I'm of the opinion that the double twist version is not an upgrade.
Hi TMCD,
Thanks for your message.
My instinct about extra things being added to common knots is similar to yours.
In this case, I am not aware that the second twist would be a variation on any “trucker” or “wagoner’s hitch” mentioned in Ashley. Yes it resembles 172 and 1148 with an extra twist, these are presented as Bell ringer’s knots rather than truckies, and of those knots Ashley says that “The purpose is to keep the rope from the belfry deck when the bell is not in use.” Hardly the same heavy duty job as the one required by a trucker’s hitch, which will place enormous tension on that portion of “shortened rope”.
In fact, unless I am misunderstanding, this thread started by PwH suggests that a double twist is the standard method of tying a truckie in the UK:
[EDIT: nope, PwH tells me that he was talking about something quite different: a twist in the pulley eye, before reeving the downhaul rope, which is also a different “choreography” to the video, where the downhaul is “pre-reeved”.]
Over here in England it is invariably tied as the first end of a short sheepshank, with a twist put in the eye to firm it up, then a bight of the W E pushed thru
This would explain why the truckie was shown to me like that in Australia.
Also, I do have day-to-day experience tying truckies, both with one twist and with two. I have experimented with one twist because when the truckie was taught to me a long time ago, I was told that “one twist can be enough, but it is not as strong.” That matches my experience exactly—especially when you don’t secure the ear with a half hitch. This may not count for much in an exchange of words, but that is my real-life experience. That’s why I was hoping to see more discussion of this simple method. On the other hand, that discussion is only meaningful if others also have experience with (or experiment with) various methods.
Wishing you a beautiful week,
Andy