Hubbry Logo
Nut (climbing)Nut (climbing)Main
Open search
Nut (climbing)
Community hub
Nut (climbing)
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Nut (climbing)
Nut (climbing)
Nut (climbing)
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Two sets of nuts with a removal tool between them

In rock climbing, a nut (or chock or chockstone or wire for the smallest versions) is a metal wedge threaded on a wire that climbers use for protection by wedging it into a crack in the rock. Quickdraws are clipped to the nut wire by the ascending climber and the rope threads through the quickdraw. Nuts come in a variety of sizes and styles, and several different brands are made by competing manufacturers. Most nuts are made of aluminum. Larger nuts may be threaded on Dyneema cord instead of wire, but this has become unusual.[1]

The very smallest nuts are known as micronuts and may be made of brass or other metal, and typically have their wires soldered into them, instead of looped through drilled holes. They are mostly used in aid climbing, and their value as protection, arresting a climber's fall, is marginal because of both their low breaking strength and their tiny surface area (the HB 0 measures about 4 x 7 x 2.5 mm) in contact with the rock, though this can be offset if several are placed at a time. Other names used include RPs (the brand name of the first commercially available micronuts) and brassies. They are available from several manufacturers in a variety of styles.

British climbers in the 1950s and 1960s were the first to use nuts as climbing protection. In addition to using pitons, they picked up machine nuts from the side of railway tracks, climbed with them in their pockets, and used them as artificial chocks. This developed to the point where they drilled the thread from the middle, threaded them with slings, and used them in cracks.

Nuts or chockstones are named after natural stones occasionally found wedged into cracks. Climbers eventually realized they could insert their own found pebble into a suitable crack. In an article called "Artificial Aids in Mountaineering" dated Oct-Dec 1956, G Sutton wrote about jammed knots for direct aid. He also compared the use of slings, chocks (rocks) and jammed knots to artificial climbing (aid climbing) and that "there should be no illusion that the use of a chockstone is in any way more admirable than that of a piton."

Climbing nut in use

By 1967 Royal Robbins saw the need for clean climbing and put up Nutcracker, an all nut protected 6 pitch climb, on the Manure Pile (Ranger Rock), Yosemite. In 1972, when clean climbing became an issue in the US, Yvon Chouinard began manufacturing chocks made specifically for rock climbing, with the familiar wedge shape still in use today. With Tom Frost, Chouinard invented a larger, six-sided nut called a Hexentric or hex. Prominent climbers like Henry Barber and John Stannard helped popularize the use of nuts, especially after it was discovered that a nut was lighter and easier to place and remove while climbing, as well as being at least as secure as a well-placed piton, and less damaging to the rock.

Nuts are available in different shapes to help the climber find the best fit for a given crack. Curved nuts have a concave face on one side and a convex face on the other. Larger nuts can be placed in either of two aspects (hexes in three aspects) to suit different-width cracks, with either the main faces or the sides in contact with the rock.

Nuts may be generically referred to as wires or stoppers, though "Stopper" is a brand name of a nut made by Black Diamond Equipment.

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Nut (climbing)

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A nut, also known as a chock or stopper, is a passive device used in , consisting of a tapered metal attached to a wire cable with a loop for clipping . It functions by being wedged into a or tapering crack in the rock, where downward force from a fall causes it to bind securely without any moving parts. The origins of nuts trace back to the in Britain, where climbers like Morley Wood experimented with natural stones wedged into cracks and looped with cord as rudimentary protection. By the 1950s, climbers in , , began repurposing discarded steel machine nuts from the nearby railway, filing their edges and attaching slings to create more reliable artificial chocks. This shift was driven by a desire to avoid the rock damage caused by pitons, which had been the dominant protection method since the 1930s. The first commercial climbing nuts emerged in the early 1960s, with John Brailsford in , , producing the " in 1961, followed by the innovative "Moac" (Master of All Cracks) in 1962, which featured a curved design for better placement. In the United States, popularized nuts through his 1967 ascent of in , a route climbed entirely with British-style nuts, advocating for "" to preserve rock features. This led to widespread adoption in the 1970s, with refinements like offset shapes for flared cracks, micro-nuts such as the RP series introduced by Roland Pauligk in 1975 for thin placements, and larger hexentrics for wider cracks. Nuts are categorized by size and shape, typically ranging from micro-nuts (sizes 1-6, often brass or copper for body-weight holds in ) to standard sets (sizes 1-13, aluminum for lead in narrow- to medium-width cracks). They excel in tapering or irregular constrictions where active devices like cams may fail, offering advantages in weight (as light as 10 grams per piece), affordability (under $10 each), and longevity (up to five years with moderate use). However, they require precise placement to avoid walking or pulling out under lateral force, and are less versatile in parallel-sided cracks compared to cams. Today, nuts remain essential in traditional (trad) , alpine routes, and big wall ascents, often racked in sets of 10-20 for redundancy, and are cleaned with a nut tool after use to minimize environmental impact. Their development revolutionized ethics, enabling damage-free ascents of routes like Half Dome's Northwest Face in 1973 and fostering the growth of standards up to 5.12 and beyond.

History

Early Development

The origins of nut-like protection in climbing trace back to the in Britain, where climbers improvised with natural materials to create rudimentary chocks. British climbers began carrying small pebbles or stones in their pockets, inserting them into cracks and securing them with cord slings for basic against falls. This method was notably pioneered by Morley Wood during the 1926 ascent of Pigott's Climb on Clogwyn Du’r Arddu in , , where he deliberately placed stones as chocks to enhance safety on the challenging rhyolite terrain. By the mid-1950s, British climbers in shifted toward more reliable artificial alternatives, adopting hexagonal steel machine nuts sourced from discarded railroad tracks or factory scraps, often along the near Clogwyn Du’r Arddu. Pioneers like Joe Brown, an engineer-turned-climber, filed down or drilled out the internal threads of these nuts to allow smoother insertion into cracks and prevent snagging on the rope, then threaded a sling through the central hole for attachment.) This innovation, also employed by contemporaries such as and Jack Soper, marked a transition from irregular natural stones to standardized metal forms, improving consistency and holding power in parallel-sided cracks. In the , these improvised machine nuts were used alongside traditional pitons by British climbers to reduce rock damage on delicate routes, particularly in Snowdonia's and rhyolite crags. Early placements occurred on demanding lines like those on Clogwyn Du’r Arddu, where nuts provided non-invasive protection in sections unsuitable for pitons, allowing bolder ascents while preserving the natural features of the cliff. This evolution from organic chocks to modified industrial hardware laid the groundwork for purpose-built climbing gear, culminating in commercial nuts by the .

Commercialization and Popularization

The commercialization of purpose-built climbing nuts began in the during the early 1960s, marking a transition from improvised protections to manufactured gear designed specifically for . In 1961, British climber and blacksmith John Brailsford invented the , the first commercial climbing-specific device, crafted from cast aluminum alloy to fit cracks more reliably than earlier ad-hoc solutions. This innovation was followed in 1962 by the introduction of the Moac (Master of All Cracks) nut by Ellis Brigham Sporting Goods, which featured swaged wire loops for attachment, drawing inspiration from to enhance portability and ease of use. These early products, produced by small-scale manufacturers in England's and , laid the groundwork for standardized hardware. The popularization of nuts accelerated in the mid-1960s as they crossed the Atlantic, influencing American climbing practices and ethics. In 1966-1967, , a prominent Yosemite climber, imported British nuts to the after experiencing their effectiveness during ascents in . That same year, Robbins and his wife completed the first all-nut route, (5.8) on Manure Pile Buttress in , relying entirely on these removable protections instead of pitons. This ascent helped coin the term "," emphasizing non-invasive techniques that preserved rock integrity and minimized environmental damage. By the early 1970s, nuts had become central to the clean climbing movement, driven by further innovations and high-profile routes. In 1972, Yvon Chouinard commercialized Hexentrics through his equipment company, introducing asymmetrical hexagonal nuts that expanded the range of crack sizes they could protect while reinforcing the ethical shift away from piton-induced scarring. The following year, in 1973, climbers Doug Robinson, Galen Rowell, and Dennis Hennek achieved the first clean ascent of Half Dome's Regular Northwest Face in Yosemite, using only nuts and slings for protection; this feat, publicized in National Geographic, underscored nuts' reliability on major walls and solidified their role in promoting sustainable climbing ethics. Key figures like Brailsford, Robbins, and Chouinard championed this evolution, transforming nuts from niche tools into essential gear that prioritized conservation alongside safety.

Design and Materials

Components

A climbing nut, also known as a stopper or chock, consists primarily of a tapered wedge-shaped body designed to create when inserted into a in the rock. This core component is typically a metal block with one convex face and one concave face, allowing the nut to conform to irregular crack geometries and enhance contact for secure wedging. The taper narrows from the top to the bottom, enabling the nut to seat firmly in the narrower portion of a tapering crack while the wider end provides stability against outward forces from a potential fall. The attachment system of a climbing nut is a or wire loop connected to the , which allows the device to be clipped to a or and integrated into the system. This loop is usually formed from galvanized steel cable, secured to the wedge via or crimping for a reliable, low-profile connection that minimizes snagging during placement or retrieval. In some designs, particularly for larger or specialized applications, the attachment may use sewn or Dyneema slings instead of wire, offering greater durability in abrasive or icy conditions. Some nuts also incorporate rounded edges on the to facilitate easier of from cracks and smoother insertion. Climbing nuts are sized to fit a range of crack widths, from micro units under 10 mm for narrow seams to larger ones over 20 mm for bigger constrictions, ensuring versatility across various rock types and routes. Manufacturers often employ color-coding for rapid size identification during ascents; for instance, Black Diamond Stoppers range from sizes 1 to 13, with each size assigned a distinct color. The wedges are commonly forged from aluminum for a balance of strength and light weight.

Construction Materials

Climbing nuts, also known as chocks or stoppers, primarily utilize hardened aluminum alloys for their wedge-shaped heads, with 7075-T6 being a common variant due to its superior strength-to-weight ratio and resistance to deformation under load. This alloy, a heat-treatable precipitation-hardened option, provides high tensile strength—often exceeding 500 MPa—while maintaining low density, allowing nuts to support forces up to 10-12 kN without excessive weight, which is critical for climbers carrying multiple pieces. The anodized surface further enhances resistance and aids in size identification through color coding. Modern nuts adhere to UIAA/EN 12270 safety standards, requiring minimum tensile strengths varying by size (e.g., 6-10 kN for standard sizes). The connecting wire or cable in standard nuts is typically constructed from , valued for its durability, flexibility, and ability to withstand repeated bending without kinking or fatigue failure. Some designs incorporate Dyneema-sheathed cables, where (UHMWPE) fibers provide exceptional tensile strength (up to 18 kN per strand) and low stretch, sheathed in to enhance abrasion resistance and prevent kinking during flexing. Additionally, occasional rubber or plastic coatings on the wires serve to dampen noise during rack movement and reduce wear on gear or rock surfaces. For specialized micro-nuts, such as the iconic RPs (Reactive Pro nuts), is the preferred material for the due to its malleability, which allows it to conform effectively to irregular or soft rock formations like without fracturing the placement. This softer metal, with a Rockwell lower than aluminum alloys but higher than pure , enables secure seating in thin cracks as narrow as 3 mm while maintaining holding power up to 5 kN in smaller sizes. The evolution of nut materials reflects advancements in climbing protection, beginning with repurposed steel machine nuts in the 1950s—sourced from industrial discards like those near railway lines—for their availability and basic gripping ability in cracks. By the 1960s and 1970s, climbers shifted to manufactured aluminum wedges, which offered lighter weight (often 50% less than steel equivalents) and better removability, supplanting heavier designs and enabling the "clean climbing" ethos popularized by figures like .

Types

Standard Nuts

Standard nuts, also known as stoppers or chocks, are symmetrical aluminum wedges with uniform tapering sides, designed primarily for secure placement in parallel-sided cracks and constrictions. These passive devices rely on and wedging action to hold falls, featuring a narrow end that fits into the crack's narrower section and a wider base that seats against the rock. Prominent examples include the Black Diamond Stoppers and Rocks, which are staples in racks for their reliability in straight, consistent placements. These nuts typically span a size range from approximately 4 mm to 50 mm in width, accommodating cracks from fingertip-sized to hand-width, though exact dimensions vary by manufacturer. For instance, Black Diamond Stoppers are available in 13 sizes, with mid-range options like sizes 4 through 9 (roughly 7-21 mm) commonly used for standard trad routes on moderate terrain. Wild Country Rocks extend to 14 sizes, fitting cracks from 7 mm to 50 mm overall, allowing climbers to cover a broad spectrum of crack features without excessive weight. Major brands have introduced innovations to enhance performance, such as the DMM Wallnuts, which incorporate a curved taper on the nut body for improved seating and stability in various rock types, along with grooved faces to increase contact area and reduce the risk of walking out. These nuts are mounted on stiff yet flexible wires that facilitate overhead placements while minimizing premature dislodgement. Holding strengths for standard sizes generally range from 2 kN for the smallest units to 12 kN for larger ones, as tested under UIAA standards, providing adequate for lead falls in typical scenarios. Standard nuts find common application in on granitic or formations, where parallel cracks predominate, offering lightweight and versatile for routes with consistent crack geometries.

Specialized Nuts

Specialized nuts represent adaptations of the basic to address specific crack geometries that challenge standard symmetrical designs, such as flares, offsets, or micro-seams. These variations prioritize niche placements in irregular rock features, often trading some versatility for enhanced security in targeted scenarios. Offset nuts feature an asymmetrical taper, with one side narrower than the other to conform to tapering or flaring cracks where parallel-sided nuts would slip. Introduced in 1983 by British climber Hugh Banner through his HB Climbing Equipment company, these were the first commercially available offsets, initially in for smaller sizes and later for durability. The design allows secure seating in peg scars or widening slots, with versions providing malleability for and models offering higher strength ratings up to 12 kN across sizes 7–11. Modern iterations, like DMM's HB Offsets, maintain this dual-taper profile for passive protection in wet or icy conditions. Micro-nuts, often for their deformability, target extremely narrow cracks unsuitable for larger gear, typically ranging from 2–8 mm in width. Roland Pauligk, an Australian climber, pioneered these in 1969 with cast aluminum prototypes, refining them to silver-soldered heads by the mid-1970s under the RP (Real Person) brand. Known for their slim profile and narrow heads, RPs excel in shallow slots for bold trad leads or placements, though their lower strength—2–6 kN depending on size—limits them to low-force scenarios like short falls or body-weight . Their malleability allows them to "mushroom" into irregular micro-cracks, enhancing grip but requiring careful placement to avoid deformation under load. Hexentrics bridge the gap between small wedges and larger chocks with their six-sided, asymmetrical aluminum construction, designed for irregular cracks from finger to fist size. Developed in 1972 by and at Chouinard Equipment (now Black Diamond), the original Hexentric wedged across three crack dimensions per size, providing versatile passive protection in expanding or flared features up to about 10 cm wide. This polycentric design, refined in 1974 to four settings, emphasized ethics by avoiding rock damage while offering a 10 kN strength rating in modern wired versions. They remain popular for offwidths or pockets where cams might rotate, functioning as space-filling chocks with a nut-like profile. Other variants include reactive designs like the Crack-n-Up, introduced in 1975 by Chouinard Equipment as double-bladed steel hooks for micro-cracks under 3/16 inch (4.8 mm). These feature angled arms that create a slight expanding effect when loaded, aiding placement in flares or corners during , though their marginal holding power suits low-impact use rather than factor-2 falls. Tricams, a hybrid nut derivative designed by Greg Lowe in the 1970s and commercialized in 1981, offer passive wedging like a nut in constrictions or active camming via a rigid sling toggle, with strengths from 5 kN in small sizes to over 10 kN in larger ones for belay anchors or horizontal cracks.

Usage in Climbing

Placement Techniques

Proper placement of climbing nuts requires careful selection based on crack to ensure a secure in a , where the crack narrows. Climbers should choose a nut size that is slightly smaller than the crack opening—typically 1-2 mm—to allow it to seat firmly into the taper without excessive force, maximizing surface contact for strength. Larger nuts generally provide more contact area and thus greater holding power when suitable, while micro-nuts (sizes 1-6) are reserved for thin cracks or scars, often limited to holding body weight rather than dynamic falls. After selection, test the fit by gently inserting the nut and tugging downward on the wire loop to confirm it binds securely without shifting. Insertion involves slotting the nut into the constriction and orienting it to align with the anticipated fall direction, which is typically downward and slightly outward. Hold the nut by its cable and position it with the broader sides or narrower ends against the rock to match the crack's shape, then pull it down into the narrowest point to set the wedge, followed by rotation if necessary for optimal contact. For standard placements, orient the nut with its broad side facing outward to resist downward pulls, though sideways orientations—narrow sides against the rock—can expand placement options in irregular cracks. Always extend the placement with a or sling to minimize drag and prevent walk-out. Rock type influences technique, as crack characteristics vary; in , such as Yosemite's often parallel-sided features, standard tapered nuts excel in any available constrictions by keying into the hard, crystalline surface for reliable holds. Flared or irregular cracks in softer , common in areas like the New River Gorge, demand offset nuts to bridge the widening, ensuring the device spans the irregularity without popping out under load. Avoid placements in loose, fractured, or downward-flaring cracks across any rock type, as they compromise security. Best practices emphasize frequent testing and strategic spacing to manage ; after insertion, a series of increasing tugs—starting gentle and building to a sharp yank—to bed the nut and verify stability, akin to load-testing protocols in standards. placements approximately every 2 meters (body length) on moderate , adjusting for rock quality and route demands to avoid excessive runouts while conserving gear on longer pitches. Prioritize solid rock features and practice on accessible to refine these skills.

Removal and Maintenance

Removing climbing nuts typically involves reversing the placement process by gently wiggling the wire cable to dislodge the nut from its constriction. For straightforward extractions, climbers can push the nut upward if it was slotted from above, applying minimal force to avoid damaging the wire. A nut tool, often carried on the harness, is essential for prying or hooking the nut's edge, especially when direct pulling on the wire risks bending or fraying it. When nuts become stuck, several techniques can facilitate removal without excessive force. One method is to "bounce" on the wire by unclipping the and whipping the rope upward to create a shock load that loosens the nut, though this should be avoided on micro-nuts to prevent wire damage. For more stubborn pieces, insert the nut tool into any available hole in the nut's frame (common on larger sizes) and twist to apply torque, or tap the tool against the nut using a rock or hex as a for gentle rocking. Offset nuts may require twisting during extraction to realign with the crack's geometry. If removal efforts fail and continued prying risks climber safety or gear integrity, it is acceptable to leave the nut behind, given their low cost and replaceability. Common issues during removal include "walking," where the nut shifts or lifts out under dynamic loads if not fully seated during placement, particularly in flared or irregular cracks. In soft rock like , nuts can embed deeply due to the material's , complicating extraction and sometimes requiring additional leverage from nearby gear. Proper extends the lifespan of nuts, which can last at least five years with moderate use if regularly inspected. After each climb, clean nuts by scrubbing off dirt and debris with mild soap and a brush to prevent or binding. Inspect wires for fraying, bends, or breaks, and the aluminum body for cracks, excessive wear, or signs of , retiring any suspect pieces immediately. Store nuts in padded racks or gear bags to avoid scratches on the metal surfaces that could lead to stress points. Annual thorough checks are recommended, especially after heavy falls, to detect subtle damage like metal in aluminum components. Climbers should never force removal if it endangers the route or themselves, prioritizing safety over gear recovery.

Advantages and Disadvantages

Benefits

Climbing nuts, also known as stoppers or chocks, offer significant advantages in weight and portability, making them an essential component of a trad climber's rack. Typically constructed from lightweight aluminum, individual nuts weigh between 10 and 50 grams, allowing climbers to carry a full set of 10-12 pieces totaling under 500 grams without adding substantial bulk. This compactness contrasts with heavier spring-loaded camming devices (cams), enabling easier racking on gear loops and reducing overall fatigue during long ascents. Another key benefit is their cost-effectiveness, as nuts are far more affordable than active alternatives. A standard set of 10-12 nuts typically costs $65 to $200, depending on the and materials, and they are fully reusable with minimal of mechanical due to their simple, passive design lacking moving parts. This affordability allows climbers to build a versatile rack without significant investment, and the low replacement cost—often under $10 per nut—makes them practical for emergency anchors or lost gear scenarios. Nuts also promote minimal environmental impact, aligning with ethics by preserving natural rock features. Their passive wedging mechanism relies on the nut's shape to hold in constrictions without expanding or applying outward force, thus avoiding the scarring or enlargement of cracks that can occur with pitons. This non-invasive placement supports sustainable practices in sensitive areas, reducing long-term damage to climbing venues. In terms of reliability, nuts provide high static strength in suitable placements, with many models rated up to 12 kN for larger sizes, ensuring robust against downward pulls. They excel in tapering or constricted cracks where expansion is unnecessary, offering secure holds in narrow to medium-width features (typically 3-20 mm) that may challenge cams.

Limitations

Nuts, as passive protection devices, rely entirely on the geometry of the crack for holding power and are ineffective in widening cracks, smooth surfaces, or parallel-sided fissures where friction or constriction is insufficient to prevent slippage. This passive nature limits their utility compared to active devices like spring-loaded camming devices, which expand to grip expanding or irregular features. Under dynamic loads, such as those from a leader fall, nuts are prone to "walking" or out if the force vector shifts upward or sideways, as they primarily resist downward pulls and offer minimal shock absorption due to their rigid design. This failure mode can be exacerbated in flared cracks, where the nut may migrate along the crack axis before dislodging entirely. Size constraints further restrict nut effectiveness; they are generally unsuitable for cracks narrower than about 2 mm or wider than 25 mm without supplementary hybrid devices, while nuts made of softer metals like can deform or crush during hard falls, reducing their reusability and strength. Nuts must comply with UIAA and EN 12270 standards, which mandate a minimum strength of 2 kN in standardized tests, but real-world performance varies significantly by rock type and placement quality—for instance, holding capacities are lower in softer rocks like compared to harder or porphyry, with field tests showing ultimate loads from 6 to 12 kN in optimal conditions. Proper maintenance, such as inspecting for wire , can help mitigate some risks of failure in repeated use.

Comparison to Other Protection Devices

Versus Spring-Loaded Cams

Nuts and spring-loaded camming devices (SLCDs), commonly known as cams, represent the two primary categories of removable rock protection in traditional climbing: passive and active, respectively. Passive nuts function by wedging into crack constrictions through their rigid, tapered shapes, typically made of aluminum or steel, relying solely on the rock's geometry to create friction and hold without any moving parts. In contrast, cams operate actively via spring-loaded lobes—usually three or four—that expand to grip parallel-sided or irregular cracks, with a trigger mechanism allowing retraction for placement and removal; this design, invented in the late 1970s, enables them to adapt to a wider range of crack widths and shapes, including flared or expanding fissures where nuts would fail. In terms of versatility, cams excel in dynamic placements across broader crack sizes, typically from 0.5 to 5 inches, making them suitable for most trad routes where precise fitting is challenging; they provide multidirectional holding power, resisting upward pulls that might dislodge a nut. Nuts, however, are more specialized for static, narrow parallel or constricted cracks requiring exact sizing, often performing best in smaller features under 1 inch where their passive wedging offers reliable security without the risk of lobe slippage. While cams are more forgiving in irregular or wandering cracks, nuts demand skilled placement but shine in scenarios like thin cracks or , complementing cams by filling gaps in a rack for comprehensive . Weight and cost further distinguish the two: nuts are significantly lighter and more affordable, with a set of 10 small to medium pieces often weighing under 200 grams and costing around $90, ideal for minimizing rack bulk on weight-sensitive alpine or multi-pitch trad climbs. Cams, being bulkier due to their mechanical components, add more weight— a set of six mid-sized units can exceed 500 grams and cost over $300—yet their expandability justifies the investment for longer runouts where reliable, quick placements reduce risk. In usage scenarios, nuts are preferred for clean, granite-based trad routes or alpine environments emphasizing lightness, such as the Tetons, while cams dominate in places like Yosemite, where their active expansion handles expansive cracks and sustained falls effectively.

Versus Pitons

Pitons, traditional metal spikes hammered into rock cracks for , contrast sharply with nuts in their installation method and environmental impact. Pitons require forceful hammering to drive them into natural fissures or pre-existing scars, often deforming the rock and leaving permanent visible damage known as piton scars upon removal. In contrast, nuts are passive chockstones that climbers wedge by hand into constrictions without tools, allowing for easy placement and retrieval while preserving the rock surface intact. This non-invasive approach aligns with modern ethics, minimizing route alteration and enabling repeated ascents without cumulative degradation. Regarding durability and performance, pitons generally offer higher holding power, particularly in scenarios, with tested ultimate loads ranging from 6 to 18 kN depending on type, material, and placement quality—often exceeding 15 kN for safety-rated models fully driven into suitable rock. However, they are heavier, typically weighing 60 to 130 grams each, which adds bulk to a rack. Nuts, while capable of holding 6 to 12 kN when properly placed, are significantly lighter at 20 to 60 grams per unit, facilitating portability and reducing overall gear weight. Their removability further enhances eco-friendliness, as they leave no lasting marks, unlike pitons that can weaken rock over time through repeated insertions. The historical shift from pitons to nuts marked a pivotal change in practices, with pitons dominating before the due to their reliability in early big-wall and ascents. By the early , particularly between 1971 and 1974, American climbers largely abandoned pitons in favor of nuts to preserve iconic routes, exemplified by clean ascents like ' 1967 first ascent of in Yosemite, which used only removable nuts and reduced damage on classics such as Half Dome's Northwest Face. This transition promoted sustainable route stewardship, as nuts enabled without scarring, influencing the ethics of . In contemporary climbing, pitons are rarely used outside of and big-wall expeditions, where their superior strength in thin or flared cracks justifies occasional placement despite the damage. Nuts, however, have become the standard for traditional , valued for their alignment with leave-no-trace principles and versatility in crack systems. This division underscores nuts' role in advancing minimally invasive techniques, while pitons persist in specialized, high-commitment scenarios.

References

  1. https://www.rei.com/learn/expert-advice/passive-rock-climbing-protection.html
  2. https://www.climbing.com/gear/nuts-rock-climbing-protection/
  3. https://www.climbing.com/gear/the-nut-chronicles/
  4. https://www.peakmountaineering.com/history-of-climbing-nuts/
  5. https://www.outdoorgearlab.com/topics/climbing/best-climbing-nut
  6. https://www.mountainhardwear.com/learn/know-how/rock-climbing/climbing-protection.html
  7. https://www.needlesports.com/Information/Features/Nuts-Museum/Nuts-Odyssey
  8. https://www.ukhillwalking.com/forums/gear/the_history_of_nuts-310710
  9. https://thebhc.org/sites/default/files/parsonsandrose.pdf
  10. http://www.needlesports.com/NeedleSports/nutsmuseum/nutsstory.htm
  11. https://hull-repository.worktribe.com/preview/4211463/content-hull_4714a.pdf
  12. https://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/climbing/world-responds-royal-robbinss-passing-2/
  13. https://www.patagonia.com/clean-climbing/
  14. https://blackdiamondequipment.com/products/stoppers
  15. https://www.andy-kirkpatrick.com/articles/view/big_nuts
  16. https://blackdiamondequipment.com/products/stopper-set-4-13
  17. https://www.rei.com/product/698028/black-diamond-wired-stopper-nut
  18. https://www.als.com/wild-country-superlight-offset-rock-climbing-nut-set-10366229/p
  19. https://asm.matweb.com/search/specificmaterial.asp?bassnum=ma7075t6
  20. https://www.savoypipinginc.com/round-bars-rods-manufacturer/aluminium-7075-t6-round-bar-supplier.html
  21. https://www.theuiaa.org/safety-standards/rock-nuts/
  22. https://www.dicksclimbing.com/products/beal-5-5mm-dyneema-cord-per-metre
  23. http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/1941722/A-few-questions-about-nuts
  24. https://www.rockandice.com/people/the-guy-whose-nuts-revolutionized-climbing-r-p/
  25. http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/230775/Whats-an-R-P
  26. https://us.dmmwales.com/products/i-m-p-brass-nuts
  27. https://www.climbing.com/gear/cllimbing-gear-history-erickson/
  28. https://www.wildcountry.com/en-us/rocks-40-RWA
  29. https://us.dmmwales.com/products/wallnuts
  30. https://www.ukclimbing.com/gear/climbing/protection/nuts_wires_stoppers-6513
  31. https://us.dmmwales.com/products/hb-alloy-offsets
  32. https://imeut.com/products/dmm-brass-offsets
  33. https://thebmc.co.uk/en/how-to-use-micro-wires-climb-skills
  34. https://blackdiamondequipment.com/products/wired-hex-set-4-10
  35. https://blackdiamondequipment.com/products/wired-hexentric-1
  36. https://verticalarchaeology.com/2014/06/19/chouinard-crack-n-up/
  37. https://www.climbing.com/skills/tricams-101-a-guide-to-using-this-tool/
  38. https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/111689419/tricamsa-thing-of-the-past?page=2
  39. https://www.rei.com/learn/expert-advice/place-trad-gear.html
  40. https://www.climbing.com/skills/learn-to-climb-trad-the-gear/
  41. https://www.andy-kirkpatrick.com/cragmanship/view/nuts_that_stay_put
  42. https://www.climbing.com/skills/gear-guru-how-often-should-you-place-gear/
  43. https://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/skills/removing_stuck_gear-14778
  44. https://www.liveabout.com/tips-to-place-better-nuts-755589
  45. https://www.metoliusclimbing.com/cleaning-and-disinfecting-climbing-equipment.html
  46. https://www.climbing.com/skills/how-to-inspect-your-climbing-gear-and-when-to-retire-it/
  47. https://www.alpidex.com/en/via-ferrata-alpin/stoppers/climbing-nuts-set-scratch-10-pcs-by-alpidex_13631_1983
  48. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-rock-climbing-passive-protection-equipment-uses-how-lslle/
  49. https://theuiaa.org/documents/declarations/13-01-2014-revision-The-Preservation-of-Natural-Rock-for-Adventure-Climbing.pdf
  50. https://rope-master.com/en/climbing/cams-and-nuts/7733-nuts-torque-nuts-various-sizes.html
  51. https://www.mltj.online/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Manes.pdf
  52. https://www.rei.com/learn/expert-advice/active-rock-climbing-protection.html
  53. https://www.andy-kirkpatrick.com/articles/view/cam_and_get_em
  54. https://www.climbing.com/skills/how-to-place-evaluate-climbing-pitons/
  55. https://wms.org/magazine/magazine/1419/Climbing-Rock-Protection/default.aspx
  56. https://americanalpineclub.org/news/2019/4/4/pitons
  57. https://singingrock-usa.com/climbing/singing-rock-piton-v-ntn18327.html
  58. https://climbonequipment.com/products/camp-soft-universal-piton
  59. https://weighmyrack.com/nut
  60. https://www.climbing.com/news/tech-tip-aid-constructive-scarring/
  61. https://www.climbing.com/culture-climbing/royal-robbins-rock-climbing-pioneer/
  62. https://www.summitpost.org/phpBB3/pitons-pegs-advice-t55972.html
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.