Collection Home
Kailas
Canyon
Multi 8
|
|
|
| Canyon | Multi 8 |
[ Top | Multi 8 | Return to Figure Eights ]
|
|
 |
| Front | Rear |
I acquired my Kailas Canyon from Kailas in 2021.
The Kailas Canyon is forged from aluminum alloy and then soft anodized. Mine is 126 mm. tall, 93 mm. wide, and 13 mm. thick. The rope hole is 44 mm. high and 61 mm. wide. The top center thickness is 12 mm. The shaft length and width are 29 mm. and 25 mm., respectively. The auxiliary hole is 28.1 mm. high and 14.4 mm. wide. The eye measures 14 mm. by 14 mm. The ears are 23.6 and 19.4 mm. long. My Kailas Canyon weighs 124 g.
The front has "KAILAS" in raised forged letters. The rear is printed with "CANYON", "KE120002," "Rope Ø9-12mm," a book-with-an-"i" icon, "EN 15151-2:2012," a strength test icon (not a rigging illustration!) with "kN▲25" above and "▼" below, and "K011217."
The Canyon is an unusual T–side eight. It is one of the following closely-related designs:
|
|||||||||||||||
These vary in size and construction, with the Oka being the lightest and the Canyon the heaviest. The Oka was the progenitor, with the others following,
The unusual shape of the rope hole allows for a taller hole without increasing the height of the eight.
The slot between the T-horns is not suitable for belaying.
The lower spur does not appear to serve an essential purpose. Perhaps it is a result of the aversion some canyoneers have to rigging a figure eight in the standard manner. I prefer the location used on the Canyon, as it points away from me and cannot poke me in the stomach.
The eye is small and there are many normal carabiners and maillons that will not fit through it. This restricts versatility, and eliminates the option of using two carabiners for redundancy. The eye has an annoying o-ring insert that keeps the Canyon from moving freely on the carabiner. It makes attaching and removing the Canyon more difficult. The ring catches in the notch in some of the carabiners that will fit. Removing the o-ring is a straight-forward option, but it still leaves a device with a small eye. Plan on dedicating a carabiner if you want to use your Canyon without a lot of hassle. I see too many disadvantages to the small eye design and no advantages (reducing the chance of dropping the device in one unlikely scenario by adding another doesn't count). The eye alone is sufficient for me to eliminate the Canyon from serious consideration.
[ Top | Canyon | Return to Figure Eights ]
|
|
 |
| Front | Rear |
I acquired my Kailas Multi 8 from Kailas in 2021.
The Kailas Multi 8 is forged from aluminum alloy and then soft anodized. Mine is 113 mm. tall, 80 mm. wide, and 10 mm. thick. The rope hole is 34 mm. high and 54 mm. wide. The top center thickness is 10 mm. The shaft length and width are 36 mm. and 26 mm., respectively. The eye measures 22 mm. by 27 mm. The ears are 13.4 mm. long. My Kailas Multi 8 weighs 93 g.
The front top is printed with "KAILAS" and the shaft with the Kailas logo, "KAILAS," "EN 15151:2," "UIAA," and a book-with-an-"i" icon. The top of the other side is printed with the "KAILAS" at the top, and the shaft is printed with a strength test icon (not a rigging illustration!) with "kN▲35" above and "▼" below, "Rope Ø8-13mm," and "I 01 0809."
The Kailas Multi 8 is a typical example of a "mini"-size figure eights with ears. It reminds me of the following bent eights:
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Unlike these eights, the Kailas is flat, and so it does not have two different riggings yielding differing friction. It will give too much friction on stiff, muddy rope. This will not affect climbers using clean, limp climbing ropes, but for cavers using stiff ropes such as PMI pit rope, this is a concern. I've found times that I could not descend without hand-forcing the rope through my eight, and I'm nearly 90 kg. (198 lb.), not exactly light (even for being 1.93 m. tall).
For an eared eight used on clean climbing ropes, I like this design enough to give it a star.
For far more content, use a larger monitor and a full-width window.
Hundreds of cell phone users complained and asked me to for a simpler, mobile friendly site. In particular, they wanted me to limit each page to a small number of pictures and minimize my use of text. This new site provides what they asked for.
