I'm coming to the inexorable conclusion that awl stitching is at least as strong as machine stitching. But as I said, I am interested in reality, and not being in the adventure gear manufacturing bidness I very much appreciate you and Bruce and Scott coming here and sharing your experiences.
I kinda doubt it...but if you really want to find out, sew up some sample loops (at least 5) and I'll have 'em broken. Might take awhile, but I'll have it done eventually. OTOH, might contact PMI to do the tests...they have the equipment and I don't (would have to send them off to Petzl or elsewhere). BTW, don't you think this is the kind of testing that the NSS should be sponsoring?
But make no mistake, regardless of what's in your heart, you most certainly are in a conflict of interest every time you discuss the pros and cons of gear that competes with your employer's.
I agree with you in principle, but in this case I was not discussing anything that competes with Petzl stuff...unless you consider a speedy stitcher to be somehow competing with Petzl. If I had said, "you should buy the Petzl harness that has a machine-sewn FW loop on it" that would be different. In any event, I would not recommend anyone use any kind of loop (factory sewn or otherwise) to attach a FW to a leg loop. Fine for a pinch, but not for regular use.
You say that the data is at PMI? Hmmm, maybe there are ways of getting that data. Maybe there are ways of generating such data in another shop.
This test was just something I did in my spare time with the assistance of Chuck Weber. I doubt he kept the data and I didn't. It wasn't a full test series anyway, just one or two loops broken (can't remember). The test simply left me with an impression: my (not so) speedy stitching ain't good enough for life safety applications. YMMV.