The deadly croll

[Mark Wright]

Petzl say that about all products that are tested to the more stringent industrial standard EN12841B as opposed to the EN567 mountaineering standard.

Its very rare these days that you see industrial rope access technicians using a separate chest ascender. I don't think I've sold one into the industrial environment for the past 6 or 7 years. Most use the Petzl Top Croll chest harness with 4mm Croll that isn't removable.

I was lucky enough to be involved in some of the field trials of the new Croll before it went on sale and can confirm it was definitely aimed at the sports market.

Mark

 

[Disgusted from Cornwall.]

Following Petzl's foray into poor quality products, I have gladly widened my horizons.

I use a Camp chest ascender and CT other ascenders. I do use my Petzl Rack and Stop though.

I started caving when Petzl was the only thing you would consider using. Sadly they blew it and frankly, other firms are more worthy of their business.

They got complacent. They started selling crap, they thought they were gods and could get away with shafting their customers and selling rubbish.

They were wrong and now they are going to pay.

 

[mikem]

The wear plate was supposed to make it last longer, they obviously hadn't long term tested it on gritty ropes, but then cavers aren't their main market anymore...

Mike

 

[Simon Wilson]

A tacit admission that the previous design was junk.

https://www.petzl.com/INT/en/Sport/New/CROLL-L

 

[royfellows]

At a glance this looks to me like a re-labelled reversal to the old design?

 

[Simon Wilson]

Not quite Roy. The new Croll L is not a new Croll at all; it is the version of the Croll that they produced in 2013 for the American rescue market after they refused to use the crappy wear plate version. They should have made this plain version available for all markets in 2013 and never made that piece of junk.

 

[Tangent_tracker]

I said to Petzl in January 2016 that the wear plate was extremely dangerous and that I thought that a recall of all the 2013 model Crolls was the appropriate action. They claimed that they were perfectly safe. Now they have dumped the wear plate which I see as an admission that it is a bad design. How many people are now going to feel uneasy about using the wear plate Croll and will buy the new version and how will those people feel about the actions of Petzl?

Petzl should go further, do the right thing, openly admit that it is dangerous and recall it. I call on them again to recall it before it kills somebody.

They have not dumped the plate at all from what I understand. They have just listened to the market and produced a new model. I will be comparing new for (new)old and if I still like the 2013 model will replace it for the same. If there is one thing the new model has brought to light, IMO is that people take their caving kit for granted and do not thoroughly check it enough.

Had my croll for two years and it still glides up the rope and is still sharp. Love it.

 

[Disgusted from Cornwall.]

Still looks like a toy. I'll stick with my Turbochest.

I still have my eye out for a suitable "original size" pantin, with the 2 stage spring. The new "toy one" from Petzl is just terrible for clipping on with no hands.

I'm not sure if the CT just has a single spring. Can anyone confirm? I will buy one now if it has (a double spring)

 

[Simon Wilson]

At a glance this looks to me like a re-labelled reversal to the old design?

Actually Roy I think you're right. It's almost identical. Which means that they have more-or-less gone back about 20 years to when they introduced the plastic trigger.