THS Smart Rigging Winch - ALT GRCS?

  • Thread starter Thread starter bonner1040
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 58
  • Views Views 9K
I've used a grcs for several years but I own a hobbs, between the two I still prefer the Hobbs. Many disagree but I used the grcs enough to discover some of the small annoyances that aren't readily apparent.
 
According to google the current exchange rate is about .8 euros to a dollar. http://goo.gl/DJeZz That makes this thing about $3,700...not $6,000. I'd pay an extra thousand for the functionality of having 2 ropes in one device. What else am I going to do- use a GRCS AND a porty? That's preposterous!

Then preposterous am I! I've used them together before. You're right about the price though. The dollar sign got me...I catch it if they show the price in pounds. I might consider it IF the mounting system were more like the GRCS. I've only used mine once without the visor. Having the visor is worth a lot to me.
 
Here's a pic of the new one. They wouldn't let us inside the comp zone so I had to zoom in a bit. You can prolly tell that the spool is longer, and the face looks a little different than the old Harkens.


348f8993.jpg
 
I had my rate wrong, woops. I might put out an extra thousand + if I sold my grcs. I don't use it much as it is, and with the bucket truck I'd probably use it even less.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #32
I am not sure which harken, I will look. My foreman apparently knows Greg and was able to help him out getting in distributing them to Big Green. I do know our harken has the longer spool allowing more wraps, it also has the pigtails you can see in the picture you posted, they hang low but hinge up and end up even with the end of the spool, keeping the rope from doubling/binding up when lowering loads.

On the THS thing above you can see the fairleads are positioned to keep the line exiting at the end of the winch drum as well. This seems like a huge advantage to me for both the THS and the new Goods.
 
I don't know that one could tell the difference in the 46 and the 48, but I do like my 48. The longer spool on the newer ones has got to be a plus, however.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #38
ok, so some elaboration is in order, everyone is fawning over the new shinyness... You cant just say it sucks without some reasons....
 
The idea of the two ropes being used at once is a novel ides, but I think Reg's (Stein Dual) design would be much more user friendly for that application. What I think I WOULD like about the Smart, is that you could lower a big limb using the bollard, and IF it hung up, the groundie could quickly re-route the rope onto the winch and lift it clear. Not so quick/easy with the GRCS if you're using the bollard and have to switch over to the winch. I still say I'd take a GRCS and a Hobb's over the Smart. Two units that could be used together if/when needed, and yet two completely independent lowering devices.

I think it would be cool for the GRCS' mounting frame to consist of two twin frames hinged together, so you could use the bollard right beside the winch. Just the mounting frame sells for over $700, if I recall correctly. Wesspur just changed their web page and it doesn't show the mounting plate alone any more.
 
That might be an idea to pitch to Mr good, Himself. Shouldn't be that hard to fabricate a pin and plate for the bollard.

I still have yet to use the bollard...
 
I don't see that rig running 2 ropes smooth at all. Also, do not like the slot being cut in the boillard, and the capstan is too small, as those of us who own a GRCS (older) know.
 
I've been tossing around the idea of building a mounting plate just for the bollard. Not near as fancy as the GRCS mount, just a steel base with a visor and a winch strap. It could probably be done for less than $50 with material/scrap on hand.
 
I don't see that rig running 2 ropes smooth at all. Also, do not like the slot being cut in the boillard, and the capstan is too small, as those of us who own a GRCS (older) know.

That's what I meant by saying I thought the Stein Dual would be better for two ropes. Looks like they would be rather crowded on the Smart. I hadn't thought about the size/power ratio of the capstan. That would be another consideration.

Have you fooled with the Stein Dual at all, Dave? I was just wondering if anyone over here is using them much at all. Seems the GRCS has the lead, with the Hobb's holding a few loyal users.
 
I think it would be handy to have an eye or something on the GRCS mount where you could attach a porty to it. Most of the time when doing removals, we will mount the GRCS for the primary lowering device and the porty for a secondary, just in case, device. Sometimes the porty gets mounted on the same tree as the GRCS and sometimes a different one. It would be nice to have a way to quickly attach the porty right to the mountain that is already up.
 
The only problem I see with that is that the porty has a certain amount of "flop" to it, because of the sling attachment. It would need to be mounted a certain distance away from the GRCS laterally to avoid the ropes interfering with one another. I'd rather have the porty be more flexible in its attachment point. I often wrap a rope several times around the tree and then use a shackle to attach the porty to it. That way, you can rotate it to wherever you need it, front, back, side, etc. Another of my quirks is that I don't like the rigging line to rub against the trunk any more than necessary. I like a straight line from raking device to the block. If the porty were attached to the GRCS, it would be less flexible in its positioning options. Just my .02...

I notice a lot of you guys say you use the GRCS a lot. I seldom use mine. I wonder if it's a matter of habit, or climbing/rigging style that dictates this.
 
I've been tossing around the idea of building a mounting plate just for the bollard. Not near as fancy as the GRCS mount, just a steel base with a visor and a winch strap. It could probably be done for less than $50 with material/scrap on hand.


That's an idea. I had a good groundy running ropes for me with the GRCS a few weeks back. It was easier for him to calculate wraps, let loads run, and to tension on the GRCS bollard over the power wrap. Much more pleasurable for me too!

Also, why do most groundies (that i've encountered), not fathom the idea of taking the rope out of the porta wrap before they walk over and untie the bowline? I think they'd be more inclined to do so if the GRCS bollard was used, as it's rigid on the tree. I dunno...
 
I've wondered the same thing, Brendon. I think it's a matter of their perception. They see it hanging slack so their mind say, "Hey...it's loose". What's a real joy for the climber is to watch them leisurely saunter 20' or so over to where the rope is tied to the limb, give it a gentle tug, realize the slack will not magically run to them, then saunter BACK over to the porty to take off the wraps when they were standing 3' from it to begin with!
 
The only problem I see with that is that the porty has a certain amount of "flop" to it, because of the sling attachment. It would need to be mounted a certain distance away from the GRCS laterally to avoid the ropes interfering with one another. I'd rather have the porty be more flexible in its attachment point. I often wrap a rope several times around the tree and then use a shackle to attach the porty to it. That way, you can rotate it to wherever you need it, front, back, side, etc. Another of my quirks is that I don't like the rigging line to rub against the trunk any more than necessary. I like a straight line from raking device to the block. If the porty were attached to the GRCS, it would be less flexible in its positioning options. Just my .02...

I notice a lot of you guys say you use the GRCS a lot. I seldom use mine. I wonder if it's a matter of habit, or climbing/rigging style that dictates this.

You make some good points. I like that idea of being able to rotate the porty around the stem of a tree.

When we first got our GRCS we forced ourselves to use it just so we would get used to it. Now we always go for it for all rigging except for the easiest of jobs. It has changed the way we work. It also makes work safer in my opinion. We are able to take larger loads and do it in a more controlled way. I love that thing.
 
I notice a lot of you guys say you use the GRCS a lot. I seldom use mine. I wonder if it's a matter of habit, or climbing/rigging style that dictates this.

I am one of those. Almost daily. I think some of it has to do with the fact that I much prefer static rigging. I hardly ever use the bollard. If we are going back and forth between static and dynamic, then porty goes up as well. The second reason the grcs goes up so often is the ease of grabbing it. It sits in the bucket truck box right next to the blocks, slings, and porty's. It doesn't take much extra effort.


Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk 2
 
Back
Top