[ Top | 3/4" Coil Spring | 3/4" Wire Spring | #4 | Return to L.C. Ascenders ]
For some reason, there was sufficient demand from the "bigger is better" crowd to justify a Gibbs Ascender for 3/4-inch rope. This is the basic model.
[ Top | 3/4" | 3/4" Wire Spring | #4 | Return to L.C. Ascenders ]
The first spring-loaded 3/4-inch Gibbs ascenders used a coil spring.
[ Top | 3/4" | 3/4" Coil Spring | #4 | Return to L.C. Ascenders ]
Later spring-loaded 3/4-inch Gibbs ascenders used a wire spring.
[ Top | 3/4" | 3/4" Coil Spring | 3/4" Wire Spring | Return to L.C. Ascenders ]
The #4 Gibbs has dimples in the shell that provide more holding power. The cam is forged, and partially covered with goo, much like the #2SS is. I suspect the goo is similar, even though the #2SS goo is gray and the #4 goo is black. All of the goo comments I made for the #2SS apply to the #4 as well, but at least there is more logic for the #4, since it is obviously too big for any rational person to use as an ascender, so it must be designed for hauling systems.
Gibbs should decide whether they are making ascenders, fall arrestors or rope grabs. The attempt to meet all three needs with one device only compromises all functions. I also believe that something that is too big ends up being left behind. I leave these ascenders behind.
[ Top | 3/4" | 3/4" Coil Spring | 3/4" Wire Spring | #4 ]
T1LeverCam69.html/070616
©2007, Gary D. Storrick