• 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

Cutting sticks equals less height myth?

denots

denots

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2017
Messages
2,088
Location
Denham Springs, Louisiana
Okay guys so I proposed this question in somebody else's thread because he said he did not want to lose any climbing height by cutting his sticks. I didn't want to keep on in his thread so I thought I'd ask a question here to see what you guys think. I hear a lot of times guys talking about cutting sticks and how much height they're losing per stick and in their total climb. My question is this if you have two sets of climbing sticks factory-made let's say Hawk helium's and you cut this one set of sticks from the standard 30" down to 22", and you leave the other set of sticks stock. On both sets of sticks you're going to use some sort of aider to make up the difference between sticks so you can set them as high as you can possibly reach on the tree. You are also going to leave the connection point the same since there is no need in moving it. Which set can you climb higher with?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
 
denots said:
Okay guys so I proposed this question in somebody else's thread because he said he did not want to lose any climbing height by cutting his sticks. I didn't want to keep on in his thread so I thought I'd ask a question here to see what you guys think. I hear a lot of times guys talking about cutting sticks and how much height they're losing per stick and in their total climb. My question is this if you have two sets of climbing sticks factory-made let's say Hawk helium's and you cut this one set of sticks from the standard 30" down to 22", and you leave the other set of sticks stock. On both sets of sticks you're going to use some sort of aider to make up the difference between sticks so you can set them as high as you can possibly reach on the tree. You are also going to leave the connection point the same since there is no need in moving it. Which set can you climb higher with?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Zero difference. I can get the same height with any length stick with a six step aider. It all depends on what aider you use. The height is limited by your aider not your stick. I can get my first stick 9 feet high by temporarily using my second stick to place it that high. I then use a 6 step aider to climb off that first stick.

Height per stick is more dependent on the aider you use not the stick length. Look at wild edge steps. Height varies only with the aider you use.
A stick usually has a versa button or cam cleat about 9 inches from the top of the stick give or take an inch. That is your attachment point - so how high you can place your attachment point is your limiting height factor.

That is why we cut sticks down. It does not usually change how high we can climb.
 
I'd say the limiting factor is how high you can put the sticks. Seems it would be the same for stock sticks and cutoff sticks. You just have to use a longer aider in addition to be able to get into the cutoff stick.
 
I saw your reply about this and it really got me thinking. Especially after others kept referring to the same "myth" of a weight vs height tradeoff.

Your idea is remarkably simple and logical, yet so counterintuitive. Longer sticks must equal higher climbing heights, right? It seems not.

Another way to think of this is to look at the length of the stick not in terms of how high it reaches up the tree, but in terms of how low it reaches down below its attachment point (versa button for discussion purposes). You can have any amount of length/metal/weight below that button, but not above. Which is to say you can either have metal below that point or aiders.

Certainly there are tradeoffs between weight/bulk and stability/climbing ease when considering cutting sticks. There is not, however, a weight/height tradeoff.

Fascinating. Thank you @denots for expanding my mind.




Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
What if one is not interested in using aiders

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 
There are no absolutes here. Lots of personal preferences.

I'm short, have bad knees, and lack flexibility. I'm envious of you guys that can climb short sticks like a chimp but I like the short step spacing on the stock Heliums.

My Heliums will see less use this year as I'm going to use the Lone Wolf hand climber seat as a climbing platform (when possible). Much easier on my knees and lighter than sticks.
 
sureshotscott said:
There are no absolutes here. Lots of personal preferences
Click to expand...

You sir are correct. There are no absolutes as far as personal preferences go. I am merely saying that there is an absolute in the fact that if you cut your stick but your attachment point remains the same distance from the top of the stick, your climbing height is not sacrificed. The question is not to convince everybody to cut their sticks, but to simply point out the fact that by doing so you are not giving anything up except for weight, and increasing packability of your sticks. For those who choose to remain on full length sticks without the use of aiders, I completely support their decision. But for those saying they don't want to cut their sticks because they can't climb as high, I'm just saying that that is simply not true.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
 
There is no doubt with stick spacing being equal, the longer stick = higher, unless you compensate with added spacing. I compensated for cutting the 7.5" off each stick by going from 1 aider on the bottom stick, to a two step movable aider. Aiders are great but certainly not everyone wants to use them too. Truthfully I don't like using them beyond my first stick, the higher I go the more uncomfortable I get using them.

I did carry my stock heliums an entire season before cutting them down. I am also not a believer in needing to get much higher than 20 feet, like ever. Exception being if you are filming or otherwise fidget a lot, higher maybe lets you get away with more.
 
Steve said:
What if one is not interested in using aiders

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Now we're talkin. The point of the question was as much about blanket statements being made one way versus the other. I know for me when I was new to this site it could be very overwhelming at times. And I believe we make blanket statements sometimes without considering the effects of our words. So to say cutting a stick does not sacrifice your climbing height is incorrect. It doesn't if you use aiders. But it is equally false to say cutting a stick does sacrifice climbing height. In my opinion the real answer is climbing height is dictated by your ability to attach something to a tree. That becomes the highest point you can climb unless you add something over that attachment point. What is below that attachment point can be solid steel, aluminum, amsteel loops, or something of the sort. That is dictated by personal preference and what someone is, or is not willing to pack into the woods, and climb on. I just know I see guys say a lot that I don't want to cut my stick because it sacrifices climbing height. I believe climbing height is dictated more by your ability to make strides between sticks/ attachment point. Whether you use a aider to make that stride, or you use longer sticks is definitely a personal preference, but a shorter stick does not equal less climbing height.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
 
I like the kiss method

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 
Not to offend anyone but the kiss method is "keep it simple stupid"

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 
Steve said:
Not to offend anyone but the kiss method is "keep it simple stupid"

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I think the KISS method is whatever you practice with and find easy... then it is simple. We are all different with lots of variations in climbing methods. I like the challenges of all the different ideas.
 
It all evolves over time too. Like I said I was rocking full length heliums last year, but finding them clunky in the tree the way I climb in one trip, I cut them down.

There's constant evolution here from those that seek what works for their system. Then we get these fads that hit like a tidal wave. Right now people are caught up in the knaider thing. I have no doubt next year will bring a new fad.

Then on the other hand, the passersby often end up here asking questions about what is "best". I find those tough to answer. We are all so different and individualized here, it really is going to vary person to person. I've seen some stuff here that is flat out absurd to me, but I've given up questioning it because I don't know what in their journey led them down that path and maybe it works for them.
 
elk yinzer said:
It all evolves over time too. Like I said I was rocking full length heliums last year, but finding them clunky in the tree the way I climb in one trip, I cut them down.

There's constant evolution here from those that seek what works for their system. Then we get these fads that hit like a tidal wave. Right now people are caught up in the knaider thing. I have no doubt next year will bring a new fad.

Then on the other hand, the passersby often end up here asking questions about what is "best". I find those tough to answer. We are all so different and individualized here, it really is going to vary person to person. I've seen some stuff here that is flat out absurd to me, but I've given up questioning it because I don't know what in their journey led them down that path and maybe it works for them.
Click to expand...
True... The cool thing is innovators try new things. Most hunters do the same thing over and over . Saddlehunter's are innovative by nature.
 
No offense taken. I do believe simple is in the eye of the beholder. So while simple to some may be carrying longer and more sticks as not to use anything to span a larger gap between sticks I myself find it easier to carry less stuff in the woods and stay more lightweight. I really am not trying to cause an argument guys. But I know when I was first new to this site I immediately thought if you cut you're stick shorter, for every inch you cut it was an inch you couldn't climb. It took me a second to think about it and realize that my ability to climb to, or pass my attachment point really dictates my climbing height. The means by which I reach that attachment point is where it becomes personal.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
 
Without aiders longer sticks will get you higher. If you cut a foot off of 3 sticks, you loose 3 feet of height.

You loose a good amount of weight which can then be made up by using a lighter aider to gain that 3 foot plus back.
 
I'm not saying that aiders are not a viable option, they are just not for everyone, just like saddlehunting.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top