Basejumper.com - archive

 
Re: LD4 UL/UUL & CXUL

Can anyone comment on ABX Harnesses please?


Not so long ago there were discussions pertaining to junctions peeling and so forth. I think we've moved on from there.

They look and sound amazing and I would like my next Alpine Rig to incoroporate an ABX harness but...?

We had an LD4 in a course here recently, and I found it very impressive.

I haven't seen any downside to the ABX harness yet. The only thing I can theorize is that there may be some long term wear issues, but in (new) use it doesn't appear to have any real problems.

Between the LD4 and the CXUL, I think it's going to come down to personal preferences, really.

 

I believe the original idea behind this system was a somewhat controversial anti-twist technology originating in the Paragliding world however my real interest is in the weight saving aspect of these harnesses as a function of using Dyneema and other modern materials, configurations and build. Thus I wonder if it’s possible to have the extremely light weight Dyneema harness matched with an extremely light weight, say VX21 container but without the controversial anti-twist technology.

Paragliders rely on weight shifting as a piloting tool. Damping out the weight shifting of a pilot in that environment seems very counterproductive to me. Doing so in the BASE environment has a lot more potential positives.

You can get the UUL version, but it's not durable as a normal one.
I think he can also mix a more durable exterior fabric with the very ligth weigth fabric inside.
The controversial is just about it's effect or not, the way it's build is not.
I think the CRUX UL is also using Dyneema cord for the back even if it's not positionned the same.

For whose you have seen both side by side which one the longest ?
I think the CRUX UL is longer than a normal CRUX but I'm not sure.

 
Antoine, do you happen to know if the Squirrel CXUL uses an ABX anti-twist configuration or is it only the Adrenalin LD?

I've just sent the same question to Squirrel.

The junction peeling issue was not related to the ABX harness, it was a separate issue about harness construction.

I have a Hybrid 3 ABX and really like it. I feel like I have felt the ABX system engaging on a handful of jumps out of perhaps 100 I have put on it. I haven't been getting major off headings or line twists for quite a while though so it's hard to tell.

ABX is Adrenalin only, I remember Squirrel putting a snide comment on their website seemingly referring to it so they will probably be quite critical of the idea when they respond to you.

I don't think SQ are using any kind of X system on their Crux UL, just the Dyneema cords to replace the webbing in the back.
They create their NBS (that they erased) to criticize the ABX. Using it now would be a bit of a shame.

Have you noticed that the Crux UL is not Smart where other's harness are ?

I really liked the aesthetics and design of the Jackdaw. It's a shame that this harness/container was discontinued and could not evolve over several iterations.

Not every jumper who has ABX likes it. That includes some very current and very experienced jumpers. Have you jumped it? What is your opinion?

 
Yes, thanks, I’m getting it now.

ABX tech is not synonymous with Dyneema harnesses. Squirrel CXUL is a Dyneema based harness sans ABX whereas the LD harness utilises Dyneema webbing and incorporates ABX tech.

 

You've got me there so I suppose that lack of "smarts" applies to me as well.

Smart harness? What could that be?

"Like it" means what exactly ?
It has an effect ? On what ?

No I did not jump it, most of the people I know who have one think that they do not feel different than other harnesses.
I think that if you are straight in a good opening position it should do nothing.

Antoine, I've just re read your question.

If you are asking if I have noticed any feedback from the ABX harness when jumping the answer is no, I haven't got one.

I mistakenly thought all new Dyneema Harnesses incorporated ABX when in fact they don't so my original question about ABX was incorrect. I am really enquiring about Ultra Lite rigs utilising Dyneema and other Ultra Lite materials as I want one for travelling and hiking

Smart is what they are calling the stitching for their normal harness. But a 1 inch webbing is probably not large enough to put these CAD designed bartacks so they put classic straight bartacks on the Crux UL.
If I resume the CruxUL is not "smart" and less strong than the others (that does not mean not enough strong).


It's just funny to me to read that kind of marketing stuff.
Like the ABX of AdrenalinBASE which can theoretically do something but for 95% of the jumps is doing nothing because the jumper is in the right position, for the 5% left it's impossible to make good statistics, and for 100% it is a feeling that can be real or not.

My apologies for not being able to communicate in French. My post was not meant to be antagonistic, simply curious. I meant that some experienced slider down jumpers who have ABX do not appreciate it. As it was explained to me, ABX can reinforce an unstable exit position, which is undesirable particularly on slider down jumps. This is why I wanted to know your opinion on ABX.

So these people have noticed an effect of the ABX, or just are guessing that there could be one ?
That would be interesting to know.

For me in SD most of the tension at the opening is put on the front part of the harness, I'm not sure how the ABX would have an effect before the body's balancing under an inflated canopy, when the position in the harness have not so much effect anymore on the opening.

This is all theory of course.

All the Ultralight and UUL harnesses from AdrenalinBASE are with ABX, probably mostly for the same reason as the CruxUL has Dyneema ropes in the back: weight.

What's the best between Crux UL, Hybrid UL or LD4 UL ?
Technically they are all harnesses that will work.
I prefer longer containers and I think LD4 is a bit longer than the others.
I did not have seen so much CruxUL this year and I did not have time to look carefully to it.
I packed a lot normal Crux and I don't like it so much, it take a lot to make it look just good, when it's easy to have the LD4 looks very good.

What I like on the SQ harness is also a weakness, it's the legstrap closing that you can fully open. For gearing up it's very nice, the con is that because the webbing is one side Dyneema if it's in the wrong side it will slide until the stop at the opening, and its not fun.
Also even in the good side if it's not in very good tension this webbing has the tendance to slide into this buckles, and that can happend during the access to the exit.
So legstraps's tension is a thing to add to the check list if there is a walking access to the exit.
I'm not a user of these harness but this slow sliding has been reported to me by some users, and if you manipulate it you will see it.

AdrenalinBASE puts a full polyester webbing for the legstraps closing to avoid that problem, but they do not allow the full opening.

 

 

Alygator,

if you didn't care either way about ABX, which harness container would you choose: LD4 or CXUL?

 

First off thank you for your contribution to this discussion.

Even if you are in some way associated to or an affiliate of Adrenalin is it not permitted to give a biased opinion with a declaration of your potential non-objectivity or will that bring a shit storm down?

Antoine mentioned that in his opinion one of them (LD4 vs CXUL) packs cleaner than the other; one of them might suffer hardware slippage; one of them does not have open leg buckles which you corrected. To me these are really interesting observations and comments.

Of course it is considered bad-form to publicly bash someone else’s product but that is not necessary when highlighting the features & benefits of your own product but I’m sure you know all this.

If you think that it’s not appropriate to do any of this on this forum might you send me a pm perhaps?

 

OK understood but could you just mention why you prefer LD4?