RG&B Soft Shackle review

[Fivespddisco]

Drink up and enjoy Rover Gear and a Beer Soft Shackle - YouTube

[antichrist]

There really should be some product warnings.
Because of the nature of how they need to/can be rigged the actual load rating of the rope needs to be reduced by a very significant amount. People might assume if the plasma rope is rated at 80,000lb then the shackle is rated the same. That's not the case.

There was a discussion about them on DWeb.

[Fivespddisco]

Originally Posted by antichrist

There really should be some product warnings.
Because of the nature of how they need to/can be rigged the actual load rating of the rope needs to be reduced by a very significant amount. People might assume if the plasma rope is rated at 80,000lb then the shackle is rated the same. That's not the case.

There was a discussion about them on DWeb.

They are ratted for 18k working load. stamped on every one. I am surprised that you do not like these and feel they are unsafe.

[fishEH]

Funny episode. Would have liked to seen more tech. When/where to use/not to use? Will they fit through a standard 3/4" recovery point? What about fraying?

[antichrist]

Well, I haven't seen anything authoritative on the material or rope diameter, so it's difficult to really say if that's an accurate WLL. Based on what I've seen that WLL is very suspect since it looks to be based on the rope material/diameter in a straight pull, not how it's used in this application.

[Fivespddisco]

Originally Posted by antichrist

Like breaking during a double line pull up a steep incline and your entire vehicle goes flying?

Maybe I'm wrong and it in fact does have some special properties that allows a person to ignore established safe rigging practices when using it.

The soft shackle is more than just a hunk of rope. There is actually a little bit of science behind what appears to be a simple loop. The shackle is first made by splicing the rope and stitching it so the eye can only open far enough to allow the ball end through. Then it is stretched on a tensile tester to the Working Load Limit. This will set the knot end and prevent it from becoming untied. For added protection the shackle is then re-dipped in a polyurethane coating and a piece of nylon chafe guarding is added.
The 9mm ones that Lucky8 sells have been tested on a 50,000lb tensile tester. This machine is calibrated by a third party every year, in part because the manufacturer must keep its test equipment up to date to comply with their military contracts.

The 9mm soft shackle is rated for a Working Load Limit of 18,000lbs. Today I had a brand new soft shackle tested and it broke at 26,088lbs. That is like hanging more than another Land Rover off the shackle past its Working Load Limit.

One thing to keep in mind with these shackles or any synthetic winch line is that they do have a shelf life. The manufacturer did a simulated long-term test of the shackle and these were the results:
First it was cycled 200 times from 14,000lbs - 20,000lbs. No damage. This should be close to the maximum pulling power of a 9k winch connected to a snatch block.
Then they upped the pulling power and kept on going. It took 73 cycles in the 20,000lb - 25,000lb range for the shackle to finally break at 25,182lbs. Keep in mind that the shackle was not allowed to cool down after each test as it was cycled continuously to test its durability in being loaded and unloaded repeatedly.

Here is some quick math:
If you were to go out twice a month and use the shackle at its maximum rating twice each outing, it would take you just shy of 6 years to mimic our testing. Not bad for a $25 shackle.

video of todays test.

Soft shackle test - YouTube

Todays test


I hope this helps put to rest some of the concerns that some people have had.

[far4cges]

Well... what if there was a meteor shower and all you have is a flashlight??? Just kidding obviously. I am involved in military acquisition and based on the information you have presented, you sir have your poop in a sock! Or your sh!t straight, whichever you prefer...
There are always going to be rigging scenarios where risk management must be performed to ensure the safety of all involved. However, based on your test data above I would have no issue with factoring the full WLL of the soft shackle into any rigging and RM scenario. Too bad I just got a trio of 3/4" shackles from santa... I may still check these out at L8 though.

[antichrist]

I'd be shocked if the DoD would accept a design factor significantly less that 2:1 for shackles. I would be surprised if a 5:1 design factor isn't specified. Since you're involved in military acquisition I expect it would be easy for you to look up.

All rigging scenarios should have risk management performed before proceeding.

[far4cges]

Originally Posted by antichrist

I'd be shocked if the DoD would accept a design factor significantly less that 2:1 for shackles. I would be surprised if a 5:1 design factor isn't specified. Since you're involved in military acquisition I expect it would be easy for you to look up.

All rigging scenarios should have risk management performed before proceeding.

I think we have derailed the intent of the thread, but since you asked (and without getting deep into defense aq theory)... It is expectations like a 5:1 design factor for a recovery shackle that drove the DOD to pay $10K for a flat tip screwdriver. Then Tom Brokaw goes on the TV talking about how America got fleeced, when it is actually our own fault for having over-ambitous expectations placed on every project in development. How about a little "not so common, common sense". We aren't talking about high tech nav systems here.
America can rest assured that some of us involved in military acquisition don't have our heads buried up our collective arse. With that said, safety equipment is expected to prove out, and while the test data is rather rudimentary in its presentation here in thread world, one has to accept on good faith that an established vendor would not make suspect safety equipment available for public purchase. Especially in today's lawsuit happy world.

Additionally, risk management is technically performed every time you start your engine or take a step out your front door. It just isn't a cognitive process where a certain amount of risk is accepted to achieve a desired outcome. Which is what I was referring to. Even conventional shackles involve some risk acceptance. There is always the possibility that a crack may exist which is unable to be seen without a NDI.

With all due respect, if you don't trust the soft shackle then obviously you are welcome to your own opinion, and are free to refrain from purchase. Freedom of choice is what I serve to defend and what makes us a great nation.

Lastly, no ill will was intended toward any fellow Rover fan(s) in the drafting of this response. Happy New Year!

[antichrist]

Originally Posted by far4cges

It is expectations like a 5:1 design factor for a recovery shackle that drove the DOD to pay $10K for a flat tip screwdriver.

Not really, since I can buy 19,000lb WLL steel shackle with 5:1 factor for about $30. Or the 5 ton ones I use, 5/8" with a 5:1 factor and a 45,000lb ultimate load for $18. Quite competitive to the soft shackle price.
By your logic my 5/8" shackle would cost $36,000. But you're right, it's completely irrelevant to the discussion.

With all due respect, if you don't trust the soft shackle then obviously you are welcome to your own opinion, and are free to refrain from purchase.

It has nothing to do with whether or not I trust them. It has only to do with people having the information needed to make an informed decision.

Freedom of choice is what I serve to defend and what makes us a great nation.

Another irrelevancy. I haven't seen anyone suggest soft shackles should be banned.