• The SH Membership has gone live. Only SH Members have access to post in the classifieds. All members can view the classifieds. Starting in 2020 only SH Members will be admitted to the annual hunting contest. Current members will need to follow these steps to upgrade: 1. Click on your username 2. Click on Account upgrades 3. Choose SH Member and purchase.
  • We've been working hard the past few weeks to come up with some big changes to our vendor policies to meet the changing needs of our community. Please see the new vendor rules here: Vendor Access Area Rules

Best friction hitch for climbing and set?

This is another reason I prefer mechanical or friction. Both Brocky and John know what they are talking about and they even get it wrong. Me trying to do wraps, twists, and breaking a knot after I have loaded in the dark, NOPE. I would rather lock in a device and slide on down. "I am BATMAN".
 
Loopwing said:
This is another reason I prefer mechanical or friction. Both Brocky and John know what they are talking about and they even get it wrong. Me trying to do wraps, twists, and breaking a knot after I have loaded in the dark, NOPE. I would rather lock in a device and slide on down. "I am BATMAN".
Click to expand...
No, “they” don’t!!!
This is the earliest reference I’ve seen. An article in Arbor Age from 2005. At first the hitch was called after the inventor, Martin. He decided later to name it from the state in Mexico where he was born. The articles author, Mark Adams got the tying instructions directly from Martin.
F52018B8-2C9C-460D-92E6-DA2E9E23E2A4.png
 
Brocky said:
No, “they” don’t!!!
This is the earliest reference I’ve seen. An article in Arbor Age from 2005. At first the hitch was called after the inventor, Martin. He decided later to name it from the state in Mexico where he was born. The articles author, Mark Adams got the tying instructions directly from Martin.
View attachment 83095
Click to expand...
Brocky. Thx. These are two bookmarks i made a few years ago that you might want for your own collection. The reason my video shows it tied 180 degrees opposite to most is just because the rope comes out the back rather than the front and in a Texas Style SRT or Stationary doubled rope climb, that's the direction it needs to Bend as it heads into my footloop next. I used to use the conventional orientation but when i did side by side tests on a JRB system, with the 2 variations on the 2 sides, i found this to be better performing in terms of moveability. Cheers.

History of a Knot

History of a Knot
forum.igkt.net

Confirming the origin of the "Michoacan"

Mark Adams is familiar with the scenario I will explain: tying the "Michoacán in a closed hitch versus the knot I came up with, and have used for the past 15 years, in an open hitch. Mark in fact introduced the argument about the closed version of the knot being called "the Martin", and later...
www.treebuzz.com


Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
Loopwing said:
This is another reason I prefer mechanical or friction. Both Brocky and John know what they are talking about and they even get it wrong. Me trying to do wraps, twists, and breaking a knot after I have loaded in the dark, NOPE. I would rather lock in a device and slide on down. "I am BATMAN".
Click to expand...
Brocky is correct. I wouldn’t say “they” got it wrong because one of them put out a video teaching people to incorrectly tie the hitch. On The Michoacán the top wrap comes down goes over the bottom leg, behind the main line and back up the single wrap. The first knot John tied in the video, the top came down behind the bottom leg, around the rope and back up, which is not a Michoacán no more than the taunt line is the Blake’s hitch…

edit: I ran the hitch in reverse orientation like John did and it makes the hitch cross the correct side of the leg but the exiting ends are completely backwards of the rope when tied correctly on the front side opposite orientation. So it is a Michoacán but it’s not a Michoacán if that makes sense. I don’t know how much difference it would make it bite or release reliability. So I am not sure what to think. Technically Brocky is right but I don’t know if the difference is as big as I thought it was when I first watched the video
 
Last edited:
John RB said:
Brocky. Thx. These are two bookmarks i made a few years ago that you might want for your own collection. The reason my video shows it tied 180 degrees opposite to most is just because the rope comes out the back rather than the front and in a Texas Style SRT or Stationary doubled rope climb, that's the direction it needs to Bend as it heads into my footloop next. I used to use the conventional orientation but when i did side by side tests on a JRB system, with the 2 variations on the 2 sides, i found this to be better performing in terms of moveability. Cheers.

History of a Knot

History of a Knot
forum.igkt.net

Confirming the origin of the "Michoacan"

Mark Adams is familiar with the scenario I will explain: tying the "Michoacán in a closed hitch versus the knot I came up with, and have used for the past 15 years, in an open hitch. Mark in fact introduced the argument about the closed version of the knot being called "the Martin", and later...
www.treebuzz.com


Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Why bookmark another forum page with a climber begging guys (with zero physical evidence) to believe he created the Michoacán? Even in the photos he provided, it wasn’t tied under the bottom leg like in your video. I can understand turning the wrap directions opposite of each other on each of your climbing legs, but the top going over the bottom leg before going behind the rope is what makes that hitch, that hitch. Kind of like bringing your exiting wraps to the bottom instead of exiting the middle wraps is what makes a schwabisch a schwabisch and not a standard English prusik.

I’m editing this post to apologize to you John. And notice I am leaving it up not deleting it ;) so people can read my confusion. Your hitch looked and was tied completely reverse orientation of anything I’ve been taught, but when trying it your way, it still crosses the leg on the correct side although the exiting orientation is completely backwards. It’s a Michoacan but not a Michoacán
 
Last edited:
GeoFish said:
Wow, this is the war of the Knotts. If I knew what the heck you guys were talking about, I would grab some pop corn, LOL.
Click to expand...
It’s the exiting legs. By tying in reverse orientation John has both legs of his “meech” exiting on the same side (front side) of the climbing rope, where as a true Michoacán is like a Blake’s with the bottom leg exiting the top of the rope with the top leg wedged behind in and exiting opposite off the rear side of the climbing rope.
correct orientation:
26A541D8-6E8F-4DEF-A2EB-9F6DE5223E99.jpeg
and John’s orientation:
49FAB822-88F0-4E5D-9063-839AA2E67B29.jpeg
 
Responding to a few different points made above.
1. I only passed along those links because they have some historical information that I felt was worth keeping and anyone else is welcome to.
2. The original post is a question about a friction hitch. If anyone prefers mechanicals, thats fine, and if we want to discuss the advantages and disadvantages, that would be fun, but we probably shouldn't do it in this post.
3. As I viewed em, the internal structure of the meech in my video is the same as the other vids. Yes, the orientation is 180 degrees rotated, and that allows me to keep the carabiner on the opposite side of the rope strand and advance it easier. I don't consider that a different knot. I consider it a different loading profile, and as I had tied and tested em both, i found this advantageous, easier to move after flowing into a footloop. I opened the video correctly: this is how I tie it. Others tie it differently. I don't believe it deserves a different name for example. It's still a meech.

Ps, There's no need to apologize brother, we're all here for the same reason, to share what we know and learn what we don't.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
John RB said:
Responding to a few different points made above.
1. I only passed along those links because they have some historical information that I felt was worth keeping and anyone else is welcome to.
2. The original post is a question about a friction hitch. If anyone prefers mechanicals, thats fine, and if we want to discuss the advantages and disadvantages, that would be fun, but we probably shouldn't do it in this post.
3. As I viewed em, the internal structure of the meech in my video is the same as the other vids. Yes, the orientation is 180 degrees rotated, and that allows me to keep the carabiner on the opposite side of the rope strand and advance it easier. I don't consider that a different knot. I consider it a different loading profile, and as I had tied and tested em both, i found this advantageous, easier to move after flowing into a footloop. I opened the video correctly: this is how I tie it. Others tie it differently. I don't believe it deserves a different name for example. It's still a meech.

Ps, There's no need to apologize brother, we're all here for the same reason, to share what we know and learn what we don't.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I can see the way you tied it as being easier to advance and possibly even break under load but the loading profile seems as it would make the bite even less reliable. Is that perhaps why you had to add a 5th or 6th wrap? In essence it’s pulling from the same directional orientation. If I do that with a Blake’s hitch, it pulls the open leg back into the hitch, far more severely than standard orientation Blake’s. I’d assume the “meech” would function somewhat similarly so your bottom wrap and second leg would create additional tension on the top wraps but once released, would aid in sliding the hitch. So similar in nature but somewhat different in functionality
 
Fl Canopy Stalker said:
I can see the way you tied it as being easier to advance and possibly even break under load but the loading profile seems as it would make the bite even less reliable. Is that perhaps why you had to add a 5th or 6th wrap? In essence it’s pulling from the same directional orientation. If I do that with a Blake’s hitch, it pulls the open leg back into the hitch, far more severely than standard orientation Blake’s. I’d assume the “meech” would function somewhat similarly so your bottom wrap and second leg would create additional tension on the top wraps but once released, would aid in sliding the hitch. So similar in nature but somewhat different in functionality
Click to expand...
It's been a couple years since i did my tests on this, and going by memory, i recall finding no difference in the holding characteristics nor the breakability of the hitch based on which way the the rope exits at the bottom. It just flows a little better this way on an actual climb. I do recall when i soaked a rope and cord in a bucket of water overnight and then tried climbing with 6mm cord on 8mm rope, I got some minor slipping and adding a wrap mitigated that. I had not seen anyone tie a meech with that many wraps before but felt it was relevant to encourage knot Tyers to recognize that potential "tuning" characteristic. I believe it's true of basically any helical friction hitch: if it slips, try adding a wrap. Error on the side of caution.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
John RB said:
So no, i didn't film anything. That would require more planning and i would want to do a good job of it. One of the problems doing this kind of testing is the number of variables in play. I intentionally chose one rope / cord combination so i could compare apples to apples. But i have at least 10 different cords and 10 different ropes and so if we start to vary things, it gets big fast. We also can typically vary the number of wraps around the rope and increase the hold with the number of wraps. The amount of hold is typically proportional to the amount of surface area contact between the cord and rope and so its normal that small diameters like 6mm cord on 8mm rope require more wraps to get an equivalent hold as 8 on 11, for example. And even if it seems to hold, when it's soaking wet, it might creep. Bottom line is that every combination of rope, cord and load needs to be tested by the person using it.

As for the question about mechanicals, no, I am not anti-mechanical. But i wouldn't use one without a backup friction hitch. And i consider it a rule that we have to be tied in for entire climb. I would never put in a mechanical device when I am already in the tree for example. It's droppable. Anything we need can't be droppable. It's gotta be put on before we start the climb. It's been a long time since i used climbing sticks, but i hated the process of managing my tie in as I climbed and a metal device just made it harder.

I believe we can trust our saddle, the tree and our rope, but everything else should be redundant, if possible. Anything that moves should have a backup. 95% of my hunting climbing is on my stationary doubled rope climbing system, and if a friction hitch were to fail completely or my adjustable bridge failed completely, or a carabiner somehow opened up, i won't fall, and I can recover without assistance, and can do it with nothing under my feet. I am not trying to sell anyone on my climbing method. But i do want ya to borrow the idea that you have the same level of resilience in your own system. Bottom line is that if someone wanted a basic recommendation for a friction Hitch, I would give them the Michoacán.

Once that is mastered, I would consider making it automatically tended by putting a Buffalo Hitch under it.

After that, play with other hitches including JRB Ascender.

Buy a 25 foot length of 7mm Sterling cord and cut a 6ft length and do some experiments. It's the best investment you can make. RockNArbor sells it and they gave us all 10% off with the JRB10 coupon code.


Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
When you were tying the hitch you were looking at the front of a Michoacán, when you brought the eyes to the back to clip to the footloop, you were looking at the back of a 180 Michoacán.
The side it is loaded on does make a difference
 
Brocky said:
When you were tying the hitch you were looking at the front of a Michoacán, when you brought the eyes to the back to clip to the footloop, you were looking at the back of a 180 Michoacán.
The side it is loaded on does make a difference
Click to expand...
With appreciation for your experience and perspective, I could have better explained why I reversed the position, and why I find it superior for climbing. It helped enable the Double Michoacán and this is exactly how i tied it there as well. Cheers.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 
Love me some knot tying videos! I’m gonna put that Knut on my tether and get rid of the mechanical. I’ve been using the Michoacán for my back up/brake when rappelling. I’m just a student here, but to the OP, I don’t own any sewn eye cords. It took me a while to have a Eureka moment, but I found the hunters bend. I close my ends using the hunters bend and love it! @John RB has a great video on that one.
 
The Michocan is a Blake's hitch with eyes. Keeping the legs equal lengths insures proper function where with some other hitches(VT etc) you can get away with some asymmetrical tying . I am not advocating not to tie,set and dress whatever you tie just pointing out some subtle differences.
 
Oh yeah, I also meant to say to the OP That many of us(probably most) don’t tie knots or hitches in the field. Mine stay on my rappel rope and my tether. I simply slide my hitch up the rope while I’m winding it back……checking it along the way. I am gonna stay with a separate tether so a few feet at the end of my rappel rope gets used as a lineman’s belt when going around limbs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top