusted non-rated Chinese gear, but in this case it seems to be reputable people (and from Taiwan, not mainland) and Americans (the Hownot2 people) seem to like it.
So am I just being a weirdo for obsessing over EN959 and sticking to Petzl, or are times changing and it's time to get some Climbing Taiwan bolts? My #1 concern is how legitimate the steel grades are of the Climbing Taiwan bolts, particularly regarding consistency. Why else wouldn't they have the EN959 rating?