Ideal size for a climber?

  • Thread starter Thread starter The Branch Doctor
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 60
  • Views Views 8K
I'm 6'6" and about 200. Works good enough, but I too struggle when bringing up the 395 into the tree. Otherwise it works well, I can footlock pretty fast and the lanky arms whelp with grabbing branches. I always thought someone short and stout was ideal though..Maybe 5'10 and 180 or so, not fat just thick.
 
The best climbers I have ever seen are all arm and leg - small torso. Closer to an ape, the better. I think sense of balance has alot to do with it too.

I think most every sport has an ideal build and people that dont fit that are exceptional in other areas to make up for it - balance etc.
 
I just know that I would prefer seeing the girl in Wesley's avatar climbing to alla you.
 
HA! Good one.

I don't think any one size climber has the overall advantage. I've seen Wes shimmy out on limbs that I would never dream of going out on.

As for me, I'm a climber trapped in a groundies body...
 
HA! Good one.



As for me, I'm a climber trapped in a groundies body...

Me too. I'm 6'0" and 245, however; I have the telephone numbers of a couple of guys who can get it done. AND they will work for money, the one guy, if you buy him a mountain dew and a bag of doritos you had better just get out of his way because wood will be flying down.
 
6'0 and about 240lbs. Far from the fastest, but I get it done safely and in good time.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #39
6'0 and about 240lbs. Far from the fastest, but I get it done safely and in good time.

That's what it's all about bro.:D

I'm glad I started this thread! I appreciate everybody's input.
 
I know this guy, Straun Edwards. He's gotta be close to 7 foot tall and weighs about 200 pounds. All legs and arms. Footlocks 40 feet in six repetitions. Amazing.

and smooth as silk in the process, i competed with him a couple times
 
I went to a birthday party at the zoo today. I watched some gibbons swinging around their cage and was severely humbled. Man those little creatures have some moves. Swinging on the underside of a branch and then landing on top of it with your feet just above where you hands were a fraction of second later. The zoo keeper wouldn't let me give them a MS 200T to see if they could lug one. Even if they couldn't manage a chainsaw, I want one to set my lines, deadwood trees and bring me refreshments while I am climbing.
 
I used to think that slim, wirey, strong, but lightweight was best-little tough guys. I thought that because the best climbers I had ever seen were built that way. My horizons have expanded. I've seen excellent climbing from several different builds so I no longer think it comes down to one bets build.
 
I used to think that slim, wirey, strong, but lightweight was best-little tough guys.

If I was 15% slimmer, wirier, stronger, and lighter I would a 100% better climber. Of that, I am 97% certain, but only because it's Sunday.

TS
 
6'3" around 240. I'd say i'm a better than average work climber. I probably couldn't stand up to a lot of the guys who compete, but in a work situation, I'd say I could hold my own. Losing about 15-20 pounds would probably do me well, but I make up for my bulk by being smart and efficient. In the end, i think the key to working a tree, not just climbing it, is your technique and how you use your strengths to be efficient. So body size doesn't matter all that much. Some guys are good climbers because of their body types, I happen to be a good climber in spite of it.
 
Back
Top