I've lurked around this site for a few years, but I finally have a question for a first post:

Anyone hear of or use these new glue in bolts called Wave Bolts? Their website says they are the best bolt available. After a long weekend and frustrating weekend of using Fixe ones I have been looking around the internet this morning (productive work day!) and came across their site. Looks new. The site is http://www.wavebolt.com . The videos show the bolt not sliding out of an overhanging route, which would be great for me. And the testing numbers are really high.
Anyone use them?

Thanks, Robert

Registered: Oct 24, 2011, 7:13 AM

Your point? You can lurk and read for a decade before registering.

Good on ya for jumping on the market niche. I dislike glueins as they are so much work, but for soft rock, they are the schizz.

They look pretty clever although hammering them in looked a wee bit more difficult than the guy made it sound.

I've seen and climbed on plenty of these already. Honestly, I think they look like crap at the crag. I've never seen one that didn't have that trashy homemade looking red/pink glue oozed out of it.

It's good to know they are credible, cause I've felt a bit sketched out clipping them!

I'm not the one out bolting, but I definitely feel as though aesthetics are high on my list. I prefer the look of a traditional bolt or the other glue ins, these just don't do it for me.

I look at glue ins as more of a special purpose than general purpose bolt, but they have their place.

Sorry if this was suspicious. Not my intent. I have indeed lurked annonymously for a while.
Anyway, thanks all for the info. The design makes sense. No one has used them though? I will keep following this to see if anyone updates.

Glue: The Hilti is that awful red color. I use Epcon A7 and it's a nice grey color when cured. The key is to wipe the hole with a rag after inserting the bolt. Dripping messes are just poor form on the bolter's part. Some glues do drip more than others...

\

Wave Bolt: 316SS which is nice. They're a much tighter fit in a 1/2in hole and require pounding after maybe 1 1/2in of insertion in limestone. As stated above, it is not an issue with your normal wall hammer. You can wiggle the drill for a looser fit but I don't really do that. Probably easier to do in sandstone. Available in 1/2 and 5/8in but only one length right now I think.

I've seen and climbed on plenty of these already. Honestly, I think they look like crap at the crag. I've never seen one that didn't have that trashy homemade looking red/pink glue oozed out of it.

It's good to know they are credible, cause I've felt a bit sketched out clipping them!

I'm not the one out bolting, but I definitely feel as though aesthetics are high on my list. I prefer the look of a traditional bolt or the other glue ins, these just don't do it for me.

I suspect that the "low profile" could be a problem with wanting to climb a route with them. If you are accustomed to seeing a hanger plate or a hunky chain and a big bolt head, seeing a simple wire loop does not inspire confidence. The thickness of the wire may be equal to the hanger, but there seems to be too little there. We would be learning again to have faith in testing rather than intuition.

A real problem with the dinky wire things is the radius it makes for a rope. WaveBolts has said:
"The "eye" of a Wave Bolt is large enough to easily clip two carabiners (even big, beefy ones), or one half-inch quicklink and a carabiner into it.
At an anchor station or crux bolt of a route, we highly recommend the developer attaching quicklinks and chain (or something similar) to the bolts so that climbers do not thread their ropes directly through the bolts. More information on this in the FAQ section of the site http://www.wavebolt.com/faq/."

I also wonder how much harder it will be to find anchors or to follow a route with the very "low profile" loops as all you can see, if the glue has been hidden as suggested here.

I think it funny that an alternative to bolts is named Bolts.

.

A real problem with the dinky wire things is the radius it makes for a rope. WaveBolts has said:
"The "eye" of a Wave Bolt is large enough to easily clip two carabiners (even big, beefy ones), or one half-inch quicklink and a carabiner into it.
At an anchor station or crux bolt of a route, we highly recommend the developer attaching quicklinks and chain (or something similar) to the bolts so that climbers do not thread their ropes directly through the bolts.

I also wonder how much harder it will be to find anchors or to follow a route with the very "low profile" loops as all you can see, if the glue has been hidden as suggested here.

I think it funny that an alternative to bolts is named Bolts.

Regarding the strength, in our testing the Wave Bolts are easily over twice as strong (i.e. resistance to failure) as a 1/2 X 4 3/4 inch Powers/Rawl bolt, for both shear and tension.

USNavy, you make excellent points. I take responsibility for errors and will make the appropriate changes in future statements and/or publications.

My intent was not to make erroneous or deceitful claims. I asked my distributor of Powers bolts what the tension and shear ratings were for the bolt. I was told 4500lbs. Since this fits with other manufacturers' (e.g. ITW) ratings, I took it as accurate. I see now, however, that according to http://www.powers.com/...mechanical/06914.pdf Powers rates their bolts at approx. 41kn for tension and 44 for shear (1/2 inch bolt, 4000psi concrete). You are correct that our test results are not twice this amount.

Regarding the UIAA standards, in http://www.theuiaa.org/...3_rock_anch_2009.pdf section 2.2.3 states an axial load of 20kn. I took this to mean a minimum requirement, so a test result (albeit shear) of over 9100lbs led me to say 'over twice as strong as the UIAA requirement.'

I see how easy it is to make errors and/or be perceived as misleading, which ultimately undermines the perceived quality of our product. This is not my intent, and I hope my responses will work to correct this.

Regarding the UIAA standards, in http://www.theuiaa.org/...3_rock_anch_2009.pdf section 2.2.3 states an axial load of 20kn. I took this to mean a minimum requirement, so a test result (albeit shear) of over 9100lbs led me to say 'over twice as strong as the UIAA requirement.'

I have been using the wave bolt for the past 3 months. It is much stronger than any other bolt out there.

This bolt is the only bolt ever certified by ANSI.

After placing a number of Wave Bolts I have found that its best to oversize the hole a bit if you are installing them in hard rock. For the 5/8" version I use a 11/16" bit and for the 1/2" version, a 5/8" bit. I found that with our dense basalt, I nearly have to destroy the bolt to get it in if I use the recommended hole size. It takes repeated hard blows with a hammer to get it in which creates a number of serious issues. After speaking with Hoosier Heights a number of times, it seems that using the 11/16" size bit is the best option for people that wish to install these bolts in dense rock.

However if you do oversize the hole, its best to use the smallest possible diameter bit that allows you to install the bolt (the sizes I recommended above). Its also critical you use a glue that has a very low shrinkage value (pure epoxy is the best bet in most cases).

Mattm,
do you think a 5/8" (15.875mm) bit with some wobble would be enough to get the 8mm (16mm) JimT bolt in?