|
nvrsmr14
Jan 3, 2006, 1:17 AM
Post #1 of 522
(87867 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2005
Posts: 5
|
This last weekend at Indian Creek one of my friends took a whipper on to a orange alien and it failed. The head of the cam completely ripped away from the stem. This was a brand new cam and should have held this fall. There was 25 feet of rope out and the fall was only four feet and had a dynamic belay. This is only a fall factor of .16 Has anyone heard about a manufacture defect or a recall on this cam?
|
|
|
|
|
tattooed_climber
Jan 3, 2006, 1:29 AM
Post #2 of 522
(87865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2003
Posts: 4838
|
shoot cch an email....they also may want to see it (for defects)
info@aliencams.com [info@aliencams.com]
or
cch@aliencamsbycch.com
INGNOR THOSE TWO....the new email is cchaliens@aol.com
edited to update the address
|
|
|
|
|
saxonyclimber
Jan 3, 2006, 1:49 AM
Post #3 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2005
Posts: 68
|
Please post pictures!
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Jan 3, 2006, 2:06 AM
Post #4 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
On a semi related note, I recently purchased a 2nd orange alien.
A quick visible inspection makes it look like the new one is almost 1/4" wider than my old one!
I'll break out the measuring tape.
|
|
|
|
|
miavzero
Jan 3, 2006, 2:37 AM
Post #5 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2005
Posts: 624
|
I have always been fond of my aliens, but cch seems to have really gone downhill in the last year. When I called them regarding the improperly drilled axle holes on a batch of oranges, I got the impression that they didn't really care. Engineers and other climbers that I spoke to all believed that a recall should have been issued.
My aliens have served me well, but CCH seems to think that they shouldn't be accountable for their work/customer service, because they are a small company. I believe that small companies should be held to the highest standard of quality and customer service. I'm glad to see that more dependable companies are working on innovative cam designs.
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 3, 2006, 3:37 AM
Post #6 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
Hi, I'm the guy that took the fall on this cam. I've never heard or seen of anything like this happening before! As you can see the stem completely dislocated from the axle.
Heres some background info:
I weigh 135 without gear on, I had placed three pieces of pro which where in a relatively straight line and I received a dynamic belay. I fell 8 feet with 24 feet of rope out which equals a fall factor of .3333 (not .16 which we previously thought). Thankfully I backed it up with a .75 Camelot which saved me from decking.
Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Kevin
http://img.villagephotos.com/...1130263/IMG_0210.jpg
Edited to insert images
|
|
|
|
|
dudemanbu
Jan 3, 2006, 3:56 AM
Post #7 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2005
Posts: 941
|
glad you're okay.
|
|
|
|
|
edge
Jan 3, 2006, 4:05 AM
Post #8 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
I am also glad you are OK!
Trad falls are scary enough, without worrying about gear ripping. I saw the cam marks skating out of Supercrack in 1985, when cams were still babies on the market; I can only imagine the horror show there now.
I do not personally own any aliens, but have used multitudes over the years while climbing on other people's racks.
Sadly, I have to agree with miavzero that the last few year's worth are severely compromised in quality control. Many, I recall, were drilled and assembled with the wrong cam axis, rendering them inconsistant at best, and useless at worst.
This may not apply to every single cam that they sold, but I think the ratio is not worth investing in.
More discussion here: http://www.supertopo.com/..._id=105618#msg105826
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 3, 2006, 4:09 AM
Post #9 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
Here are more pics to shed some more light on the situation.
http://img.villagephotos.com/...1130263/IMG_0206.jpg
This is the point at which I fell. As you can see the orange alien is at about foot level and the .75 is right below it.
http://img.villagephotos.com/...1130263/IMG_0207.jpg
Here is me falling and the piece spinning towards me. I fell trying to clip the red alien that is still in the crack.
Hopefully these pictures offer more information on the circumstances leading up to this failure.
Kevin
Edited for images
|
|
|
|
|
jermeng
Jan 3, 2006, 4:18 AM
Post #10 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2005
Posts: 64
|
REI did issue a recall of some unsold orange cams this past October. I'll have to look up the quality return memo when I get to the store. It did have to do with the range of the cams but not the performance. It indicated a date range of the units to be returned, though I don't remember these dates off-hand. I'll get back with some more details once I find the memo.
-Jeremy
|
|
|
|
|
climbinginchico
Jan 3, 2006, 4:19 AM
Post #11 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 3032
|
The pics don't work for me, even after I copy and paste the url's when i click on quote. do you have another place to host them?
|
|
|
|
|
enjoimx
Jan 3, 2006, 4:31 AM
Post #12 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 23, 2004
Posts: 378
|
Pics not working for me either....would love to see them.
|
|
|
|
|
themightyjimbo
Jan 3, 2006, 6:04 AM
Post #13 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 17, 2003
Posts: 31
|
wow. glad you are still with us. definitely contact cch.
|
|
|
|
|
thomaskeefer
Jan 3, 2006, 6:12 AM
Post #14 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2002
Posts: 186
|
Those pics are crazy! Has anyone had any luck contacting CCH about this? I have been having some problems keeping my newer aliens sludge free for some reason which is odd since the old ones (~8 years or so) are still snappy and work great. I dont really think that they are mistreated at all it just seems the action is not as good...
Hmm..
|
|
|
|
|
areuinclimber
Jan 3, 2006, 6:17 AM
Post #15 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2004
Posts: 436
|
if they dont handle this right i see a mass boycott in the near future.
|
|
|
|
|
landgolier
Jan 3, 2006, 6:42 AM
Post #16 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 714
|
I know it's hard to take notes during wingers, but did the thing offer any resistance at all, or did it just blow like it wasn't even there?
glad you're ok, gear failure sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 3, 2006, 7:05 AM
Post #17 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
I have two sets of hybrids and after the other thread about the mis-manufactured aliens with the axle hole drilled in the wrong location I checked mine. They have slight but observable variances in the axle hole location on same size cams and the cam lobes themselves have some interesting though equally slight differences relative to their shapes.
At this point it's clear that this more of craft/artist shop like a blacksmith or jewelry outfit and not a "normal/standard" manufacturing operation. From a pure manufacturing perspective none of these outcomes or behaviors would ever be tolerated let alone go publicly unacknowledged and addressed. And while the company still retains a fiercely loyal following who clearly understand and accept the "craft" nature of this operation, my feeling is each piece you buy should be carefully inspected prior to purchase and use. I like the design of my hybrids, but beyond that I personally have much, much higher expections from any manufacturing operation that produces gear I hang my life on...
Oh, and here is a cleaned up version of the shot:
http://www.cascadeclimbers.com/...0/6299img0210_1_.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
twclimber
Jan 3, 2006, 7:18 AM
Post #18 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2004
Posts: 29
|
this is bullsh1t!
I have been a loyal user of aliens for years. What the hell has happened to this company? I'm tired of defending them. I'm quitting the cch cult for good!
|
|
|
|
|
ricardol
Jan 3, 2006, 7:28 AM
Post #19 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1050
|
i have a double set of aliens + a double set of offsets ..
.. please do let us know what the response from CCH is .. i hope they treat you well .. and that they thoroughly investigate this failure ..
.. otherwise i may have to find a new favorite cam ..
|
|
|
|
|
cruzinsouthoc
Jan 3, 2006, 7:29 AM
Post #20 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2001
Posts: 84
|
First of all, glad you're alright man...
I've never heard of this kind of cam failure before. I use my red and orange Aliens all the time. Mine seem to look OK, I've placed and tugged on them, but never took a lead fall on them.
Is there anymore information on the Orange Alien recall at REI?
Aliens are very popular so if anybody learns about any signs of defect to look for, please let everyone know. I'm going to take a closer look at mine again before I use them again.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 3, 2006, 7:29 AM
Post #21 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
When was that cam purchased and from where?
|
|
|
|
|
roshiaitareya
Jan 3, 2006, 7:38 AM
Post #22 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 23, 2004
Posts: 345
|
Just sue CCH for not meeting safety standards. Then you'll be able to afford all the climbing gear you've ever wanted. And I charge 3% giving you the idea.
|
|
|
|
|
horseonwheels
Jan 3, 2006, 8:06 AM
Post #23 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2005
Posts: 226
|
Here's a discussion about the orange axle fiasco from supertopo.com.
http://www.supertopo.com/..._id=105618#msg112075
I'm interested to hear what CCH says about your exploding cam. I have been considering adding Aliens to complement my TCU's after using other peoples', but I'm beginning to think that I might want to wait for the C3's after everything I've been hearing about CCH.
Oh yeah.... and nice placement of that .75!!!
|
|
|
|
|
elepita
Jan 3, 2006, 9:01 AM
Post #24 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 23, 2005
Posts: 160
|
I took my first fall on a yellow alien and it held beautifully, I was leading aid though, it was not a big fall, maybe only 1 metre and a half, which would be 6 feet I guess (??). Anyway, I have heard of problems with aliens before, gladly I have not experienced one yet. Please keep us posted as to what CCH tells you. On another subject, I would like to ask people in this thread what feedback, if any, would you guys give to wild country cams, they don´t look very sturdy to me, but they might be great, I don´t know. I would like to know from you what are your experiences, especially if any with the smallest ones. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
andy_reagan
Jan 3, 2006, 1:21 PM
Post #25 of 522
(87864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 12, 2004
Posts: 1075
|
Was this the first fall this orange alien ever had to hold? So, in other words, if you had bounce tested it in a static sling (which puts tremendous forces on a peice correct me if I'm wrong?) you might would of averted this near disaster.
Comments?
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 3, 2006, 1:40 PM
Post #26 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: Was this the first fall this orange alien ever had to hold? So, in other words, if you had bounce tested it in a static sling (which puts tremendous forces on a peice correct me if I'm wrong?) you might would of averted this near disaster. Comments?
seriously?
I think it a bit unreasonable to expect leaders to preform much more than a thourough visual inspection of their protection. I don't think that the cllimber in question is in any way at fault for not anticipating the structural failure of his cam.
This is clearly an issue of quality control, and not of climber incompitance.
Do you bounce test all of your protection with a static sling before you lead above it (free climbing, not aiding)?
|
|
|
|
|
edge
Jan 3, 2006, 1:45 PM
Post #27 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
In reply to: Was this the first fall this orange alien ever had to hold? So, in other words, if you had bounce tested it in a static sling (which puts tremendous forces on a peice correct me if I'm wrong?) you might would of averted this near disaster. Comments?
Andy, how do you bounce test free climbing gear, without defying the definition?
Also, shouldn't gear manufacturers make sure that whatever hits the shelf is safe, or at least made to the best of their abilities? It looks like CCH just fokked up here, and needs to admit it. The fact that this was noted months ago (on another forum) does not help their case.
|
|
|
|
|
piton
Jan 3, 2006, 2:22 PM
Post #28 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1034
|
looks like they ran out of silver braze and used 60/40 solder! CCH really needs to stop using flame to braze these joints and switch to Induction Heating!
|
|
|
|
|
crotch
Jan 3, 2006, 2:51 PM
Post #29 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
As a member of the cult, it's sad to see that CCH has slipped.
It may be unreasonable to expect climbers to bounce test every sling, cam, or biner on the ground before leading with them but this is a good reminder that having only one piece between you and the ground isn't really a sound protection scheme.
To the original poster: Nice job arranging a protection SYSTEM and backing things up.
To the rest of us: Now is the time to bounce test those new aliens you've got on your rack.
To CCH: Sell the Alien brand to Malcolm Daly, buy some beer and go climbing for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 3, 2006, 3:04 PM
Post #30 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: Sell the Alien brand to...
You read my mind.
I'd be thrilled to hear that another well know climbing company purchased the rights to Aliens.
I'm sure those of you who sell them would be thrilled as well!
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Jan 3, 2006, 3:12 PM
Post #31 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
In reply to: Was this the first fall this orange alien ever had to hold? So, in other words, if you had bounce tested it in a static sling (which puts tremendous forces on a piece correct me if I'm wrong?) you might would of averted this near disaster. Comments?
I don't think was meant as a flame, as a few people have seem to have taken it.
It seems like there was a similar, Alien falling apart on a small fall, thread about a year ago.
Since CCH seems to be having quality issues, it seems like a simple bounce test while on the ground might not be a bad idea before trusting your life to it.
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Jan 3, 2006, 3:24 PM
Post #32 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
In reply to: In reply to: Sell the Alien brand to... You read my mind. I'd be thrilled to hear that another well know climbing company purchased the rights to Aliens. I'm sure those of you who sell them would be thrilled as well!
Not to hijack this thread and start a flame war but,..... :tinfoilhat:
Maybe Madrock bought the rights and they are being made in China now? :twisted:
:lol:
Seriously though, here are some older threads related to Alien failure:
http://rockclimbing.com/...topic=80507&forum=23
http://www.rockclimbing.com/....php?p=992499#992499
|
|
|
|
|
edge
Jan 3, 2006, 3:34 PM
Post #33 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
In reply to: Maybe Madrock bought the rights and they are being made in China now? :twisted: :lol:
Please do not attribute any gear that is inferior as automatically being made by Madrock, or by hardworking Chinese, unless you have insider information.
That company stands by their name; as all good companies should.
Associatiing an inferior product with them is unfair.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 3, 2006, 3:39 PM
Post #34 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: As a member of the cult, it's sad to see that CCH has slipped. . . . To CCH: Sell the Alien brand to Malcolm Daly, buy some beer and go climbing for a few years.
Now there is a good idea...
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 3, 2006, 3:39 PM
Post #35 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: It seems like there was a similar, Alien falling apart on a small fall, thread about a year ago. Since CCH seems to be having quality issues, it seems like a simple bounce test while on the ground might not be a bad idea before trusting your life to it.
I'll definately agree with you there. I'll likely bounce test mine now!
On the other hand, what about the people who climb above aliens every day that do not follow the posts on this site? CCH needs to be held accountable.
When you are marketing a product like cams, from a business prospective, the consumer's trust in the device to hold a fall is almost more valuable than its actual ability (only talking about selling cams here, please don't misread) Many noobs, like myslef, search the threads on this site extensively before deciding which cams to purchase. It wouldn't take too many customer complaints before a large amount of their business is lost to other companies.
Again, from a business vantage point (not a climber's), It's not as much how frequently a customer recieves a defective device, but how you handle the situation once the problem happens.
The guys at CCH are squandering the gold mine they sit on.
|
|
|
|
|
andy_reagan
Jan 3, 2006, 3:46 PM
Post #36 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 12, 2004
Posts: 1075
|
In reply to: In reply to: Was this the first fall this orange alien ever had to hold? So, in other words, if you had bounce tested it in a static sling (which puts tremendous forces on a piece correct me if I'm wrong?) you might would of averted this near disaster. Comments? I don't think was meant as a flame, as a few people have seem to have taken it. It seems like there was a similar, Alien falling apart on a small fall, thread about a year ago. Since CCH seems to be having quality issues, it seems like a simple bounce test while on the ground might not be a bad idea before trusting your life to it.
Of course no flame. Probably should of worded my post differently, but yes, I was suggesting going beyond a simple visual inspection when buying new gear and bounce testing it before trusting it and climbing above it. The only reason I suggested this is because I have never heard of doing this with new gear, but in light of the rash of defects seems like it may be a good idea!
Edge: No, you would not have to do this on every free climb. I would wager your belayer would think you were a tad "touched." :lol:
Have fun, be safe!
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 3, 2006, 3:50 PM
Post #37 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
thanks to everyone who has given feed back on this issue. Here are some answers to some of the questions raised.
The alien was purchased a week before this climbing trip as a Christmas gift.
It had never been fallen on, (and only placed once)
And no, it did not occur to me that I should bounce test the piece.
I did e-mail CCH last night with all of the details of what happened and pictures. I'll let you all know what they say.
Thanks again,
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 3, 2006, 4:03 PM
Post #38 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Would you mind posting a close up profile shot of the head of your busted orange Alien? I'd really like to see if it's one of the ones that were drilled incorrectly, RE, the Supertopo thread.
|
|
|
|
|
piton
Jan 3, 2006, 4:09 PM
Post #39 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1034
|
looked like a cold braze joint
|
|
|
|
|
edge
Jan 3, 2006, 4:09 PM
Post #40 of 522
(72965 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
In reply to: Would you mind posting a close up profile shot of the head of your busted orange Alien? I'd really like to see if it's one of the ones that were drilled incorrectly, RE, the Supertopo thread.
The SuperTopo thread is months old, and well documented.
If that cam was mis-drilled and CCH allows them to still be sold without a recall, then I would not trust any of their gear in the future, regardless of their reputation or previous history.
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 3, 2006, 4:23 PM
Post #41 of 522
(72963 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
In reply to: Would you mind posting a close up profile shot of the head of your busted orange Alien? I'd really like to see if it's one of the ones that were drilled incorrectly, RE, the Supertopo thread.
http://img.villagephotos.com/...1130263/DSCF0042.JPG
It looked OK to me, but it was my first orange alien so I had nothing to compare it to.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
mistertyler
Jan 3, 2006, 4:37 PM
Post #42 of 522
(72963 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 9, 2003
Posts: 197
|
In reply to: I did e-mail CCH last night with all of the details of what happened and pictures. I'll let you all know what they say.
What?! Are you crazy?!? By contacting CCH to ask for an explanation you have recklessly endangered the life of this thread. Have you even considered just how difficult it will be to make the case that CCH is doomed as a company should they respond reasonably and responsibly to your inquiry?
I expended considerable effort composing a wild, bilious rant about CCH filled with unsubstantiated but difficult-to-counter accusations and perfectly formed, irrelevant proclamations of lost-loyalty, and now you've ruined it!
The next thing you know some idiot will pick up the phone and call them at (307) 721-9385.
*Sigh*
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 3, 2006, 5:00 PM
Post #43 of 522
(72963 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: In reply to: I did e-mail CCH last night with all of the details of what happened and pictures. I'll let you all know what they say. What?! Are you crazy?!? By contacting CCH to ask for an explanation you have recklessly endangered the life of this thread. Have you even considered just how difficult it will be to make the case that CCH is doomed as a company should they respond reasonably and responsibly to your inquiry? I expended considerable effort composing a wild, bilious rant about CCH filled with unsubstantiated but difficult-to-counter accusations and perfectly formed, irrelevant proclamations of lost-loyalty, and now you've ruined it! The next thing you know some idiot will pick up the phone and call them at (307) 721-9385. *Sigh*
ah, yes, a good response out of CCH.
Something we should all expect after the previous fiasco involving the same orange cam, and their deft handling of it.
irrelevant proclamations of lost-loyalty?
With the pevious incident, CCH demonstrated their poor commitment to safety, manufacturing standards, quality control, and customer service all in one fell swoop.
Now some dude's brand-new medium-sized cam exploded after a less than severe fall.
Irrelevant?...Realy?
I will concede that speculation on CCH's response may be premature, but hardly unfounded. What we're seing out of them can hardly be mistaken for the beginnings of a fould trend.
|
|
|
|
|
mistertyler
Jan 3, 2006, 5:24 PM
Post #44 of 522
(72963 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 9, 2003
Posts: 197
|
In reply to: ah, yes, a good response out of CCH. Something we should all expect after the previous fiasco involving the same orange cam, and their deft handling of it. Now some dude's brand-new medium-sized cam exploded after a less than severe fall. Irrelevant?...Realy? I will concede that speculation on CCH's response may be premature, but hardly unfounded. What we're seing out of them can hardly be mistaken for the beginnings of a fould trend.
Pro failure is obviously something to be concerned about. The point of my post was to mock all the ridiculous, irrelevant posts both from this thread, previous threads here on rc.com, and especially on supertopo.com that add no useful information to help get to the bottom of these issues. There were a slurry of posts on supertopo that even ripped on their website.
I'm in f-ing Thailand and it took me 2 minutes to call CCH via Skype and talk to a live person. The guy told me he was "very concerned" about any gear failure and implored the OP to call him ASAP.
|
|
|
|
|
edge
Jan 3, 2006, 5:33 PM
Post #45 of 522
(72963 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
In reply to: I'm in f-ing Thailand and it took me 2 minutes to call CCH via Skype and talk to a live person.
Did you catch this person's name; and care to share it? I need to talk to them about this as well.
Thanks in advance!
Loran
|
|
|
|
|
fishercrack
Jan 3, 2006, 5:57 PM
Post #46 of 522
(72963 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 18, 2005
Posts: 27
|
my email to cch has seen no reply, and they are not answering their phone. Sure, they are probably very worried, but their lack of customer service and public relations is disturbing. They have a user account (cchaliens). Why couldn't they at least log on and make some sort of statement that shows that they are concerned, or at least investigating the incident?
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 3, 2006, 6:09 PM
Post #47 of 522
(72963 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
In reply to: What?! Are you crazy?!? By contacting CCH to ask for an explanation you have recklessly endangered the life of this thread. Have you even considered just how difficult it will be to make the case that CCH is doomed as a company should they respond reasonably and responsibly to your inquiry?
The purpose of this thread was to see if other people have had similar experiences and to raise awareness of the issue. Not to "make a case" against CCH.
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Jan 3, 2006, 6:23 PM
Post #48 of 522
(72963 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
I think you've done a fair job of posting the facts. I, too, have long been a drinker of the CCH Kool-Aid and some accusations against them in the past have been simply ridiculous. These threads about the Orange cams are a different matter.
I sense a class action lawsuite waiting in the wings, especially if CCH continues to take no action to fix the problem. I'm hoping they will make some sort of public statement about what the hell is going on. I personally own 36 Aliens and trust them with my life, but I wouldn't trust any purchased in the last six months until CCH clarifies the nature and scope of the manufacturing problem.
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
tradgal
Jan 3, 2006, 6:43 PM
Post #49 of 522
(72963 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Posts: 384
|
In reply to: I sense a class action lawsuite waiting in the wings, especially if CCH continues to take no action to fix the problem. I'm hoping they will make some sort of public statement about what the hell is going on.
This thread was posted YESTERDAY.... An email was sent by the person who owns the cam--LAST NIGHT!!! Are we forgetting that? While this is a small company in terms of climbing, this is a company. And, most companies have red tape, procedures that must be followed. You aren't going to have Joe Blow who answers the phone and responds to email release a statement or come up with a plan to remedy this situation. I would imagine, like any business, they are taking the proper measures.
While no one should stand for poor quality and product failures--especially when they involve one's life--we have to remember that this was isolated (in terms of a cam "exploding"). And, it's not that CCH is necessarily ignoring or not logging into the most up to date news source being RC.com (because I am sure that's their top priority) they just have not responded as of today (less than 24 hours after an EMAIL was sent). And, let me remind you that you don't have to be logged on to read this particular thread.
|
|
|
|
|
paganmonkeyboy
Jan 3, 2006, 6:49 PM
Post #50 of 522
(72963 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 30, 2003
Posts: 663
|
In reply to: my email to cch has seen no reply, and they are not answering their phone. Sure, they are probably very worried, but their lack of customer service and public relations is disturbing. They have a user account (cchaliens). Why couldn't they at least log on and make some sort of statement that shows that they are concerned, or at least investigating the incident?
Could be that no one is there at this instant ? No One qualified to address this issue ? Day after the long weekend/week+ of vacation and all that sort of thing ?
I'd give CCH the benefit of the doubt for a little while yet...
|
|
|
|
|
climb_ian
Jan 3, 2006, 6:51 PM
Post #51 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 28, 2005
Posts: 77
|
and to think i just bought the orange one s---! :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
edge
Jan 3, 2006, 6:52 PM
Post #52 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
Tradgirl, you are right about the posting dates for this particular thread, but did you read all four pages?
The link I provided to a similar topic on SuperTopo is dated early October, and the company was made well aware of the problem then. They have had almost 3 months to respond.
Plus, the pic in this thread looks like a problem with the flexible stem being swaged to the head, which I believe has also been brought to their attention (I will hunt for it, but is probably listed in the related threads at the bottom of this page).
So, 1) ample notice of inferior swaging, and 2)innacurate milling of the cam. I personally think some sort of notice should be issued by the company.
|
|
|
|
|
mistertyler
Jan 3, 2006, 7:06 PM
Post #53 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 9, 2003
Posts: 197
|
Insainio: No part of my post was directed at you, whatsoever.
Loran: Sorry, I didn't get his name. The internet cafe I was in was shutting down for the night (I'm back at my hotel, now), and the prepaid internet access I bought literally had less than a minute left on it when I hurriedly finished up my brief conversation with the guy and then hung up.
It did take me several tries to get through to him (a fax machine picked up on my previous attempts), but he did answer the phone and I have gotten through to people there several times in the past.
My impressions from the brief conversation I had with him were that he's much more interested in *talking* with people who have questions, issues, etc. (and most specifically, the actual person who had the issue) over the phone rather than dealing with this online, and to a very large extent I don't blame him. I do think that a blanket post to the effect of "Hi. We're looking into this and will keep you informed as to what we find out..." would help to allay a lot of the back and forth gibberish that gets thrown around whenever something like this comes up, but that's about it.
Anyway, keep calling, Insainio; I'm sure you'll get through.
Let us know what you find out!
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 3, 2006, 7:06 PM
Post #54 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: Tradgirl, you are right about the posting dates for this particular thread, but did you read all four pages? The link I provided to a similar topic on SuperTopo is dated early October, and the company was made well aware of the problem then. They have had almost 3 months to respond. Plus, the pic in this thread looks like a problem with the flexible stem being swaged to the head, which I believe has also been brought to their attention (I will hunt for it, but is probably listed in the related threads at the bottom of this page). So, 1) ample notice of inferior swaging, and 2)innacurate milling of the cam. I personally think some sort of notice should be issued by the company.
word
|
|
|
|
|
tradgal
Jan 3, 2006, 7:17 PM
Post #55 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Posts: 384
|
I saw the super-topo thread. I see what you are saying, but these are two separate issues. Poor customer relations--sure, negligent???? Let's just wait and see...
From supertopo...
In reply to: thanks shack i called CCH and here is the scoop Appearently they had some new machinery and the axle hole was bored in the wrong location so there are definitly some bad aliens out there. Not sure how many or if it affects sizes other then orange. they said if I was not happy send it in and they will send out a good one. Great I'll do just that. CCH seemed to know of the problem. The arc of the expansion curve is at least 200% off from factory specs seems that could very well be a safety issue. These products need to go thru exact design enginerring and testing. I question CCH for not doing a product recall even if there was not a safety issue these cams dont meet their factory specs and i wonder if they have even tested these cams to failure to see how they hold up.IMO CCH needs to take this more seriously then just offering replacements to people that call them. If this had happened to BD i bet they would do a product recall. What do you all think?
I would be curious to see why REI issued a recall? Was it because of their own concerns or if CCH asked them to pull the products? Anyone know?
|
|
|
|
|
tradgal
Jan 3, 2006, 7:22 PM
Post #56 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Posts: 384
|
I just called CCH and asked if they were aware of what happenned and what their plans of remedy or public awareness was...
Dave of CCH said that they were aware. They plan to make a statement later today. And they are looking into the situation. Impossible to know exactly what happened by only hearing stories or seeing pictures. But were looking into it as we spoke.
BTW, I dialed the phone number only once. They answered on third ring and were very nice.
|
|
|
|
|
jsj42
Jan 3, 2006, 7:39 PM
Post #57 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 24, 2002
Posts: 374
|
I can't comment on the mis-drilled axle issue or on the head popping off of the stem, but I would like to share my experience with customer service.
In late October I mailed in an Alien that needed trigger wire repair. I included my address and number as they requested, but never heard from them.
A phone call in early November confirmed that they had received the cam and were in the process of repairing it -- it would be sent back to me that week.
Two weeks went by (early December now) and hadn't received the Alien. Worried that it might have been lost in the mail, I placed a phone call. CCH informed me that the Alien was done but they hadn't sent it to me. I gave them my address a second time -- perhaps they didn't have it?
I should add that on several occasions I spoke to a woman at CCH who couldn't answer my questions but promised to pass my message on to someone who could. My calls were never returned however, every time I had to call back.
It's now early January. I called again today and was told that my Alien was still there, and ready to go. I mentioned that I thought I would have received it weeks ago and was surprised to still not have it. CCH confirmed my address a second time. I then asked if they had an estimate on WHEN it would be shipped. CCH told me that it would go out today - I guess we'll see!
I realize they have a small shop and a huge demand. I would understand if I had to wait months for something like this to be taken care of, but if it's going to take a long time, they should just say that up front. Furthermore, if someone says they'll call you back, they should do it.
Ironically, the cam I sent in was an orange alien :)
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Jan 3, 2006, 7:59 PM
Post #58 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
In reply to: This thread was posted YESTERDAY.... An email was sent by the person who owns the cam--LAST NIGHT!!! Are we forgetting that?
I'm not forgetting that I have 8 F*ing Alien offsets (that's eight) on the way to me right now (my Christmas gift to myself). Furthermore, if tomorrow we hear of a death due to another Orange Alien failure at the creek then I would have to say NO, today is not too late to hear something.
But thats me.
And I don't think I forget THAT either.
But thats me, your results may vary.
|
|
|
|
|
tradgal
Jan 3, 2006, 8:23 PM
Post #59 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Posts: 384
|
I am not disagreeing that a statement should be released as soon as possible...that's why I called CCH--to ask!
But, I am realistic in what I am asking of a company whose reputation and customer's safety is on the line.
I wonder how many Ford SUV's rolled over before a recall was issued--Surely more than one. How many airbags didn't release on certain vehicles before a recall was issued. More than one?
I would hate for someone to be hurt by using one of these cams if they are, in FACT, defective. But, unfortunately, we don't know that answer. And, as it would appear per the phone conversation--CCH is looking into it now.
BTW, I own a full set of Aliens that use regularly and have taken many falls on. If my safety was in danger--I definitely would want to know. I don't want a "maybe," "possibly," or "it could happen." I want a definitive answer. I don't want to deal with a company who will make an uneducated statement or a statement they don't know is 100 percent true. I don't want CCH to fluff information to make a quick statement. I want CCH to make an informed statement taking into account all possible causes of failure. To cover our ass and their own.
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Jan 3, 2006, 8:36 PM
Post #60 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
I missed the part where they acknowledged reciept of the email. As in, "we will be looking into that".
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Jan 3, 2006, 8:37 PM
Post #61 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
Tradgal -- this is not a new issue. They have virtually ignored complaints about this particular run of Orange Aliens for several months. This is the first publically reported incident where one has failed. It's the lack of action by CCH and failure to address a known problem that is opening them up to greater liability via a class action suite.
I, too, have spoke with Dave in the past about various issues and I've been an ardent CCH supporter over the years. Fact is, they make some pretty piss-poor business decisions. The thread on Supertopo was also brought to their attention months ago, and as you can see by reading it, CCH has choosen not to address this problem in any way, shape, or form. I hope they take the opportunity, now, to explain to the public which cams were affected, what date range they were produced, and what they are recommending the owners of some fucked up cams should do to make the situation right.
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
leapinlizard
Jan 3, 2006, 8:48 PM
Post #62 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 14, 2004
Posts: 200
|
I wonder if it has anyting to do with last year when the company coudn't produce enough cams to supply the Yosemite Mountain Store with any. When I was talking to the guy at the YMS he told me that REI bought so many from CCH that they weren't able to supply any to any other company for a while.
|
|
|
|
|
tradgal
Jan 3, 2006, 8:54 PM
Post #63 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Posts: 384
|
In reply to: I missed the part where they acknowledged reciept of the email. As in, "we will be looking into that".
You also missed the part where I spoke to someone on the phone.
Re: Epic-Ed's comment...
"Fact is, they make some pretty piss-poor business decisions"
No denying that...
"CCH has choosen not to address this problem in any way, shape, or form."
They were replacing those that have been turned in--which is at least acknowledging a problem and addressing it in some way--possibly not the best way. But as far as I know there was no known weakness in strength noted on that issue?
J_ung--in the up close picture--(and I may have missed this answer) did that cam look like one of the cams that was drilled incorrectly?
"I hope they take the opportunity, now, to explain to the public which cams were affected, what date range they were produced, and what they are recommending the owners of some f--- up cams should do to make the situation right. "
I agree, but I also think we need to give them opportunity and time to make this business decision responsibly...
Edited because apparently I don't know how to use the "quote" buttons well...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Jan 3, 2006, 9:26 PM
Post #65 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
In reply to: In reply to: CCH has choosen not to address this problem in any way, shape, or form. They were replacing those that have been turned in--which is at least acknowledging a problem and addressing it in some way--possibly not the best way. But as far as I know there was no known weakness in strength noted on that issue?
No -- this would be an acceptible way to address a single failure, or to gather data about a possible, unknown defect in a production run. In this case, CCH admitted that there had been "some" cams produced that weren't drilled for the correct cam axle. Well, fuck -- how much is "SOME!" -- and are mine among the affected?!
Once a company knows that it has defective run of cams out there for distribution, it no longer acceptible that they handle it on a case-by-case basis. Someone at CCH needs to get off their ass, figure out how many cams are affected by the faulty axle placement, and indicate to the public what they can do to determine if they own one of these defective cams and what they can do to remedy the situation. They also need to let us know what the expected ramifications are for using the defective equipment. Is the failure of the cam head in question related to the defective production? Or is it entirely unrelated, but part of another problem?
Granted, they need time to address this specific issue, but by their own admission there have been production issues with the Orange Alien in particular and they have know about it for a very long time. Addressing customer concerns about a known defect like this in a private, one-on-one basis gives the appearance of wanting to keep the problem quite and sweep it under the rug.
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
dudemanbu
Jan 3, 2006, 9:34 PM
Post #67 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2005
Posts: 941
|
If the failure was related to the lobes being incorrectly drilled, it's probable that the lobes themselves would have failed and not the brazing that connects the head to the stem.
It appears that this is a completely different and unrelated problem. Which is not a good thing.
you know what they say..
mo' problems... mo' problems?
|
|
|
|
|
yosemite
Jan 3, 2006, 9:49 PM
Post #68 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 5, 2002
Posts: 331
|
There seem to be two issues with the aliens. The first is the misplaced axle, while the other is a weak connection where the cable attaches above the plate that hold the wires to the cam lobes. Based on what I gather so far, the problems are not related. Is it the consensus that these problems have only been found in the orange aliens?
I just checked my two orange aliens. One has an opaque orange plastic clip-in tube with a red sling. The other “orange” one uses semi-transparent RED plastic tubing material with a red sling. The former is marked 0501; the latter 0902, which I take to be month and year of manufacture.
Anybody have the numeric codes on aliens that have failed?
Thanks.
Gene
|
|
|
|
|
leapinlizard
Jan 3, 2006, 10:03 PM
Post #69 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 14, 2004
Posts: 200
|
Out of the whole thing, what I find absolutely unbelievable is that the OP actually had pictures of the setup, prefall, and fall. I guess it was a good thing that they had a camera when this happened so they could document it so well. How lucky they were to have had all the evidence that they need to go after CCH. And the fact that the alien was backed up by a black diamond directly below it that held. It's amazing that this leader had the foresight to back up that particular cam. Just imagine if he hadn't have backed it up. I guess it really goes to show you that the CCH alien couldn't hold what the BD could.
|
|
|
|
|
edge
Jan 3, 2006, 10:10 PM
Post #70 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
Ed Leeper takes out full page (or damn close to it) ads about bolt hangers he produced in the late 70's.
I bet his hangers cost 1/50th of what an Alien cost.
I just think if CCH is aware of a problem, then they should address it as such.
Right????
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Jan 3, 2006, 10:31 PM
Post #71 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
In reply to: Ed Leeper takes out full page (or damn close to it) ads about bolt hangers he produced in the late 70's. I bet his hangers cost 1/50th of what an Alien cost. I just think if CCH is aware of a problem, then they should address it as such. Right????
RIGHT ON.
And they should be responding, via email, IMMEDIATLY, to the person with the 2 part cam, not just any ol tradgirl who is totally unaffected and just happens to call later on via phone.
And what else would they say to you Tgirl? They obviously were just trying to get you off the phone, and they did.
|
|
|
|
|
tradgal
Jan 3, 2006, 11:04 PM
Post #72 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Posts: 384
|
Do you really want the guy making minimum wage who reads the email to respond to such a serious allegation? Or would you rather wait for an informed response?
I was proactive in calling instead of waiting around to see what opinions were posted next on this thread. I decided, instead, to find out for myself.
I am affected by this. I own a full set of Aliens. And I do care--or I wouldnt bother responding or calling CCH to find out first hand.
For the record, Dave was very nice on the phone. He offered more info that I even asked about. He didn't brush me off or simply not answer the phone. He took the time to answer respectively.
And, frankly--if this had happenned to me, the first thing I would have done was call CCH, not post a thread and later email CCH. That's not a shot at the OP (though it sounds that way). I just want to make it clear that people repsond to situations in different ways. While I called and asked questions, you post sarcastic comments on threads asking why someone "not involved" would call. As climbers, we are all involved.
I am not necessarily defending CCH, I am simply giving them the benefit of the doubt. Innocent until proven guilty. I am realist. I am a business owner. Perhaps, I am able to see this from a perspective other than a just a climber.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 3, 2006, 11:16 PM
Post #73 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
- Repair times in months that require multiple inquiries
- Defective SS stem sheath batches
- Badly or not soldered heads
- Variances, both large and small in axle hole location
- Use of differing axle diameters in same size cams (Red/Yellow)
That's actually quite a litany of manufacturing and quality problems that badly need to be addressed and belies some real systemic problems. Dave has had the benefit of the doubt now for a year or so and has not responded in any formal public way to-date. I suspect CCH and not REI needs to run a formal consumer recall process on some of their product.
Oh, and Bill Coe is also speaking as a business owner who supplies manufacturers with specialized fastners and does speak with solid knowledge on the topic.
|
|
|
|
|
sixleggedinsect
Jan 3, 2006, 11:17 PM
Post #74 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 385
|
In reply to: For the record, Dave was very nice on the phone. He offered more info that I even asked about. He didn't brush me off or simply not answer the phone. He took the time to answer respectively.
yeah.. chh, customer service of the highest standards.
i get a real kick out of the folks who called CCH once and chatted with dave (who, yes, is always nice on the phone) and come away warm and fuzzy inside.
and then there are the rest of us, who have called, emailed, and PMd CCH fifteen times trying to find out what the hell happened to gear we sent them months ago. most of the time getting no one. sometimes getting through and being promised empty unfulfilled promises. calling back later, emailing when asked to email, calling again, trying their rc.com handle, getting strung along and promised left and right and .. well, beating a dead horse here.
i was whining about this to a chick i met from laramie. she offered to take a six pack over to their shop and plead my case in person. i turned her down, thinking there was no way it would need to come to that, but now i wonder..
and ive got an orange alien waiting for me at home, brand new from rei, and now im f*cking gripped that im going to die next time i take a fall on the thing.
man. man oh man.
ill third the trango motion. id cry tears of joy to see the honorable maldaly set everything right. maybe he could give the cch guys a sinecure contract. they can sit in a backroom somewhere with a dusty CNC machine and a beer funnel and they dont have to bother with drilling axle holes on center anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 3, 2006, 11:19 PM
Post #75 of 522
(68489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
In reply to: And, frankly--if this had happened to me, the first thing I would have done was call CCH, not post a thread and later email CCH. That's not a shot at the OP (though it sounds that way).
Actually, I did e-mail CCH before posting this. I e-mailed instead of called because 1. they were closed and 2. I had pictures which could better explain what happened than I could over the phone (P.S. thanks Michelle for taking the pics). I then wanted to post this to warn other climbers.
Oh, and the number on the cam is "805"
And as of yet, they have not responded to my e-mail.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
jsj42
Jan 3, 2006, 11:27 PM
Post #76 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 24, 2002
Posts: 374
|
In reply to: In reply to: J_ung--in the up close picture--(and I may have missed this answer) did that cam look like one of the cams that was drilled incorrectly? Actually, no, it doesn't. Right now I'm trying to decide if that's a good thing or a bad thing.
Hee hee. That's funny! We should create a poll:
Which would you rather fall on: An old-style Leeper hanger or an orange Alien?
|
|
|
|
|
jsj42
Jan 3, 2006, 11:53 PM
Post #77 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 24, 2002
Posts: 374
|
In reply to: I was proactive in calling instead of waiting around to see what opinions were posted next on this thread. I decided, instead, to find out for myself.
It's only going to be good for us to have people calling CCH and inquiring/complaining. The more the voices and the louder they are, perhaps the more they'll listen.
But tradgal, you're giving CCH "the benefit of the doubt?" Give me a break! The failures of these cams are documented. You get the benefit of the doubt before you screw up. Once you screw up the burden of proof is on your shoulders -- not the people who are affected.
The reason we're all so vocal about it is because, conceptually, Aliens are amazing pieces of equipment. But in reality, if you can't trust them, let alone if you have good reasons NOT to trust them, then what good are they?
What you don't seem to understand is that this isn't some big business like Black Diamond... I saw the shop once and my impression was that it was a little removed from a garage workshop. Half the time I've called their phone is answered by a busy-sounding woman and I've heard, what sounded like, a crying toddler in the background. I don't think they have a staff to respond to people's emails and inquiries. Apparently they don't have a QA staff either. This probably worked fine when the demand for the product was managable, but with REI buying out their entire stock every year, it appears they simply aren't able to keep their products QA'd and SAFE.
The way I see it they've cut corners and now, hopefully, it will bite them in the ass before it bites any more climbers in the ass. I want to see the Alien brand live on and actually be in stock at my local shop... but if I can't place one of them when I'm otherwise way run out and have faith that the thing won't explode if I fall on it, what's the point?
Awhile ago I had two sets of small cams - BD's and Aliens. When I added a third set, I added more BD's... not because I like them better, but because I just can't trust Aliens. I hope CCH is listening.
And I also hope that Malcolm is smiling at all the veiled compliments in this thread. Nothing would please me more to see the Alien concept developed by someone who actually gives a damn. I'm positive that Malcolm does - and he's certainly got as many business concerns as CCH. He's personally responded to many of my emails, regularly reads posts on this site, and cares about his climbers. Again... I hope CCH is listening.
|
|
|
|
|
tradgal
Jan 3, 2006, 11:54 PM
Post #78 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Posts: 384
|
About two years ago, I ordered a full set of Aliens from Mgear.com. They , of course, were out of stock. I proactively called CCH to find out when they were to ship to mgear.com again. At the time, they weren't exactly sure, but they offered to drop ship my order to me. Which means, instead of shipping the order to mgear to ship to me, CCH shipped directly to me and I in return paid mgear.com. I had my Aliens a week later.
That is not poor customer service. When I talked to Dave on the phone today, I did not receive poor customer service.
Do I think their current crisis management team or public relations staff is crap--yes. If I owned that business would I have already addressed this situation to the best of my ability--Yes. But, I don't own that business. None of us do. And, until we hear from CCH regarding this, none of us can fathom the exact explanation for the alleged failure. Or the reasons behind the way they have handled this situation.
To the OP, I was going off your previous post that you emailed CCH last night...seemed as though it was after the thread was listed...though that's completely beside the point... I just wanted to argue that everyone handles situations differently...
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Jan 4, 2006, 12:11 AM
Post #79 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
In reply to: Out of the whole thing, what I find absolutely unbelievable is that the OP actually had pictures of the setup, prefall, and fall. I guess it was a good thing that they had a camera when this happened so they could document it so well.
I guess cameras really are everywhere and I guess [ at least in this case] that is a good thing.
I was also impressed with these shots. Including the cam flying through the air as the leader starts to catch on the next piece down.
If somebody had posted that such a low fall factor had caused the cam to fail without the photos, I wouldn't have given it much credence unless I knew something about the poster.
|
|
|
|
|
tradgal
Jan 4, 2006, 12:14 AM
Post #80 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Posts: 384
|
Like they say, opinions are like assholes--we all have them.
But, if the failures of these cams are "documented," I doubt they would still be on the market. The defects of the cams are documented on a forum (axle drilling). The actual strength and safety tests on those defects have note been publicly posted or completed. If completed, they may prove CCH to be the producers of ill-manufactured, usafe cams. I am just asking that we all wait for definitive proof not opinions. Same with this instance of the stem coming apart from the head of the cam.
As for poor customer service--that's as prevalent as assholes in this world. Though, it has been my experience that CCH has treated me well.
I do know CCH is small company and doesn't have the staff that say, REI has. Not debating that. But any business owner should/ and probably does have some business plan (whether written or conceptual) about how to handle "crisis manangement." CCH has somethings to learn about that...
|
|
|
|
|
shutupandbelay
Jan 4, 2006, 12:22 AM
Post #81 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 10, 2005
Posts: 6
|
To all you cch lovers... I have never liked the things and have always used the original tcu taking many fine whips on them. It is a reassuring feeling to trust in ones protection.
|
|
|
|
|
sixleggedinsect
Jan 4, 2006, 12:23 AM
Post #82 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 385
|
In reply to: But, if the failures of these cams are "documented," I doubt they would still be on the market.
there is photographic evidence that
1. there were fall forces well below the published strength rating for the cam, and
2. the soldering failed
which counts for documention in my book.
from my dusty brazing/soldering experience, that looks like a bad joint to me. didnt clean the head, or cold soldered it, or used the wrong flux/solder, id venture to guess. all of those would be serious and repeatable problems.
i dont want to bounce test my aliens and then hope for the best. anyways, the forces generated in bounce testing won't guarantee you anywhere strength anywhere near real high factor fall forces. i want to KNOW they're going to fail near or at (or above) their rated strength if i put them in a good spot. nothing less is acceptable.
CCH product testing/quality control: joe-schmoe bounce testing his cams in his basement. great.
|
|
|
|
|
thrutch
Jan 4, 2006, 12:37 AM
Post #83 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 5, 2005
Posts: 14
|
tcus are the way to go, anything else is far inferior.
|
|
|
|
|
tradgal
Jan 4, 2006, 12:40 AM
Post #84 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Posts: 384
|
perhaps we hold different opinions of the word "documented."
If someone on this website tells me aliens have invaded earth and have taken over the whitehouse--you better believe that I will be watching CNN or another reputable source. I wouldn't be asking another forum consultant...
Call me paranoid, skeptical, silly, whatever. But, I require more proof than someone posting a picture. I know I have tooled around with photoshop before.
And, before everyone gets all huffy and puffy--I am NOT accusing the OP of lying or fixing a photo. I simply want to hear from CCH as to why/how/if this happenned. Some of you may remember in Feb '05 a similar post was made and no photos were ever shown. The all-mighty rc.com'ers labeled that incidence a "hoax." Was it? We may never know. The OP of that thread has never logged on again...
I hope that if indeed this is a TRUE problem with Aliens, that CCH remedies the problem before anyone gets hurt and in a respectable manner.
Siding with skepticism or innocent until proven guilty, the "break" between the head of the cam and the stem looks WAY too clean to be a break. Also, and I am not sure, but by looking at my orange Alien, if that seam bewteen the head and stem were broken, then the wires connecting the lobes to the stem would also have to have broke for that piece to have failed. Wouldn't the entire piece be busted more so than what is shown? Or wouldn't the metal piece that the wires are connect to be apart from the stem itself.
Again, these are questions that came to mind whil looking at my Alien and the pictures...
|
|
|
|
|
sixleggedinsect
Jan 4, 2006, 12:56 AM
Post #85 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 385
|
In reply to: perhaps we hold different opinions of the word "documented." If someone on this website tells me aliens have invaded earth and have taken over the whitehouse--you better believe that I will be watching CNN or another reputable source. I wouldn't be asking another forum consultant... Call me paranoid, skeptical, silly, whatever. But, I require more proof than someone posting a picture. I know I have tooled around with photoshop before.
tradgal, im rolling my eyes here. your alien analogy is bogus. and the climbing media? there is a good argument to be made that we are the climbing media. you going to wait for some climbing mag editor to deck when his alien breaks to hear anything about it? and you think those pictures were photoshopped? so that the OP could start this thread? have you been reading? are you for real?
In reply to: Siding with skepticism or innocent until proven guilty, the "break" between the head of the cam and the stem looks WAY too clean to be a break. Also, and I am not sure, but by looking at my orange Alien, if that seam bewteen the head and stem were broken, then the wires connecting the lobes to the stem would also have to have broke for that piece to have failed. Wouldn't the entire piece be busted more so than what is shown? Or wouldn't the metal piece that the wires are connect to be apart from the stem itself.
the failure looks clean because there was a weak bond between the cable and the head. the soldering job was botched. do you know anything about joining metals?
the trigger wires are not broken because as soon as the stem failed, the load came onto the wires and effectively cleaned the cam.
i think giving cch the benefit of the doubt here is really pushing it. i understand that you have had good experiences with cch in the past, but you are really stretching your agenda with these last couple posts.
|
|
|
|
|
mr8615
Jan 4, 2006, 1:06 AM
Post #86 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 1032
|
I'm going to toss my hat in the 'skepticism' ring as well. Not saying that these photos are photoshopped, but I do have a few questions for the climber. Why did you double up there, and only there? If you had already fallen there before and doubled up while hanging, you would've placed a cam below the cam you fell on (meaning that you fell on the orange alien, then placed the bd to back it up after the fall). It looks like you had planned on falling there, is that the crux of the route? (anyone else with route beta?)
Why do you have perfectly timed pictures of you falling? Most falling photos are taken by chance or dumb luck, unless the climber is falling on purpose, yet you have perfectly timed before and after photos.
Perhaps I'm doubtful merely because I don't want to believe this actually happened, I love my aliens...
|
|
|
|
|
radistrad
Jan 4, 2006, 1:08 AM
Post #87 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 25, 2002
Posts: 800
|
I just dont see the alien in the crack before the fall, is it above his foot? Also the alien appears to be falling with him in the second picture, apparently attached to the rope by a black 'biner (the only black one I can see on your rack), but the sling does not appear to be attached to the biner.
It is a bit hard to see. Does any one else see this?
I have over 20 aliens, all over a year old, but I sure will worry if they are really failing this way, I dont back up my aliens with a camalot 2 feet under them...
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 4, 2006, 1:29 AM
Post #88 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
In reply to: I'm going to toss my hat in the 'skepticism' ring as well. Not saying that these photos are photoshopped, but I do have a few questions for the climber. Why did you double up there, and only there? If you had already fallen there before and doubled up while hanging, you would've placed a cam below the cam you fell on (meaning that you fell on the orange alien, then placed the bd to back it up after the fall). It looks like you had planned on falling there, is that the crux of the route? (anyone else with route beta?) Why do you have perfectly timed pictures of you falling? Most falling photos are taken by chance or dumb luck, unless the climber is falling on purpose, yet you have perfectly timed before and after photos. Perhaps I'm doubtful merely because I don't want to believe this actually happened, I love my aliens...
I backed it up because it was right before the crux of the climb (for me), it was a on-sight attempt and it was far enough off the ground that if the piece were to fail, I would get really hurt. That's why I backed it up. To create a system (as previously pointed out).
The pictures were a case of dumb luck. End of story. NOT photoshop.
And the "black" biner is actually a Omega JC wire gate.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
rcpeters
Jan 4, 2006, 2:08 AM
Post #90 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 1, 2004
Posts: 42
|
In reply to: In reply to: I backed it up because it was right before the crux of the climb (for me), it was a on-sight attempt If it was an onsight attempt, how did you know what the crux of the climb would be (for you)?? (kevin, don't take it personally, i'm just playing devil's advocate :twisted: )
Your question is silly. Good lead climbers can tell when a crux is coming.
|
|
|
|
|
arostecrux
Jan 4, 2006, 2:15 AM
Post #91 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2002
Posts: 158
|
Faith in the product has been lost. Companies don't deserve to be in business, they have to earn that right. Sounds like this outfit is serious trouble. Climbing cam manufacturers need flawless safety records and great customer service, without either how can they be trusted with your life? I'm definitely not going to buy any aliens anytime soon. I guess that makes shopping for cams a bit easier now :(.....the jury is still out but it doesn't look good.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 4, 2006, 2:26 AM
Post #92 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Tradgal (and mr8615),
I love my two sets of hybrids too, but at this point it is you that is being over-the-top and quite unevenly handed in this discussion. It has now been repeatedly pointed out to you that there have been a number of incidents of various types over the course of the past 12 months. Multiple people here and at Supertopo, including myself, reported it taking months of repeated unanswered inquiries to get a cam repair completed and returned. Again, these are very real manufacturing and service problems that are all well documented. And none of this is lost on other cam makers in general and the industry as a whole has a very real and valid interest in CCH not screwing up badly again and again and then not publicly and formally responding in any way. Now you can persist all you want in the same vein of questioning the validity of the op and photos but you are rapidly approaching a point of diminishing credibility not to mention generating some serious doubt about your mechanical knowledge of the subject along the way.
|
|
|
|
|
clayman
Jan 4, 2006, 2:34 AM
Post #93 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2004
Posts: 296
|
In reply to: Awhile ago I had two sets of small cams - BD's and Aliens. When I added a third set, I added more BD's... not because I like them better, but because I just can't trust Aliens.
What made you decide that you couldn't trust CCH? (excluding this thread) You seem to imply that you climb on all three sets, is this true? If you can't trust them why climb on them?
cl
|
|
|
|
|
saxonyclimber
Jan 4, 2006, 2:43 AM
Post #94 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2005
Posts: 68
|
I thought cch was planning on responding this afternoon. I understand that they are probably being conservative or making sure that they are covering their rear ends before releasing a statement. Still, it would be nice to hear from them.
I don't see the photos as questionable, because I have frequently seen people start to shake and struggle when they are about to fall. When I am gripped, I will frequently place an extra piece. All it takes is your buddy to stand there ready to capture your fall on film when he sees you thrashing, hears your whining or observes your legs elvising.
I have also seen people intentionally fall for a photo op. If this was the case, it is still inexcusable for a piece to fail as the result of an average fall.
I would say that the crux of this climb is the start, but I have seen many people fall as they get pumped higher up.
|
|
|
|
|
mr8615
Jan 4, 2006, 3:19 AM
Post #95 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 1032
|
In reply to: Tradgal (and mr8615), Now you can persist all you want in the same vein of questioning the validity of the op and photos but you are rapidly approaching a point of diminishing credibility not to mention generating some serious doubt about your mechanical knowledge of the subject along the way.
Well put! As I said, I'm merely playing the devils advocate, and enjoying rc.com, not sincerely attacking the op or the validity of his pictures. I am doing my own research for my own peace of mind. I do take others' experience into account (including well reported, if honest :P incidents such as this one) as well.
Thanks for your thoughtful and articulate input, as always.
Mark
|
|
|
|
|
sbaclimber
Jan 4, 2006, 3:26 AM
Post #96 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 3118
|
In reply to: I am doing my own research for my own piece of mind. |
|
|
|
|
mr8615
Jan 4, 2006, 3:30 AM
Post #97 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 4, 2004
Posts: 1032
|
In reply to: In reply to: I am doing my own research for my own piece of mind. What happened to the rest of it? :wink:
Haha, awesome, set myself up for that one, eh? :oops: (i'll be fixing it now...)
|
|
|
|
|
skinkididoo
Jan 4, 2006, 4:04 AM
Post #98 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2005
Posts: 9
|
This is not quite the same problem, but after reading this thread, i went to go check my own Aliens (purple through gray) which I was given for my birthday March 2005. Most of them checked out except for the blue one, which appears to have been manufactured somewhat incorrectly
I have pictures of it at
http://photobucket.com/...ide/Sketchy%20Alien/
There is an unusually large gap between the lobes on the right and because of this (maybe??) The spring on that side is not working correctly, as in it doesnt snap all the way open when you release the trigger. I don't think it has always been this way and possibly the large gap between the lobes has caused this. The lobes on all the rest of my aliens are much closer together than this and they are all still very snappy when you release the trigger.
Seems like when I return this to REI, it might be best to bide my time and buy one of the new C3's when they come out instead of getting another alien...
|
|
|
|
|
fear
Jan 4, 2006, 6:38 AM
Post #99 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 475
|
Everyone take a deep breath and calm down... Jeez.... Like a bunch of pansies.....
We now know there might be a problem with some recent Aliens. Climbing is dangerous. Remember? The gear might pull, the rock might break, the biner might unclip or break itself. And sometimes, yes, the gear itself fails. People die and stuff. Take up chess if you don't like it. Grow up.
Talking of lawsuits is absurd and would result in all of us paying $500.00 for each 2 pound steel cam. So let's stop that bullsh1t right now.
Now that ample evidence has been provided of a head ripping off with pics to boot, give CCH a few days to respond.
Until then at least put your Orange Aliens on a shelf and back up other aliens with other gear. If you're betting your @ss on one piece of gear, whatever the brand, then that's the choice you make and you live or die with that decision.
If CCH does not respond in a week or so with an action plan(recalls, inspection, etc) then the market and word of mouth will quickly determine CCH's fate. It won't take long these days...
-Fear
|
|
|
|
|
leapinlizard
Jan 4, 2006, 6:58 AM
Post #100 of 522
(69492 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 14, 2004
Posts: 200
|
Aliens still rock.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 4, 2006, 6:59 AM
Post #101 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Given no one has been hurt there isn't a need for any type of lawsuit - but, if this simply never get's addressed then all bets are going to be off. This latest cam was made in 8/05 which means between this one and previous problem cams there are likely many suspect cams out in stores and on peoples' racks - this needs to get addressed. They also need to individually test them before letting them out the door starting today.
Good advice to back them up when using them for now. If I had any made in the past year or two that I hadn't fallen on I'd also be inclined to go out and setup somewhere to bounce test them all...
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jan 4, 2006, 7:40 AM
Post #102 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
In reply to: Ed Leeper takes out full page (or damn close to it) ads about bolt hangers he produced in the late 70's. I bet his hangers cost 1/50th of what an Alien cost. I just think if CCH is aware of a problem, then they should address it as such. Right????
This sums up the deal nicely.
I saw someone's new aliens in August, they looked cheap and poorly made. I hope that person (and you know who you are) will at a minimum carefully inspect those cams.
|
|
|
|
|
tradgal
Jan 4, 2006, 2:24 PM
Post #103 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Posts: 384
|
I think I am playing the devil's advocate as well. It's not that I don't think it's possible for manufacturing errors to have occurred with CCH products, it's just that I am trying to see it from all different standpoints and letting CCH at least respond (which should be as soon as possible).
Re: Sixleg.. comments...
I NEVER said I had any mechanical knowledge. In fact, I was asking questions to try and undertsand what happenned better. Reread my posts...on many occasions, I wrote I wasn't sure about those particular items I asked about.
As for RC.com being a "reputable climbing media." Absolutely not--I do NOT think that's true. Are their many reputable climbers in here who give reputable accounts of climbing related news--YES, NO DOUBT. But, by far, I would not consider the mass of rc.com to be a reputable climbing media.
What I want to see done--to clear CCH or prove them to be in the wrong--is for an outside source to test the cams in question for strength and possible manufacturing errors not all ready brought to attention. We can speculate all we want, but until there is some definitive answer from an expert in manufacturing or condusive tests to prove some error on CCH's part--than I will continue to be skeptical...
Also, and others may shed some light, looking at the male part of the two piece cam that I said looked like an awefully clean break...wouldn't there be some type of broken soder, just something rough where the pieces came apart? I don't see any soder on either part in the picture. Again, that's a question i don't know the answer to which makes me question this whole thing. It seems to me, and I am not an expert (thought I would be clearer for some), that if that bonding failed, soder would be visible on that male part after the fact...or the female for that matter...
RE: Blue alien...I looked at mine as well and there is one side of the cam where there is a noticeably larger "gap" compared to the other spring location. Yours almost looks like when you pull the trigger it is getting "caught up" and not returning to it's original location??? Not sure though...
|
|
|
|
|
landgolier
Jan 4, 2006, 3:27 PM
Post #104 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 714
|
I may have just gotten trolled (references to aliens for birthday, not knowing the right size names, and REI are all suspect), but dude, that's totally normal, you just need to lube it. The lobes, spring, and middle piece that joins to the stem are all free-floating on the axle, yours has just slid to one side. You notice this more on blues and blacks because the springs are not internal to the lobes like on the bigger sizes, so there has to be more free space on the axle for the springs. Swishy swishy lubey lubey and you will be all set.
In reply to: This is not quite the same problem, but after reading this thread, i went to go check my own Aliens (purple through gray) which I was given for my birthday March 2005. Most of them checked out except for the blue one, which appears to have been manufactured somewhat incorrectly I have pictures of it at http://photobucket.com/...ide/Sketchy%20Alien/ There is an unusually large gap between the lobes on the right and because of this (maybe??) The spring on that side is not working correctly, as in it doesnt snap all the way open when you release the trigger. I don't think it has always been this way and possibly the large gap between the lobes has caused this. The lobes on all the rest of my aliens are much closer together than this and they are all still very snappy when you release the trigger. Seems like when I return this to REI, it might be best to bide my time and buy one of the new C3's when they come out instead of getting another alien... |
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 4, 2006, 4:08 PM
Post #105 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
Just wanted to keep you all informed. So far no one from CCH has e-mailed me back or called.
I'll let you know when they do.
Thanks for all the comments,
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
happiegrrrl
Jan 4, 2006, 4:28 PM
Post #106 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
In reply to: Everyone take a deep breath and calm down... Jeez.... Like a bunch of pansies..... We now know there might be a problem with some recent Aliens. Climbing is dangerous. Remember? The gear might pull, the rock might break, the biner might unclip or break itself. And sometimes, yes, the gear itself fails. People die and stuff. Take up chess if you don't like it. Grow up. Talking of lawsuits is absurd and would result in all of us paying $500.00 for each 2 pound steel cam. So let's stop that bullsh1t right now. Now that ample evidence has been provided of a head ripping off with pics to boot, give CCH a few days to respond. Until then at least put your Orange Aliens on a shelf and back up other aliens with other gear. If you're betting your @ss on one piece of gear, whatever the brand, then that's the choice you make and you live or die with that decision. If CCH does not respond in a week or so with an action plan(recalls, inspection, etc) then the market and word of mouth will quickly determine CCH's fate. It won't take long these days... -Fear
Here, here!
And yes, Dirt. I have, as I said in the response to your PM, checked my aliens both times I read about these problems. The first time, I understood what to look for and found no problems, but this time I don't have the ability to understand how to analyze the situation. I will wait to see how CCH responds, but am fully confident in the ones that I own and I will continue to lead on them.
If, after a reasonable timeframe, it turns out that the folks at CCH become overwhelmed by this issue and cannot provide information satisfactory to the general climbing community(It is possible. They are human beings and the company is small. The world ain't perfect and this isn't McDonald's.), perhaps some people who are qualified to make assessments can provide some direction as to what we can look for to make more educated analysis of the gear we have in hand. As a public service, sort of the way we analyze accidents to help each other out.
Until then, my support is for the humans behind CCH in this time. This is the sort of thing that any business owner dreads.
.
.
.
On a light note - I have a climbing partner who inspired me to create an "I'm In Love with An Alien" tee shirt. It's still in the design phase, and I'm hand painting it, just for my own wear and one other hand-painted for the partner.
She has a set of Red/Blue/yellow/Green and whenever she leads, she has me hand over at least the Blue and Green from my rack. Then she bought a dupe Blue - and STILL she took MY Blue guy on a lead!
Anyway, one day she is leading this pitch and she goes into aoutopilot and snags the Blue off her harness to place him. She hesitates..... I say 'What's up?" And she actually whines (well okay, I exaggerate....) "I don't want to waste him!"
I almost peed myself laughing. I told her she was an Alien Horde(r) and obsessed. After, of course, mentioning in polite, supportive belayer style, that the gear is meant to be placed.
And then I said "I'm gonna make you a shirt that has a drawing on the Green guy and says "I'm In Love...." Anyway, I am going to get back to work on the thing today.
|
|
|
|
|
iceisnice
Jan 4, 2006, 4:30 PM
Post #107 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 874
|
i have one question, and i'm sorry if its been asked already (7 pages is way too much to read through for my attention span)......did the cam walk when you moved past it or when you were grabbing rope for the next clip? its very common for cams to walk in indian creek cracks. if the cam rotates upside down when you were pulling rope, and then you fell, it would create dangerous tourquing forces on the cam. just a thought before everyone burns the company on this one incident. don't get me wrong, its possible for a manufacturing defect to arise. cams are produced on such a large scale now it competely possible for one in thousands to fail. NOBODY can expect perfection. if you do you're an idiot and i'll start expecting perfection from you. this is the risk we have to accept in this activety. yes, we need to be vigilant and expect the best out of manufacturers, but we need to realize there are limitations.
|
|
|
|
|
sevrdhed
Jan 4, 2006, 4:31 PM
Post #108 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 5, 2004
Posts: 923
|
In reply to: Why do you have perfectly timed pictures of you falling? Most falling photos are taken by chance or dumb luck, unless the climber is falling on purpose, yet you have perfectly timed before and after photos.
Just wanted to add my thoughts on this, although it's kinda already dead. I've got 6 perfectly timed pictures of someone we were climbing with decking in the creek. If there's someone actively taking pictures, and they know what they're doing, then if you fall, they'll probably get a couple good shots of it.
At least, in my opinion they will :D
Steve
P.S. No, I'm not posting the photos. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 4, 2006, 4:40 PM
Post #109 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
In reply to: i have one question, and I'm sorry if its been asked already (7 pages is way too much to read through for my attention span)......did the cam walk when you moved past it or when you were grabbing rope for the next clip? its very common for cams to walk in indian creek cracks. if the cam rotates upside down when you were pulling rope, and then you fell, it would create dangerous tourquing forces on the cam. just a thought before everyone burns the company on this one incident. don't get me wrong, its possible for a manufacturing defect to arise. cams are produced on such a large scale now it competely possible for one in thousands to fail. NOBODY can expect perfection. if you do you're an idiot and i'll start expecting perfection from you. this is the risk we have to accept in this activety. yes, we need to be vigilant and expect the best out of manufacturers, but we need to realize there are limitations.
I don't believe it walked, but to be honest I don't know. It all happened to quickly. It is a possibility and we will never know if it did or did not.
And yes, I agree with you that I may have got the one in a thousand that failed. I hope that is the case so that this doesn't happen to someone else.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
elvislegs
Jan 4, 2006, 4:44 PM
Post #110 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2002
Posts: 3148
|
i think there's something that has sort of been overlooked in this thread because of the alien fuss: doubling up before a crux.
big props to insaino for backing up that piece. pure genius mate, and i'll be bearing it in mind the next time i'm on difficult ground and not far off the deck. things like this are great reminders to those who will listen, to practice redundancy and wisdom when protecting routes. so thanks for the reminder.
also, that .75 camalot should probably be bronzed and put on your mantle in homage.
just a thought.
-sean
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 4, 2006, 5:03 PM
Post #111 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: if the cam rotates upside down when you were pulling rope, and then you fell, it would create dangerous tourquing forces on the cam. just a thought before everyone burns the company on this one incident. don't get me wrong, its possible for a manufacturing defect to arise. cams are produced on such a large scale now it competely possible for one in thousands to fail. NOBODY can expect perfection. if you do you're an idiot and i'll start expecting perfection from you.
Please excuse my ignorance of the creek (never climbed there... yet), but if cams are prone to walk there, and more prone to swiveling, how could a substantial force be put onto an inverted cam before it swivels to right itself. I just cannot wrap my brain around the idea of a cam maintaining an upward orientation throughout the entire time downward force is applied. I think if swiveled up, it would swivel back down. I will concede that the situation you propose is possible, albeit highly unlikely.
As for manufacturing defects of 1 in 1000 being possible, or acceptable, I will beg to differ. No company, with the exception of McDonald's, could get away with such a failure rate. We buy protection because we plan on putting ourselves in situations where a fall on said piece is likely enough. This is why we hold the manufacturers to such a high standard.
Also, this is not the first case of this particular mode of failure, follow the link in one of the first few pages of the thread.
as climbers, we should try whenever possible to keep more than one piece of pro between us and trouble. But this is idyllic, and not always possible, not to mention, no excuse on a company's part for the failure of their product.
Yes, this thread has the appearance of a mob-scene, and for due reason. This is not the first documented case of alien failure within the past year. Of course CCH should have the benefit of the doubt... the first time... or maybe the second time they slip. But we are not a criminal court, we are consumers, and many of us are losing trust in the company. The first few times angry mobs tried to surface over issues with these cams, they were quelled by the mobs of devout CCH supporters. Their cult following is what helped maintain their reputation before, but may not be of much help if we here of more incidents like this one.
Another thing to consider (and please somebody tell me if this estimate is out of line): How many times have you fallen on a particular cam. How many pieces will you own that will experience more than a dozen falls How many aliens on the market never see a fall? My point is, many trad climbers try very hard not to fall on gear, especially small gear like aliens. We do not have the number of people climbing in the US that other sports can claim. So with so few (relatively speaking) climbers, and so few falls on said gear, how often are aliens truly tested. Surely not more than a hand-full of times a week? Again, my estimates could be brutally off, but when this is considered alongside the number of recent complaints regarding their craftsmanship, it is troubling to say the least. I don't want to extrapolate too far, but it is something to consider.
We are consumers, not a jury, and our lives depend on whether or not joe-solderer was paying close enough attention to his job on that particular day. We are right to be very concerned, and very anxious for a response from CCH. I for one have much more important things to worry about when I'm climbing above my last piece. I don't like stressing about my cam popping apart.
|
|
|
|
|
iceisnice
Jan 4, 2006, 5:09 PM
Post #112 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 874
|
yes, cams can rotate and get stuck in that position. happens a lot. get out climbing enough and you'll see it happen quite a bit. it usually happens with the larger style cams, but can happen with any size. its just a possibility and needs to be answered first. MOST "cam failures" i've seen were from usage. that may sound harsh and hard for many to accept, but it is true.
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Jan 4, 2006, 6:11 PM
Post #113 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: Also, and others may shed some light, looking at the male part of the two piece cam that I said looked like an awefully clean break...wouldn't there be some type of broken soder, just something rough where the pieces came apart? I don't see any soder on either part in the picture. Again, that's a question i don't know the answer to which makes me question this whole thing. It seems to me, and I am not an expert (thought I would be clearer for some), that if that bonding failed, soder would be visible on that male part after the fact...or the female for that matter...
If there were no solder visible in such a case, maybe it never got soldered in the first place. However when I look at the photo on page 3, it appears to me there's solder on both parts.
|
|
|
|
|
josephgdawson
Jan 4, 2006, 6:20 PM
Post #114 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 20, 2004
Posts: 303
|
As a lover of Aliens, this thread bums me out. I will not buy another Alien again if they do not handle this problem in a responsible manner. I have recommended Aliens to numerous friends because I can often get a bomber placement with an Alien where I can only get a mediocre placement with a Camalot. I will not be telling any of my friends to buy them.
Have any problems been reported on other sizes of Aliens?
I remember a thread about a gray Alien that sheared during a fall and the dude decked and died.
As an aside, when I lead, I always, ALWAYS, make sure there are at least two pieces between me and the deck. One of the cornerstones of pro is redundancy.
CCH, we await your response.
|
|
|
|
|
architect
Jan 4, 2006, 6:23 PM
Post #115 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 16, 2003
Posts: 84
|
Gee,
8 pages in a day! I heart rc.com
anyways my two cents.
This happened to my Orange alien as well.
last season, i had bought it at the beginning of the season and same exact thing happened. took it back to the local shop (Rock and Snow in New Paltz) and they replaced it for me. What happened? the trigger wire came unattached to the trigger. boy was my partner pissed when he cleaned it.
Turns out Alien has changed the way they are attaching the trigger cables to the heads. by the looks of this picture (the screws on the end of the trigger wire) this is the new design.
Btw a couple things.
1 - all you who talked about attaching the cable thru solder, Aliens (the Bigger ones orange on up ) like this one in the picture are attached via screws and the thread is still there (this is new as of 2005).
2 - the trigger wire is in no way active during a fall.
So if it was placed correctly in a good placement and didn't walk then It would not pop out. It did not Break from the fall. looks like the wire screw on the trigger came off (defect) and it was a bad placement that pop'd.
Most likely why he backed it up anyways.
|
|
|
|
|
josephgdawson
Jan 4, 2006, 6:25 PM
Post #116 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 20, 2004
Posts: 303
|
In response to what Architect wrote, it is clear that the head of the cam came of when the OP fell on it, not just a trigger wire.
What is the url of CCH? I always have a hard time finding it?
|
|
|
|
|
architect
Jan 4, 2006, 6:30 PM
Post #117 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 16, 2003
Posts: 84
|
deleted my post due to the fact I didn't notice the ENTIRE head had broke off not just the trigger wire!
Damn! that does suck!
had to go back and reexamine the picture on page 3.
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 4, 2006, 6:30 PM
Post #118 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: In response to what Architect wrote, it is clear that the head of the cam came of when the OP fell on it, not just a trigger wire. What is the url of CCH? I always have a hard time finding it?
http://www.aliencamsbycch.com/
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Jan 4, 2006, 6:33 PM
Post #119 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: This happened to my Orange alien as well. last season, i had bought it at the beginning of the season and same exact thing happened. took it back to the local shop (Rock and Snow in New Paltz) and they replaced it for me. What happened? the trigger wire came unattached to the trigger. |
|
|
|
|
jsj42
Jan 4, 2006, 6:58 PM
Post #120 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 24, 2002
Posts: 374
|
From the front page of the CCH website:
"Handmade Quality and Mechanical Perfection... these key features are why Alien Cams are so Strong, Dependable, and Durable."
Regarding the poster who asked why I'd climb on gear that I can't trust: Sometimes it's the best you can get.
Regarding the repeated posters who make comments about always having two pieces between you and the ground: Sometimes that's just not possible.
And finally,
In reply to: Everyone take a deep breath and calm down... Jeez.... Like a bunch of pansies..... We now know there might be a problem with some recent Aliens. Climbing is dangerous. Remember? The gear might pull, the rock might break, the biner might unclip or break itself. And sometimes, yes, the gear itself fails. People die and stuff. Take up chess if you don't like it. Grow up.
Give me a break. Are we supposed to take you seriously? Who are you?
When I buy gear I expect it to work as advertised (ie to not fall apart). They get my $54, I get a cam that works. The risk starts there, not before I even buy the cam.
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 4, 2006, 7:02 PM
Post #121 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: When I buy gear I expect it to work as advertised (ie to not fall apart). They get my $54, I get a cam that works. The risk starts there, not before I even buy the cam.
exactly
|
|
|
|
|
josephgdawson
Jan 4, 2006, 7:12 PM
Post #122 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 20, 2004
Posts: 303
|
In response to what Architect wrote, it is clear that the head of the cam came of when the OP fell on it, not just a trigger wire.
What is the url of CCH? I always have a hard time finding it?
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 4, 2006, 7:35 PM
Post #123 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: What I want to see done--to clear CCH or prove them to be in the wrong--is for an outside source to test the cams in question for strength and possible manufacturing errors not all ready brought to attention. We can speculate all we want, but until there is some definitive answer from an expert in manufacturing or condusive tests to prove some error on CCH's part--than I will continue to be skeptical...
Well, unless you're blind, haven't read all these posts, or read the other threads both here and on SuperTopo then how on earth can you be skeptical? The OP posted up good, clear photos and has been more then forthcoming, I and others who have been around along time have posted up problems we have had with CCH service and cams, and a number of others on both forums have as well. Be as skeptical as you want, but we are way, way past skepticism, "tests", or "proof" at this point - there is at the very least months worth of cam production that is suspect that runs at from 8/05 back to whenever the previous similar solder failure was. Then there are the cams that went out the door with misaligned axle holes resulting in no range. Again, I love my two sets of hybrids, but I do know about manufacturing and QA systems and this situation is simply unacceptable.
Does CCH need to respond to this forum in hours or days - not necessarily. Do they need to respond to the OP immediately? Hell, yes! Look, it isn't rocket science, when a customer sends you a problem cam or calls/emails a problem you respond immediately acknowledging you heard them, resolve the issue in a timely manner (days or weeks), and get back to them with that resolution or repaired product without them having to badger you for months. It's been more than painfully obvious Dave needs to ease up on his grip a bit, get some solid, reliable help in operations and QA, and find someone capable of owning customer service. If he would get over whatever it is that prevents him from doing those relatively simple things he'd still make his way clear of all this...
|
|
|
|
|
foresthill
Jan 4, 2006, 8:21 PM
Post #124 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 28, 2004
Posts: 1
|
Here's the email I just sent to cch@aliencamsbycch.com:
Dear Folks -
I've been using aliens for many years now. They are an essential part of my rack, and I love them. I've taken several falls on them and have never been disappointed by their performance.
However, I've recently read a few things which make me wonder if I should ever buy any more aliens. These two threads cause me great concern about your quality control:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=104150&postdays=0&postorder=asc&topic_view=&start=0
http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.html?topic_id=105618&f=0&b=0
I'm also very concerned that despite these reports, there's been no recall so far as I'm aware, in fact no response at all to the climbing community. These problems (especially the first one!) could easily result in someone dying, and it makes it highly unlikely that I will ever buy another alien until I hear that these issues have been resolved and any potentially defective items recalled.
An (up until now) very happy customer,
Forest Hill
Tucson, AZ
|
|
|
|
|
nuts_r_us
Jan 4, 2006, 8:35 PM
Post #125 of 522
(69587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2005
Posts: 172
|
Beautiful hands for a crack climber... :wink:
My orange alien is from 8/04 and looks to have an appropriate cam range, but really would like to hear from CCH soon. Hello? Anyone there?
|
|
|
|
|
fear
Jan 4, 2006, 8:38 PM
Post #126 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 475
|
In reply to: In reply to: When I buy gear I expect it to work as advertised (ie to not fall apart). They get my $54, I get a cam that works. The risk starts there, not before I even buy the cam. exactly
Wrong.... The risk starts when you decide to leave the ground. If you find that you "can't" get two pieces of gear at the crux then you make the decision to go on and trust your life or health to one small piece of aluminum and steel wedged into cracks. So be it. I've done it too.
My objection is to the "oh my God, you mean this stuff can break?" attitude in this thread. No, it shouldn't. But it can and does. People have died from similiar failures in the past.
Do you test every cam or piece of gear you've ever bought? Of course not. No one does. So you really don't know anything about the particular cams you're using. We can guess and hope but won't ever know for sure until you test it. Maybe that bomber #10 WC rock in the perfect constriction has a crappy crimp on the cable.
Modern climbing gear is extremely lightweight for it's intended purposes. It's generally made in small quantities by small companies with slim profit margins. More defects are going to occur...
Of course there's problem that CCH needs to address quickly. But they need to be given a chance.
And don't think that CCH is the only gear company out there with problems... And as everyone jumps on the lighter=better bandwagon it's going to get worse...
-Fear
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 4, 2006, 9:05 PM
Post #127 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: When I buy gear I expect it to work as advertised (ie to not fall apart). They get my $54, I get a cam that works. The risk starts there, not before I even buy the cam. exactly Wrong.... The risk starts when you decide to leave the ground. If you find that you "can't" get two pieces of gear at the crux then you make the decision to go on and trust your life or health to one small piece of aluminum and steel wedged into cracks. So be it. I've done it too. My objection is to the "oh my God, you mean this stuff can break?" attitude in this thread. No, it shouldn't. But it can and does. People have died from similiar failures in the past. Do you test every cam or piece of gear you've ever bought? Of course not. No one does. So you really don't know anything about the particular cams you're using. We can guess and hope but won't ever know for sure until you test it. Maybe that bomber #10 WC rock in the perfect constriction has a crappy crimp on the cable. Modern climbing gear is extremely lightweight for it's intended purposes. It's generally made in small quantities by small companies with slim profit margins. More defects are going to occur... Of course there's problem that CCH needs to address quickly. But they need to be given a chance. And don't think that CCH is the only gear company out there with problems... And as everyone jumps on the lighter=better bandwagon it's going to get worse... -Fear
Actually, you may believe you can give CCH a slide by slagging other companies work and QA by asserting they all perform the same, but that's a crock. CCH in the past year has demonstrated a failure rate that is beyond pale. BD, Metolius, Wild Country, Trango, et al manage to crank out cams with rigorous QA and a very low defect rate many orders of magnitude below what we are talking about here.
Now you may have some shred of a point relative to gear getting lighter weight and that generating its own issues - but even there all the lightweight gear I know of dynos in as high as the old stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
climb_ian
Jan 4, 2006, 9:32 PM
Post #128 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 28, 2005
Posts: 77
|
so what the consensus here safe unsafe? return or not return ?
|
|
|
|
|
fishercrack
Jan 4, 2006, 9:57 PM
Post #129 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 18, 2005
Posts: 27
|
Ample time has been allowed. By now cch shoul have consulted with an attourney to figure out what they could say without putting themselves in greater risk of civil action. They have already stated that they are aware of the situation. If they do not in the next 24 hours, come out and at least make a simple statement along the lines of "We are looking into this matter," I will never purchase another cch product.
|
|
|
|
|
climbs4fun
Moderator
Jan 4, 2006, 10:06 PM
Post #130 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 19, 2003
Posts: 9679
|
In reply to: so what the consensus here safe unsafe? return or not return ?
I think I'd talk to the company and give them the opportunity to make it right.
|
|
|
|
|
sumo
Jan 4, 2006, 10:53 PM
Post #131 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 28, 2005
Posts: 176
|
If anyone is scared to climb on their Aliens
PM me with pics and prices
haha... seriously though
A lot of good points in here
but it really isn't a black and white issue.
I've never had a problem with any of my Aliens. It is unfortunate for the few that have had problems. Both for them and CCH.
I realize there have been previous cases, but you can't expect an immediate response.
Take a look at natural disasters or other major recalls. There is a lot of things that go on behind the scences.
S
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 4, 2006, 11:10 PM
Post #132 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: When I buy gear I expect it to work as advertised (ie to not fall apart). They get my $54, I get a cam that works. The risk starts there, not before I even buy the cam. exactly Wrong.... The risk starts when you decide to leave the ground. If you find that you "can't" get two pieces of gear at the crux then you make the decision to go on and trust your life or health to one small piece of aluminum and steel wedged into cracks. So be it. I've done it too.
The risk of a 54 dollar cam disasembling itself after a less than spectacular fall, or any reasonable fall for that matter is unacceptable, period. There are many risks willingly encoundered when you decide to leave the ground, but there is no good reason that this should be one of them. The practice of doubling up on pro before a crux is no new idea, and should be based on the chance of placement failure, and not manufacturing defects. If a micronut shears out of a tiny slot after a 20 footer that is reasonable. The alien situation is not.
Climbing is about carefully managing risks. Maybee poorly constructed gear is ok to you. Fine, go have a hayday and buy up all of the used gear on ebay. I will continue to expect the companies that I do business with to deliver.
I've got three new aliens purchased within the past month, and I'd be thrilled to see at the very least some sort of response to all of this. Would it be so hard to issue one on their website? or to make some response to the questions in this forum?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
md3
Jan 4, 2006, 11:25 PM
Post #134 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 13, 2004
Posts: 172
|
While few things may be truly black or white, isn’t the catastrophic failure of the cable/stem attachment on a new cam under expected loads pretty close?
In reply to: look at natural disasters or other major recalls
What are you talking about? What do natural disasters have in common with the recall of products designed for critical uses because manufacturing flaws have made them susceptible to failure when used as anticipated?
|
|
|
|
|
josephgdawson
Jan 4, 2006, 11:31 PM
Post #135 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 20, 2004
Posts: 303
|
Whewwww weeeeee, CCH's response is strong.
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Jan 4, 2006, 11:32 PM
Post #136 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
from that thread
In reply to: "Without an actual report by a lab we will assume this is a staged hoax. "
are you kidding? I was hoping for so much better. I was hoping more along the lines of the recall by CAMP for the tri cam pin problem, the WC helium recall, Omega Pacifics Five-O locker recall. Not necessarily an immediate recall but at least some show of responsibility and not calling the OP a hoax..
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1195082#1195082
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=65849&postdays=0&postorder=asc&topic_view=&start=15
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=532470#532470
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Jan 4, 2006, 11:52 PM
Post #137 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
In reply to: i have one question, and i'm sorry if its been asked already (7 pages is way too much to read through for my attention span)......did the cam walk when you moved past it or when you were grabbing rope for the next clip? its very common for cams to walk in indian creek cracks. if the cam rotates upside down when you were pulling rope, and then you fell, it would create dangerous tourquing forces on the cam.
I could understand that if a cam had walked or inverted that a fall could shear the cams lobs off (I've seen this on a blue alien).
However, I don't care what position the cam is in, I don't believe the head of the cam should come off without there being a manufacturing defect.
I also don't find CCH response unreasonable as far as wanting to examine the piece first. No manufacturer would admit liability until they have closely examined the piece. That's just the way the world works.
Now whether there are other issues that CCH should have already adressed, that is something else.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpstrength
Jan 4, 2006, 11:56 PM
Post #138 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 285
|
to me, aliens just dont look as strong as my metolius fcus and tcus or my bd c4s. I think I am done collecting aliens. Calling this a hoax is ignoring the problem. Not offering to at least assist in finding the problem is laughable.
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Jan 5, 2006, 12:29 AM
Post #139 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
Hey Kevin,
I've been following this thread with interest and I have a few questions.
In your first climb photo it looks like the Alien and C4 are stacked right on top of each other. Is that the way you placed them? It almost looks like a single cam. Was there any way that two cams placed right together could have put a weird load onto the Alien?
In the second photo, the cam lobes look like they're still attached to the cam. Was it still together when you stopped falling or had it fallen apart? If the head of an Alien just pulls off the cable like the picture seems to show, the four cam lobes, the trigger wires, trigger and cable sheath assembly would still be up in the crack. When we've field tested cams with a hydraulic puller, occasionally the cable breaks at the head. When it does the cam lobes and trigger assembly remain in the crack and are a bitch to get out.
Any speculation on why that trigger wire broke? Again, if the cable pulled out due to a fautly braze, then there wouldn't be much of a load on the trigger assembly. Do you think that maybe that C4 tweaked them as the cam loaded?
How do you keep your hands looking so nice?
Mal
|
|
|
|
|
fear
Jan 5, 2006, 12:41 AM
Post #140 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 475
|
Hey Kevin,
Looking at that first pic you posted at the cable stump where the head sheared away there is some kind of interesting looking discoloration on the cable. In the closeup pic you posted later, there's nothing but shiny solder.... Maybe flip it over and take another closeup?
Thanks...
-Fear
Here is the spot that seems odd:
http://contract.fearnot.emailcorner.net/oddalien.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
climbinginchico
Jan 5, 2006, 12:46 AM
Post #141 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 3032
|
In reply to: Hey Kevin, I've been following this thread with interest and I have a few questions. In your first climb photo it looks like the Alien and C4 are stacked right on top of each other. Is that the way you placed them? It almost looks like a single cam. Was there any way that two cams placed right together could have put a weird load onto the Alien? In the second photo, the cam lobes look like they're still attached to the cam. Was it still together when you stopped falling or had it fallen apart? If the head of an Alien just pulls off the cable like the picture seems to show, the four cam lobes, the trigger wires, trigger and cable sheath assembly would still be up in the crack. When we've field tested cams with a hydraulic puller, occasionally the cable breaks at the head. When it does the cam lobes and trigger assembly remain in the crack and are a b---- to get out. Any speculation on why that trigger wire broke? Again, if the cable pulled out due to a fautly braze, then there wouldn't be much of a load on the trigger assembly. Do you think that maybe that C4 tweaked them as the cam loaded? How do you keep your hands looking so nice? Mal
By far, the best post on the thread. Well said, Mal.
|
|
|
|
|
paganmonkeyboy
Jan 5, 2006, 12:50 AM
Post #142 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 30, 2003
Posts: 663
|
ten pages in - pmb gets overwhelming urge to throw all four aliens he owns (bluegreenyellowred 4+ yrs old)in a choss crack 2 miles from here and bounce from aider to aider on tr, in the dark, perhaps to music of some sort...(not because I think they will fail, mind you - just that I love climbing, and my aliens are afeelin ornery...)
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 5, 2006, 12:59 AM
Post #143 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Hey Kevin, Looking at that first pic you posted at the cable stump where the head sheared away there is some kind of interesting looking discoloration on the cable. In the closeup pic you posted later, there's nothing but shiny solder.... Maybe flip it over and take another closeup? Thanks... -Fear
Kevin,
I too would like to see a flip side closeup and one close up straight down the axle centerline as well if possible. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
climbinginchico
Jan 5, 2006, 12:59 AM
Post #144 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 3032
|
Insano, do you have full res pics available? I'd like to see the full res versions to answer some of the questions Mal raised.
|
|
|
|
|
leapinlizard
Jan 5, 2006, 1:12 AM
Post #145 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 14, 2004
Posts: 200
|
In reply to: Hey Kevin, I've been following this thread with interest and I have a few questions. In your first climb photo it looks like the Alien and C4 are stacked right on top of each other. Is that the way you placed them? It almost looks like a single cam. Was there any way that two cams placed right together could have put a weird load onto the Alien? In the second photo, the cam lobes look like they're still attached to the cam. Was it still together when you stopped falling or had it fallen apart? If the head of an Alien just pulls off the cable like the picture seems to show, the four cam lobes, the trigger wires, trigger and cable sheath assembly would still be up in the crack. When we've field tested cams with a hydraulic puller, occasionally the cable breaks at the head. When it does the cam lobes and trigger assembly remain in the crack and are a b---- to get out. Any speculation on why that trigger wire broke? Again, if the cable pulled out due to a fautly braze, then there wouldn't be much of a load on the trigger assembly. Do you think that maybe that C4 tweaked them as the cam loaded? How do you keep your hands looking so nice? Mal
I can't rate posts today, but this is the certainly the best post I have seen recently. Mal Rocks. As for the OP and Insaino, I am curious which climbing store you guys work for, I remember insaino saying you worked for one in a previous thread. Do they sell aliens, and if so what has the store's reaction been to this whole thing.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 5, 2006, 1:19 AM
Post #146 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Hey Kevin, I've been following this thread with interest and I have a few questions. In your first climb photo it looks like the Alien and C4 are stacked right on top of each other. Is that the way you placed them? It almost looks like a single cam. Was there any way that two cams placed right together could have put a weird load onto the Alien? In the second photo, the cam lobes look like they're still attached to the cam. Was it still together when you stopped falling or had it fallen apart? If the head of an Alien just pulls off the cable like the picture seems to show, the four cam lobes, the trigger wires, trigger and cable sheath assembly would still be up in the crack. When we've field tested cams with a hydraulic puller, occasionally the cable breaks at the head. When it does the cam lobes and trigger assembly remain in the crack and are a b---- to get out. Any speculation on why that trigger wire broke? Again, if the cable pulled out due to a fautly braze, then there wouldn't be much of a load on the trigger assembly. Do you think that maybe that C4 tweaked them as the cam loaded? How do you keep your hands looking so nice? Mal
Malcolm,
Looks like the heads were about 3-4" apart so you probably can't entirely rule out some interation. With regard to the unit staying together. I believe if it had instead seperated the stem wire from the wirecap immediatly adjacent/above the trigger bar it would have resulted in exactly what you suggest, the whole assembly staying in the crack. But with just the head seperating from that wirecap the trigger would have stayed with the stem and the force of the fall would have acted exactly like someone pulling the trigger back. It's easy enough for me to believe that that would be enough to do the job of releasing the piece almost intact rather than in two pieces, particularly in slick creek stone.
Any idea on a good independent lab or someone willing to be an "escrow" it in the process?
|
|
|
|
|
styndall
Jan 5, 2006, 1:20 AM
Post #147 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2002
Posts: 2741
|
In reply to: In reply to: Hey Kevin, I've been following this thread with interest and I have a few questions. In your first climb photo it looks like the Alien and C4 are stacked right on top of each other. Is that the way you placed them? It almost looks like a single cam. Was there any way that two cams placed right together could have put a weird load onto the Alien? In the second photo, the cam lobes look like they're still attached to the cam. Was it still together when you stopped falling or had it fallen apart? If the head of an Alien just pulls off the cable like the picture seems to show, the four cam lobes, the trigger wires, trigger and cable sheath assembly would still be up in the crack. When we've field tested cams with a hydraulic puller, occasionally the cable breaks at the head. When it does the cam lobes and trigger assembly remain in the crack and are a b---- to get out. Any speculation on why that trigger wire broke? Again, if the cable pulled out due to a fautly braze, then there wouldn't be much of a load on the trigger assembly. Do you think that maybe that C4 tweaked them as the cam loaded? How do you keep your hands looking so nice? Mal By far, the best post on the thread. Well said, Mal.
As to the second question:
It seems like, once the head pulled off, all the weight of the fall would be on the trigger wires, forcing the head to collapse and, in effect, cleaning the cam.
Try it yourself: place a cam in a parallel crack and then yark on the trigger. It should come right out. This is exactly what would happen in a situation like the OP's.
|
|
|
|
|
jermeng
Jan 5, 2006, 1:30 AM
Post #148 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2005
Posts: 64
|
Check the dates, as REI has pulled Orange Aliens with the date code "0105" through "0605" from their shelves. Just orange sizes, as the ones within this range may not have the correct expansion range. Range was the original reason for the recall, though it seems there could be another issue here...
Insainio, is your cam from that date range?
|
|
|
|
|
leapinlizard
Jan 5, 2006, 1:37 AM
Post #149 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 14, 2004
Posts: 200
|
I thnk he said that it had a munufacture date of 8/05
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 5, 2006, 1:38 AM
Post #150 of 522
(71704 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Check the dates, as REI has pulled Orange Aliens with the date code "0105" through "0605" from their shelves. Just orange sizes, as the ones within this range may not have the correct expansion range. Range was the original reason for the recall, though it seems there could be another issue here... Insainio, is your cam from that date range?
He had already posted up that is an "0805" unit...
|
|
|
|
|
thegreytradster
Jan 5, 2006, 2:03 AM
Post #151 of 522
(70528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2003
Posts: 2151
|
I wonder how much these guys would charge?
http://www.rapid-response-consulting.com/failure-analysis_3.html
You really need a Welding/Brazing specialist not a general metalurgist. The failure was at the connection not in the base materials.
From what's been visible in the photos so far it looks like a cut and dried example of a pre-tined joint that was "cold soldered" on final assembly. Higher resolution photos and a complete sequence of 8 photos along both the short and long axis (all four sides) would be illustrative as well as a shot right down the bore of the hole. If you are going to send it to a lab, try to keep it in as original a state as possible.
Right now I'm glad that me or none of my partners own any. Especialy given CCH's dismissive reply.
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Jan 5, 2006, 2:09 AM
Post #152 of 522
(70528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
healyje,
I'm not sure I follow you here. What are you calling the head? It seems to me that once the cable (stem wire) pulls out of the head (wirecap) unless there is some sort of bulge on the cable (perhaps from the shoulder of the braze) then the whole top rig--cam lobes, trigger wires, trigger bar, cable sheath and lower trigger bar--would just pull off 'cause they're all attached.
We need to be careful here. It's all speculation after all. Thank God Kevin didn't get hurt.
Mal
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 5, 2006, 2:26 AM
Post #153 of 522
(70528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: healyje, I'm not sure I follow you here. What are you calling the head? It seems to me that once the cable (stem wire) pulls out of the head (wirecap) unless there is some sort of bulge on the cable (perhaps from the shoulder of the braze) then the whole top rig--cam lobes, trigger wires, trigger bar, cable sheath and lower trigger bar--would just pull off 'cause they're all attached. We need to be careful here. It's all speculation after all. Thank God Kevin didn't get hurt. Mal
Malcolm,
I only have hybrids so I could be misinterpreting what I am seeing in the photo, but there is definitely a "shoulder" of some material keeping the top bar on. It looks to not be the brazing solder but I could be wrong there. Whether a separate piece between the wire and head or just a "shoulder" formed of solder it does appear to act to keep the trigger assembly in place. A close up of the the stem wire end with the trigger retracted would also be quite helpful in this regard.
I had advocated giving Dave a chance to respond, but that response pretty much says volumes. That along with the axle hole issue, which from what I can see in my own aliens is not restricted to just a few orange models. That was the drastic version, but there are [smaller] variances in the axle center between the same size cams I have. How hard is it to either CNC the axle hole in the case of machined cam lobes or to drill it accurately with a jig if the lobes are from extruded stock? It shouldn't be. I can understand a bad batch of SS stem sheaths sneaking through the system. But axle holes wildly off axis to the point that the cam has no range? How do those lobes make it through machining, parts inventory, assembly, final inspection, and shipping without anyone noticing? Look, I love my hybrids, but this response is quite extraordinary given the what has made it out CCH's door this past year...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Jan 5, 2006, 3:27 AM
Post #155 of 522
(70528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
Kevin,
thx for responding. Nice pics. I'm not quite clear what you mean by "the head of the cam was separated from the stem right after the fall". Was the head hanging from the stem by the trigger wires with the head and cable pulled apart like your picture shows? Is that what wa hanging on the rope?
I'm glad those weren't your hands. Glad you're not hurt.
Mal
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 5, 2006, 3:32 AM
Post #156 of 522
(70528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
In reply to: Kevin, thx for responding. Nice pics. I'm not quite clear what you mean by "the head of the cam was separated from the stem right after the fall". Was the head hanging from the stem by the trigger wires with the head and cable pulled apart like your picture shows? Is that what wa hanging on the rope?
Yes, this is what I meant. sorry for the confusion.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
fear
Jan 5, 2006, 3:42 AM
Post #157 of 522
(70528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 475
|
Good pics...
Looks like a bad brazing job to me.... I've only done a bit though so we'll need some professional input...
But has CCH offered any suggestions as to who to send it to or what kind of testing they'd like done?
-Fear
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 5, 2006, 3:49 AM
Post #158 of 522
(70528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Kevin,
Hi, could we trouble you for one more shot of the side of the cam head straight in line down the axle so that the camera is on a parallel plane with the sides of the cam lobes. Like this one so we can see exactly where the axle hole is on the cam (but on a better plain and contrasting background):
http://www.cascadeclimbers.com/...299Alien2_1_-med.jpg
P.S. Malcolm, Ah I see there is no intermediate piece but it's the solder making a retaining "shoulder" that keeps the unit quasi-together even with the head separated. That would explain it pulling. Hard to call it much besides a bad brazing job of some sort. An expert would definitely be required for a definitive analysis no doubt.
|
|
|
|
|
thegreytradster
Jan 5, 2006, 4:16 AM
Post #159 of 522
(70528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2003
Posts: 2151
|
It looks like what we have here is an assembly method that uses a ferule to keep the wire in place for ease of insertion in the cam stem.
(I'd have to be convinced that's a good idea. Does anyone else do this?)
While it looks like there's plenty of solder and a nice radiused fillet between the wire and the ferule, it looks like there's almost no sign of solder on the outside of the ferule or the inside of the cam stem.
Kevin, is that what I'm seeing?
Is the ferule made of silver solder?
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 5, 2006, 4:30 AM
Post #160 of 522
(70528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
In reply to: While it looks like there's plenty of solder and a nice radiused fillet between the wire and the ferule, it looks like there's almost no sign of solder on the outside of the ferule or the inside of the cam stem. Kevin, is that what I'm seeing? Is the ferule made of silver solder?
thegreytradster,
the answer to your first question is a yes. This observation appears correct to me. As for the second question, I don't know what the ferule is made of.
I hope these are better pics of the axle holes (although they are pretty fuzzy).
http://www.picturehosting.org/...nsainio/dscf0042.jpg
http://www.picturehosting.org/...nsainio/dscf0043.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
tswaner
Jan 5, 2006, 4:43 AM
Post #161 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 5, 2006
Posts: 1
|
WOW.
This post has brought me out of lurker status. I am really displeased with CCH's response. To accuse a someone of a hoax on this subject is ridiculous to say the least.
Do you think CCH is defensive and all steamed up?
Do you think they think it's a hoax.....really?
Have you ever had a runout with an orange alien 8 feet or more below you?
This is some scary S#$%!!! If a product you manufactured failed would you post on a Online community before you contacted an individual? This needs to be addressed right now.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 5, 2006, 5:13 AM
Post #162 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Kevin,
Thanks for those. The second one is too far off the centerline of the axle, and the first one is much closer. Could you try one last time and try to line the center of the axle up with a line through the center of the lens, thanks again...
P.S. And notice the difference in axle locations between these photos of Kevin's and the one of the earlier axle problem photo I just posted above them...
[Edit: Here is Kevin's picture given the photos in his post above don't seem to be working right now for some reason:]
http://www.cascadeclimbers.com/.../6299dscf0042_1_.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
sixleggedinsect
Jan 5, 2006, 2:56 PM
Post #163 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 385
|
In reply to: P.S. Malcolm, Ah I see there is no intermediate piece but it's the solder making a retaining "shoulder" that keeps the unit quasi-together even with the head separated. That would explain it pulling. Hard to call it much besides a bad brazing job of some sort. An expert would definitely be required for a definitive analysis no doubt.
my goodness. i stop watching the thread for a day and its seven pages longer!
i also wanted to reply to maldaly re: the potential for the alien self cleaning. a couple other posters mentioned what i was thinking (ie: the solder was big enough that it didnt fit through the sheath.)
'just thought i'd add, for other's benefit, that the reason this might not have been an issue with trango cams (maldaly said that testing trango cams left cam lobes in the crack) is that they have a different trigger bar design. instead of a reasonably tight fitting sheath like the alien, they have the more common set up with a trigger bar. trango's trigger bars, btw, usually have plenty of clearance around the cam stem (at least on the ones i own) for ease in finagling gear, and a failure at the solder would most likely whip the wire and remaining solder through the hole.
in reference to another poster's suggestion that a cam that had walked, or been kicked, into an upwards or sideways position might see weird forces resulting in failure, i add that if there is one climbing area where that is unlikely to happen, it is the creek. the place is so splitter that a cam that is kicked or walked into an upwards or sideways position will rotate down into a better orientation. if it rotates up into a pod or a constriction, well, maybe bad things could happen, but thats not classic creek crack. and i would expect to see a badly kinked/flattened cable in that case, and a failure in the lobes, not the stem.
further, regarding hoax accusation. for the poster to make this up, he would have had to torch the alien to remove the cable, then dissassemble the lobes and springs so he could clean the scale and torch marks off, and even then the solder remaining on the stem cable woudln't look like it does.
finally, with cch's responses and organizational reputation, i get the willies thinking about sending it to them for testing. i hope if this goes any further (and i sincerely hope it does) a third party does the testing and cch never gets their hand on the piece.
|
|
|
|
|
sixleggedinsect
Jan 5, 2006, 3:04 PM
Post #164 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 385
|
In reply to: P.S. Malcolm, Ah I see there is no intermediate piece but it's the solder making a retaining "shoulder" that keeps the unit quasi-together even with the head separated. That would explain it pulling. Hard to call it much besides a bad brazing job of some sort. An expert would definitely be required for a definitive analysis no doubt.
my goodness. i stop watching the thread for a day and its seven pages longer!
i also wanted to reply to maldaly re: the potential for the alien self cleaning. a couple other posters mentioned what i was thinking (ie: the solder was big enough that it didnt fit through the sheath.)
'just thought i'd add, for other's benefit, that the reason this might not have been an issue with trango cams (maldaly said that testing trango cams left cam lobes in the crack) is that they have a different trigger bar design. instead of a reasonably tight fitting sheath like the alien, they have the more common set up with a trigger bar. trango's trigger bars, btw, usually have plenty of clearance around the cam stem (at least on the ones i own) for ease in finagling gear, and a failure at the solder would most likely whip the wire and remaining solder through the hole.
in reference to another poster's suggestion that a cam that had walked, or been kicked, into an upwards or sideways position might see weird forces resulting the in failure, i add that if there is one climbing area where that is unlikely to happen, it is the creek. the place is so splitter that a cam that is kicked or walked into an upwards or sideways position will rotate down into a better orientation. if it rotates up into a pod or a constriction, well, maybe bad things could happen, but thats not classic creek crack. and i would expect to see a badly kinked/flattened cable in that case, and a failure in the lobes, not the stem.
further, regarding hoax accusation. for the poster to make this up, he would have had to torch the alien to remove the cable, then dissassemble the lobes and springs so he could clean the scale and torch marks off, and even then the solder remaining on the stem cable woudln't look like it does.
finally, with cch's responses and organizational reputation, i get the willies thinking about sending it to them for testing. i hope if this goes any further (and i sincerely hope it does) a third party does the testing and cch never gets their hand on the piece.
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 5, 2006, 3:41 PM
Post #165 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
I'll second having an independant lab test the cam. There should be no problem if the op and cch can agree on one together. If CCH can't pony up for it, I also would be willing to contribute.
I looked at my aliens last night and four of my five were manufactured in 2005. I'll be real excited to place those on sunday!
Aliens are rapidly dropping from some of my favorite equiptment to possibly having their own pages on ebay.
Poor cam construction, quality controll, and customer service, what a hoax!
http://www.birdsinthebelfry.com/shoot%20in%20foot.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
wjca
Jan 5, 2006, 4:09 PM
Post #166 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2005
Posts: 7545
|
You want to know how to get CCH to respond and react? Don't complain to CCH, but instead contact their big customers: REI, Mountain Gear, etc. Once these huge retailers smell a potential product defect, they will get a reaction out of CCH. My bet is that, CCH, being a small company, has gotten into bed with these monster retailers and a significant percent of their product goes to satisfy these supply contracts. If those contracts are threatened, CCH will respond. If they don't and the retailers cancel the supply contracts, CCH will fold.
By the way, the reason REI, Mountain Gear, etc. will find such an interest has its roots in product liability law. Generally, anyone (manufacturer, wholesaler, retailer) who sells a defective product is jointly and severally liable for damage suffered as a result of said defect. In other words, if someone takes a fall (and gets injured or worse) on an alien and the cam blows because of a defect, CCH and REI are both equally liable. And REI has the deeper pockets from which a plaintiff could seek damages. Hence, such a vested interest in getting to the root of the problem. I gurantee you that REI does not want to be in the business of selling defective climbing gear.
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
thomaskeefer
Jan 5, 2006, 4:14 PM
Post #167 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 24, 2002
Posts: 186
|
So.. Over on ST hold2please had her rack stolen and people were lining up to donate gear to her out of the kindness of their hearts- pretty damn cool if you ask me. It think that sense of community could be particularly useful here. Perhaps the OP could get an appraisal for the type of analysis needed and even to have the cam replaced and then all those concerned could throw in a few bucks to him via paypal. Not to volunteer him or anything but I think that sending the unit to the manufacture is just not a good idea...not just for CCH but for any company manufacturing something. Self policing just does not work all that well all the time.
OP, if you do decide to have this done, I will throw some coin your way.
|
|
|
|
|
clayman
Jan 5, 2006, 4:34 PM
Post #168 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2004
Posts: 296
|
In reply to: So.. Over on ST hold2please had her rack stolen and people were lining up to donate gear to her out of the kindness of their hearts- pretty damn cool if you ask me. It think that sense of community could be particularly useful here. Perhaps the OP could get an appraisal for the type of analysis needed and even to have the cam replaced and then all those concerned could throw in a few bucks to him via paypal. Not to volunteer him or anything but I think that sending the unit to the manufacture is just not a good idea...not just for CCH but for any company manufacturing something. Self policing just does not work all that well all the time. OP, if you do decide to have this done, I will throw some coin your way.
Right the &^%$ on! This is a great idea, and I would definitly chip in.
cl
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 5, 2006, 4:37 PM
Post #169 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
thomaskeefer,
Thanks for the offer. But I don't expect others to put money forward for something that cch should pay for in the first place. If they decide to analyze the cam at all. I re-sent my e-mail to them last night. Lets see if they respond today. It has been 3 full days since the first one was sent and still no response.
I will not send the cam to anyone until cch contacts me and instructs me to do so. The ball is in their court now. Lets see what they do.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
ronolsen
Jan 5, 2006, 4:44 PM
Post #170 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 8, 2003
Posts: 47
|
Kevin,
You might try contacting CCH by phone:
Colorado Custom Hardware
115 East Lyons Street, Laramie, WY 82072
(307) 721-9385
I never had success getting an email response from them.
-- Ron
|
|
|
|
|
sixleggedinsect
Jan 5, 2006, 4:46 PM
Post #171 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 385
|
In reply to: Thanks for the offer. But I don't expect others to put money forward for something that cch should pay for in the first place. If they decide to analyze the cam at all. I re-sent my e-mail to them last night. Lets see if they respond today. It has been 3 full days since the first one was sent and still no response.
i was thinking the exact same thing as other posters- i'd be more than pleased to donate a few dollars to a community analysis kitty. but insainio- its not to bail cch out. of course i believe they should pony up, but given their track record im not convinced it will happen, or not on your schedule anyways.
id be interested in seeing an analysis out of purely selfish reasons. i want to trust my aliens again, or have extra-legit documentation that they made a big mistake so they can recall anything that might be suspect. again- i like aliens. i want to be able to climb above them without feeling like i need to put another piece in 4" underneath them.
In reply to: I will not send the cam to anyone until cch contacts me and instructs me to do so. The ball is in their court now. Lets see what they do.
well, be careful, eh? cch really isnt inspiring trust in me right now. they've been acting as unprofessionally as anything. if they ask you to send the cam to them, you might consider getting the information of the third party lab they plan to send it to so you can send it direct.
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 5, 2006, 4:57 PM
Post #172 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: In reply to: Thanks for the offer. But I don't expect others to put money forward for something that cch should pay for in the first place. If they decide to analyze the cam at all. I re-sent my e-mail to them last night. Lets see if they respond today. It has been 3 full days since the first one was sent and still no response. i was thinking the exact same thing as other posters- i'd be more than pleased to donate a few dollars to a community analysis kitty. but insainio- its not to bail cch out. of course i believe they should pony up, but given their track record im not convinced it will happen, or not on your schedule anyways. id be interested in seeing an analysis out of purely selfish reasons. i want to trust my aliens again, or have extra-legit documentation that they made a big mistake so they can recall anything that might be suspect. again- i like aliens. i want to be able to climb above them without feeling like i need to put another piece in 4" underneath them. In reply to: I will not send the cam to anyone until cch contacts me and instructs me to do so. The ball is in their court now. Lets see what they do. well, be careful, eh? cch really isnt inspiring trust in me right now. they've been acting as unprofessionally as anything. if they ask you to send the cam to them, you might consider getting the information of the third party lab they plan to send it to so you can send it direct.
definately words of wisdom
I'd contribute too. At this point, I'd really feel better if the cam went to the lab before cch got their hands on it.
My selfishness though, and your defective cam
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Jan 5, 2006, 5:01 PM
Post #173 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
can these two threads be merged at all? it seems like now that dave responded, most of the posts in both threads are heading the same direction, and i'd like to keep following both of them, in the event that he or someone else from cch(is there anyone else?) responds again.
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Jan 5, 2006, 5:48 PM
Post #174 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
Apparently the same thing happened to quietmonk at the beginning of 2005.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=991387#991387
I would bump that thread, but it's locked.
|
|
|
|
|
happiegrrrl
Jan 5, 2006, 6:02 PM
Post #175 of 522
(70529 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
In reply to: thomaskeefer, Thanks for the offer. But I don't expect others to put money forward for something that cch should pay for in the first place. If they decide to analyze the cam at all. I re-sent my e-mail to them last night. Lets see if they respond today. It has been 3 full days since the first one was sent and still no response. I will not send the cam to anyone until cch contacts me and instructs me to do so. The ball is in their court now. Lets see what they do. Kevin
Kevin, I would like to suggest that you abandon the idea of your emailed inquiry and resent email as doing your end of the thing "to get the ball rolling." Emails get lost, they get sent to the spam file because of attachments...all sorts of crap can happen. I don't see, in the post from CCH, any mention of having received any communication from you directly. Strange as it may seem, it is possible that the only information they have...is this thread and calls from 3rd parties who are not involved!
It MIGHT proove more useful if you get on the telephone and get a hold of Dave, and at this point, I think it behooves you to do so.
As well, to accept the community's offer to pony up for testing.... I think you shoud take it. I'll donate towards that end as well. With your post, you have invovled "the community" and made it not a personal matter between you and CCH.
|
|
|
|
|
dudemanbu
Jan 5, 2006, 6:20 PM
Post #176 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2005
Posts: 941
|
removed for topic as ed suggested below.
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Jan 5, 2006, 6:43 PM
Post #177 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
OK -- we have two topics going that are covering similar issues. I'd like to keep both open for further commentary since they do have enough difference to merit more discussion.
**For this thread** -- please keep comments focued on the failure of the cam and the analysis of the failure.
**For the "CCH responds" thread** -- please add your comment there if you have anything to say about how CCH is handling/responding to the situation.
With your help, I think we can keep these two topics seperate and have good discussion on both issues.
Thanks,
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Jan 5, 2006, 6:56 PM
Post #178 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
In reply to: Apparently the same thing happened to quietmonk at the beginning of 2005. http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=991387#991387 I would bump that thread, but it's locked.
Hmmm,
That's the same thread I linked here back on page 3.
I looked through the that whole thread and no pictures were ever produced. The thread ended up being called a troll. I think it was even rated T10++. Not to say that it never happened.
Pretty compelling evidence here though.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpstrength
Jan 5, 2006, 7:13 PM
Post #179 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 285
|
I have a question about the alien in the picture on page 11 posted by healyje. The number 2 is stamped into the axle. I checked out my orange alien and it does not have anything stamped in that part of the cam. I then checked out my only other alien, gray, and it does not have anything stamped either. What is the stamped number there for? I know metolius stamps there seconds/blems with "2nd." Is this how cch does it? Does cch release seconds? Might your cam be a cch blem/second??
I am just not as knowledgeable on aliens as other and jus don't know what the number is. I have found my batch numbers for my two aliens, 0105 and 0605 so I think I am ok. But wasnt there an issue last year about this time with aliens?
I am a lost child
|
|
|
|
|
gunkjunkie
Jan 5, 2006, 7:47 PM
Post #180 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2001
Posts: 153
|
I am sorry - perhaps this is ignorance on my part - but I have a question that I would like cleared up. I was under the impression that aliens are not the best camming units to use in parallel sided cracks - especially in softer rock. It is my understanding that they work best in areas like the Gunks - with harder rock such as quartzite conglomerate and granite - and in more featured cracks. Wouldn't camalots and TCU's be more appropriate camming units for use in Indian Creek?
Deirdre
Edited to add - this is not an attack on the OP - just a request for information in an attempt to keep my fat a** from hitting the ground again at an acceleration rate of 9.88 m/s2.
|
|
|
|
|
fear
Jan 5, 2006, 10:14 PM
Post #181 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 475
|
In reply to: I am sorry - perhaps this is ignorance on my part - but I have a question that I would like cleared up. I was under the impression that aliens are not the best camming units to use in parallel sided cracks - especially in softer rock. It is my understanding that they work best in areas like the Gunks - with harder rock such as quartzite conglomerate and granite - and in more featured cracks. Wouldn't camalots and TCU's be more appropriate camming units for use in Indian Creek? Deirdre Edited to add - this is not an attack on the OP - just a request for information in an attempt to keep my fat a** from hitting the ground again at an acceleration rate of 9.88 m/s2.
??
The softer rock might shear/break easier and the cam might pull out but in this case the head CAME OFF... Nothing to do with the sandstone...
-Fear
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 5, 2006, 10:28 PM
Post #182 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
9.81
|
|
|
|
|
dirtineye
Jan 6, 2006, 12:59 AM
Post #183 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2003
Posts: 5590
|
Naw man, he had it right. There's more gravity at the gunks. Them damned yankees think they're from another planet anyway. :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
sixleggedinsect
Jan 6, 2006, 1:42 AM
Post #185 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 385
|
I just went over to ST.com and checked out their budding alien thread. One poster (apologies, ive forgotten the handle) wrote this:
In reply to: The real end is going to be next year when CCH's patents run out on not only the internal spring design but the sleeve style trigger as well. With the explosion in the active pro market I think we are going to see these features incorporated in some wild new stuff. I love the lower six aliens I have but I think I'm going to pass on buying a set of hybrids. Maybe Trango or somebody is already working on it? Hmmmm......
Is this true? The patent burns out in a year and then the design is fair game? There have been numerous dreamy-eyed comments in this thread about how it'd be nice to have aliens built by someone with some credibility. And because CCH makes so few, the market isn't nearly saturated.
|
|
|
|
|
gunkjunkie
Jan 6, 2006, 2:54 AM
Post #186 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2001
Posts: 153
|
Unfortunately it's not that the Gunks has more gravity - but that my A** is so big it has its own gravitational field. :lol:
I asked the ? because I wondered if there was a possiblity of the unit walking and being repositioned in such as way as for there to be a sufficient twisting force being placed upon it to cause the head to break away from the stem.
Deirdre
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 6, 2006, 4:24 AM
Post #187 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
Hey all,
After not hearing from cch today, I will be calling them tomorrow to discuss what should be done. I believe that I have given them ample time to respond to my e-mails.
I would like to point out that my e-mail address is displayed clearly on my profile. If it is in fact true that my e-mails did not go through, and Dave did take this seriously, he could have responded to me through my profile.
I will let you know what he says,
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
happiegrrrl
Jan 6, 2006, 4:30 AM
Post #188 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
It is possible, Kevin, that he didn't even read the thread. That someone called him and said "(whatever)" and being that he HADN'T heard from you.... responded the way he did.
As someone else mentioned, not everyone uses the internet in the same "dedicated" fashion as some of us do. It may "seem" obvious to you that your contact information is readily available, but you are making assumptions in doing so.
But I am glad that you will make the call to him and talk one on one.
|
|
|
|
|
fear
Jan 6, 2006, 5:06 AM
Post #189 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 475
|
In reply to: Hey all, After not hearing from cch today, I will be calling them tomorrow to discuss what should be done. I believe that I have given them ample time to respond to my e-mails. I would like to point out that my e-mail address is displayed clearly on my profile. If it is in fact true that my e-mails did not go through, and Dave did take this seriously, he could have responded to me through my profile. I will let you know what he says, Kevin
I've found a lot of low-tech companies just toss their e-mails in the dumper anyway, if they ever get them at all.... Those companies won't be around in a few years but that's another story...
Dave also might not even know what your profile is.....
-Fear
|
|
|
|
|
sumo
Jan 6, 2006, 6:39 AM
Post #190 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 28, 2005
Posts: 176
|
I'm sorry for not quoting the comment
but what I meant about natural disasters and other recalls
is take a look at Ford or Firestone. They deined any problems for years, only after 40+ deaths did they make a major recall.
Until the company knows it is an actual problem they are most likely going to reassure the consumer. The last thing they want to do is cause a mass panic.
Now I don't really agree with this, but it is what I would have expected.
Edit: OP check your PMs
Sumo
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 6, 2006, 8:55 AM
Post #191 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
In reply to: It is possible, Kevin, that he didn't even read the thread. That someone called him and said "(whatever)" and being that he HADN'T heard from you.... responded the way he did. As someone else mentioned, not everyone uses the internet in the same "dedicated" fashion as some of us do. It may "seem" obvious to you that your contact information is readily available, but you are making assumptions in doing so. But I am glad that you will make the call to him and talk one on one.
Please.. Dave from CCH did in fact log on, viewed the images, and posted a pathetic response. Obviously he is savvy enough to know how to find the thread, scroll and click his way through in order to do this. If he did so without noting Kevin's contact info, or making any attempt to contact him, *disgraceful* doesn't even begin to describe it.
I am shocked and dismayed that people continually imply that the OP is somehow to blame for his method(s) of contact, or something as ridiculous as the cam in question was not suited for the type of rock he was climbing on. (Obviously the cam wasn’t suited for climbing period)
We're not talking about a defective toaster here, we trust out lives to these cams, I would expect *that*, at the very least would be taken seriously by CCH, who it appears- has chosen instead to stick his head in the sand.
Paul on the other hand is being proactive and communicating with the climbing community. (someone I trust and will continue to deal with).
If CCH had taken the same approach, we would have all closely inspected our aliens and carried on. This thread would have died long ago.
|
|
|
|
|
happiegrrrl
Jan 6, 2006, 4:06 PM
Post #192 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
Skinner - I was not, and am not, "blaming" the OP or Insanio.
You DON'T know that Dave read the thread, viewed the images.....you are ASSUMING he did.
If this was about my product, would I read the thread and view the images - Yes, I would. Would you? Well, only you can answer that, but I would guess that you would!
Had it been my product, and I viewed the thread, but received no initial communication - as has been suggested may be the case here - would I go and contact the OP? Umm......it would depend on my mood of the day; how busy I was, how much I wanted to engage the situation. Considering that this forum has it's share of tolls.....it might be more wise to not engage.
What I was suggesting, to Insanio, was that he get on the telephone and have a direct conversation. I suggested this because I actually have had a similar situation in my business. It is a loooooong story, but the gist was that what I thought was going on through the email communication(which was entirely an unsatisfactory response) was actullay not at ALL what was going on "in real life." And, I spent a lot of energy getting all worked up, and indignant, for no real reason. When I got on the phone, I STILL couldn't figure out how my email communications had been so mismanaged, but it was crystal clear that there was no malicious intent or signs of an indifferent stance for the other party.
I learned a lesson from that, and even though I honestly and truly believe 'I had the right" to see things the way I did....the fact is, when it came down to it, I was seeing them in a way that was not the reality of the situation.
Just trying to help someone else avoid the same problem, is all I am doing, by suggesting he have a phone conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 6, 2006, 5:54 PM
Post #193 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
OK guys, here is whats happening.
I spoke to David this morning and I will be sending the cam to a lab that he recommended in Denver. David said that we should have the results next week. He also graciously offered to pay for the testing.
I just want to say thanks to David for doing that.
Also, to clear up the communication issue. I asked David if he had checked his email, and he told me that he hadn't. So, for future reference, it is probably better to call or mail if you have any questions.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
iceisnice
Jan 6, 2006, 5:57 PM
Post #194 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 874
|
wow. some people should really feel like asses now. happiegirl had a good point.
|
|
|
|
|
dudemanbu
Jan 6, 2006, 6:05 PM
Post #195 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2005
Posts: 941
|
No she doesn't.
He should've both read the thread in its entirety after having it pointed out to him through other callers, and should've checked his company email at some point over the 5 day period that it took him to respond.
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 6, 2006, 6:15 PM
Post #196 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: No she doesn't. He should've both read the thread in its entirety after having it pointed out to him through other callers, and should've checked his company email at some point over the 5 day period that it took him to respond.
'ding' ... we have a winner.
With the seriousness of this issue, once made aware of it, they should have tried every avenue to reach insano. They should have at least checked their email.
Not to mention that Dave from CCH says that he hadn't been contacted by insano without checking his email?! That would be like if insano left a message on their answering machine and CCH didn't check it and then said, 'nobody has called us about this'. Talk about burrying your head in the sand!
With that said, I think CCH deserves due credit for taking the proper steps at this juncture, regardless of their promptness.
BTW, got the name of that lab in Denver so those more acquainted with the industry can weigh in on its legitemacy?
|
|
|
|
|
couch_climber
Jan 6, 2006, 6:55 PM
Post #197 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 23, 2003
Posts: 21
|
Regarding the subject of a phone call vs email.
From my point of view, if a company isn't going to check and respond to emails on a timely basis they shouldn't provide an email address to the public.
|
|
|
|
|
shazinky
Jan 6, 2006, 7:11 PM
Post #198 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 86
|
I love my aliens and am very interested in the outcome of the lab tests. I bought an orange alien oh maybe a year ago and it has performed well for me. As well as my partner who took a nice dinger on it before redpointing "star walls crack" in Donner.
On the other subject of the REI recall is there any more info on that, I purchased my orange Alien at REI like I said about a year ago.
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 7, 2006, 4:22 AM
Post #199 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
Hey everyone,
I wanted to let you in on another interesting little factoid that I learned today. The e-mail address listed on cch's website is old and no longer in use.
Their new e-mail address is: cchaliens@aol.com
Thought you might want to know.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
iceisnice
Jan 7, 2006, 6:05 PM
Post #200 of 522
(70117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 874
|
wow, there are a lot of people on here with their foots in their mouths.....or they are just a bunch of bandwagon assholes. it was fun to read though.
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jan 7, 2006, 6:49 PM
Post #201 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
In reply to: Hey everyone, I wanted to let you in on another interesting little factoid that I learned today. The e-mail address listed on cch's website is old and no longer in use. Their new e-mail address is: cchaliens@aol.com Thought you might want to know. Kevin |
|
|
|
|
heiko
Jan 9, 2006, 3:54 PM
Post #202 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 1505
|
A little puzzle for the mathematicians among you:
How high is the probability that
- person X is an RC.com user AND
- X lead-climbs, identifies the crux on-sight and backs up the orange Alien A with a BD cam AND
- X takes a fall just above the two pieces AND
- orange Alien A a has a manufacturing defect and rips into pieces from this not-so-huge fall AND
- friend Y has a camera and is taking perfect shots right in this moment?
The combined probability of these events must be a number so low I can't even imagine.
What I'm asking is: mostly everyone - with a few exceptions - is taking this whole thing for granted. Why is that? How many Aliens have CCH sold? Thousands? Tens of thousands? More? How many falls have people taken on their cams? How many have blown apart?
If you didn't know me (as you probably don't) and I'd somehow manage to post a few pics of myself on lead in the Nose now claiming to have freed it in 2 hours (probability, remember?), would you believe me? I mean, other people have done similar things, right?
Flame me, I don't care. I just can't believe people here are so easy to convince about some things, and so extremely suspicous about others.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 9, 2006, 4:12 PM
Post #203 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: A little puzzle for the mathematicians among you: How high is the probability that - person X is an RC.com user AND - X lead-climbs, identifies the crux on-sight and backs up the orange Alien A with a BD cam AND - X takes a fall just above the two pieces AND - orange Alien A a has a manufacturing defect and rips into pieces from this not-so-huge fall AND - friend Y has a camera and is taking perfect shots right in this moment? The combined probability of these events must be a number so low I can't even imagine. What I'm asking is: mostly everyone - with a few exceptions - is taking this whole thing for granted. Why is that? How many Aliens have CCH sold? Thousands? Tens of thousands? More? How many falls have people taken on their cams? How many have blown apart? If you didn't know me (as you probably don't) and I'd somehow manage to post a few pics of myself on lead in the Nose now claiming to have freed it in 2 hours (probability, remember?), would you believe me? I mean, other people have done similar things, right? Flame me, I don't care. I just can't believe people here are so easy to convince about some things, and so extremely suspicous about others. Cheers.
anothe exercise in probability-
Take all of the climbers in the US (a very small number related to other sports)
Now subtract all that do not climb 5.0 and above terrain
Now subtract all exclusive sport climbers
Now subtract all trad climbers that keep the grades very moderate and do not fall on their protection.
Now subtract all that do not use CCH aliens
Now subtract all that do not read this site,
Now of those who do read it, subtract all that don't post.
Now subtract those that have had problems with climbing gear that will not bring this sort of public attention to the companies, and deal with the issues privately.
The number you are looking at is a reletively very small number.
Now of those RC.com posting trad climbers who actually climb at or near their limit, actually using (ie-falling on) their protection more than a small handfull of times per year that happen to own aliens, and would feel the need to inform the RC.com community, there have been three instances indicating manufacturing flaws in the past year.
If there is nothing to the claims on this website then there is likely a conspiracy theory between otherwise seemingly unacquainted members. Man, I love my aliens and all, but some of you die-hard, hard-core loyalists need to see past your own bias and look at the facts. I'm as unthrilled as anyone else that this crap is going on, but I'm not going to try and find ways to show either party is guilty of "a hoax". I'm going to objectively look at the information presented and draw my own conclusions.
|
|
|
|
|
crotch
Jan 9, 2006, 4:15 PM
Post #204 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
The probability seems to have been 1.0 to me.
|
|
|
|
|
saxfiend
Jan 9, 2006, 5:00 PM
Post #205 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 31, 2004
Posts: 1208
|
In reply to: In reply to: A little puzzle for the mathematicians among you: [snip] Flame me, I don't care. anothe exercise in probability- [snip]
-- person X goes out and spends $60 or so on a brand-new alien
-- person X finds a way to sabotage this perfectly good and expensive piece of gear without leaving any evidence of his tampering
-- he then launches on a climb and places his sabotaged alien plus a backup piece
-- he then INTENTIONALLY falls on this setup in an area notorious for spitting out gear in hopes that his backup piece will save him from a death fall
Once you've finished calculating the probabilities on that, explain to me what person X has to gain from this scenario.
:boring:
JL
|
|
|
|
|
pastprime
Jan 9, 2006, 6:28 PM
Post #206 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2005
Posts: 251
|
Using the logic above, one could look at some gym climbing accident where the climber was dropped by his belayer and ask: "What are the odds of someone weighing exactly 172 pounds and using Madrock shoes and Metolius chalk, falling from 18 feet off of the floor while on a Sterling rope at exactly 6:20 pm on a tuesday while belayed by someone named Alphonse who has belayed exactly three times before and is using a BD atc in the only climbing gym in Akron Ohio and breaking his left ankle? Too astronomical. It couldn't have happened."
Another way of looking at the odds might be:
Assume an RC.cm member had that did fail. 1. What are the odds he might have another piece in below the failed piece that did hold?
Pretty good, I'd say.
If he's in a very photogenic area on a blue sky day that is far enough from any town that he probably doesn't go there every weekend, what are the chances someone in his group might have a camera on him for a lot of his climb, including the time of the fall, especially considering that digital cameras cost nothing per shot and you can take 20 shots in 5 minutes and dump the ones you don't like afterwards, so people do just that?
Not all that unlikely, I'd say.
|
|
|
|
|
pastprime
Jan 9, 2006, 6:52 PM
Post #207 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2005
Posts: 251
|
Above should read: "had a cam that did fail"
How do you edit posts?
|
|
|
|
|
jimfix
Jan 9, 2006, 8:47 PM
Post #208 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2004
Posts: 314
|
In reply to: Now subtract those that have had problems with climbing gear that will not bring this sort of public attention to the companies, and deal with the issues privately.
I think this nails it. No manufacturing procedure is fool proof. Problems can/will occur. The public outcry is a little over the top, and admittedly CCH haven't handled it well. A replacement cam and a sorry would have done wonders. However it is well known that CCH doesn't have the best PR skills.
We trust our gear with our lives, but at the end of the day, if their was no risk in climbing, it wouldn't be climbing.
The only way to avoid the risks of a small manufacture like CCH is to not buy their products. But given the love affair with aliens, I doubt one bad cam is going to stop alien sales. Boycott them by all means, it will make it easier to get them for those of us who still want em.
In reply to: Once you've finished calculating the probabilities on that, explain to me what person X has to gain from this scenario.
Now what are the probabilities of someone having the skill the manufacture the images you have seen with photoshop? But I digress, we all know the internet is gospel.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 10, 2006, 1:40 AM
Post #209 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: In reply to: Now subtract those that have had problems with climbing gear that will not bring this sort of public attention to the companies, and deal with the issues privately. I think this nails it. No manufacturing procedure is fool proof. Problems can/will occur. The public outcry is a little over the top, and admittedly CCH haven't handled it well. A replacement cam and a sorry would have done wonders. However it is well known that CCH doesn't have the best PR skills.
You are right with your first two sentences - no one is perfect. Where you go wrong is the fact with appropriate checks mistakes that happen should almost never be assembled and shipped as product. Bad parts happen, bad assembly happens - shipping those mistakes shouldn't...
|
|
|
|
|
kimgraves
Jan 11, 2006, 8:08 PM
Post #210 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2003
Posts: 1186
|
EDIT: I was wrong. My Aliens are retired effective immediately.
No doubt that CCH handled the question of possible manufacturing flaws VERY badly. So badly that they deserve all the grief that they're getting.
But let's do a reality check.
There are three separate issues: 1) the QA issue of a misdrilled hole and 2) a bad braze of the cable to the head that caused the failure of the orange alien. 3) the management failure to address issues 1 & 2
1) There is clearly a QA issue associated with some of there products with regard to the misdrilled hole. This flaw has been widely reported. Clearly that batch/s should be identified by CCH and recalled.
2) Other than the original poster showing the orange alien in pieces, HAVE THERE BEEN ANY OTHER FAILURES? If there have, I'd certainly like to hear about them. Clearly CCH should pay for the testing of the cam in question to find out if they have a one-time failure, a systemic production problem, a hoax, or some other issue.
3) The fact that they haven't done the test doesn't de facto mean that they have a systemic production problem or any production problem for that matter. What it means is that they have a very serious management failure. A failure serious enough that I can no longer trust them to be responsible for things that are clearly their responsibility: I won't buy anything further from CCH until they take positive steps to restore my trust. But it doesn't mean that all the Aliens out in the market are suspect. If you've fallen on their cams; if you've aided on there cams; if you've inspected their products that you have in your rack and found nothing amiss; then I personally feel comfortable continuing to use the CCH products that I already have.
On March 24, 1989, shortly after midnight, the oil tanker Exxon Valdez struck Bligh Reef in Prince William Sound, Alaska, spilling more than 11 million gallons of crude oil. It was the largest oil spill in U.S. history. Exxon handled the accident so poorly that I swore that I would never again buy an Exxon product. This was not a comment on Exxon gasoline. It was a comment on Exxon management. 17 years later Exxon has never made good. 17 years later I have not bought an Exxon product.
Clearly what I'm looking for from CCH is to have the cam in question independently tested and then publish the results. Then a statement to the effect that they'll improve their QA and begin testing every cam that comes off the production line. That would restore my trust in their management.
Regards, Kim
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 11, 2006, 8:26 PM
Post #211 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
Unless I missed a lab or manufacturer report, can't yet say that a bad braze caused the failure of the orange alien.
Also, I've been trying to closely follow the mislocated axle issue and I haven't seen where we can say that the manufacturer failed to address it. I understand there was a recall. I assume it was at the manufacturer's request. The main issue I have with the mislocated axle is that one could infer from the recall that a mislocated axle only effects the expansion range without addressing why or simply stating that it did not significantly effect holding power.
Wouldn't even venture out into the area of whether other folks should continue using their products. I might but it is strictly a personal decision.
I appreciate the summary.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
iamthewallress
Jan 11, 2006, 8:30 PM
Post #212 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 2463
|
In reply to: I assume it was at the manufacturer's request.
Why do you assume that?
|
|
|
|
|
schveety
Jan 11, 2006, 8:45 PM
Post #213 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2005
Posts: 98
|
The last I heard of this whole deal, Dave from CCH did offer to pay to have the alien in question tested and that it was being sent to a lab in Denver. There are ways for CCH to fix the lobe drill hole issue, but I don't know if they have taken any suggestions. Fitting the piece into a mold to check if it fits the way it should would help to solve this problem, or using a new technique to drill.....
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 11, 2006, 8:45 PM
Post #214 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: In reply to: I assume it was at the manufacturer's request. Why do you assume that?
Personally, I guess I'm not interested in getting into what has transpired between the dealers/distributors and CCH. ... because it just seems like there is currently plenty of pressure on CCH to get things right as evidenced by the recall(s). So I give CCH the benefit of the doubt in that area.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
md3
Jan 11, 2006, 8:57 PM
Post #215 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 13, 2004
Posts: 172
|
I am impressed with your ability and willingness to abstain from Exxon products. I imagine that if more consumers took this sort of thing seriously we would end up with more responsible and accountable corporations.
Of course, as to the CCH thing- I want more of the crazy chickens running around with their heads cut off due to improper spinal cord attachment hysteria we had a few days ago. I am already nostalgic – it gave me something to live for and I felt more justified checking in at work ….
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 11, 2006, 9:00 PM
Post #216 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
Wasn't the whole controversy over the misdrilled axle holes centered around the fact that CCH didn't instigate any recall?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't REI do their own recall? I haven't heard of any other recall, and there has definately been no statement issued by CCH.
The only thing they did was inform those with said cams (who took it upon themselves to contact CCH) that they could send them in for a new cam.
Also, there was another instance of 'brazing failure' reported on this site about a grey alien. The claim was dismissed by the pack of alien worshipers as a hoax.
this second time people aren't as quick to distrust the OP
|
|
|
|
|
scottquig
Jan 11, 2006, 9:07 PM
Post #217 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 10, 2005
Posts: 298
|
In reply to: But it doesn't mean that all the Aliens out in the market are suspect. If you've fallen on their cams; if you've aided on there cams; if you've inspected their products that you have in your rack and found nothing amiss; then I personally feel comfortable continuing to use the CCH products that I already have.
Kim- I found your post most accurate, save for one detail. Brazing quality is not something you can just visually isnpect. It's a material flaw, not exactly something you can see from the outside. Just because a cam has held a fall or looks fine does not mean that it is free of defect. I'm sure that the majority of the aliens out there are just fine (evidenced by how much people tend to like them), but there could be failures just waiting to happen. It might just take a little more force than you put on it last time, or one more shock loading to a system that has already been over-stressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wideguy
Jan 11, 2006, 9:16 PM
Post #219 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 9, 2003
Posts: 15046
|
In reply to: I won't buy anything further from CCH until they take positive steps to restore my trust. But it doesn't mean that all the Aliens out in the market are suspect.
And I don't think many other people are saying that, But like you said, the publicity combined with the seemingly ever increasing reports of poor customer service certainly merit discussion and from a PR standpoint the major retailers would be foolish not to pull CCH product until the storm dies a bit.
In reply to: Exxon handled the accident so poorly that I swore that I would never again buy an Exxon product. This was not a comment on Exxon gasoline. It was a comment on Exxon management. 17 years later Exxon has never made good. 17 years later I have not bought an Exxon product.
I would be very surprised if this is true, although I don't doubt your intentions. Exon Mobil is the second largest oil company in the world refining 6 million barrels a day and operating 16,000 ratail gas sations in the US under the Exxon, Mobil or Esso names. In addition they sell refined gas to numerous smaller in "Independant distributors" who sell it at market under probably thousands more unknown mom and pop names.
In addition with the Mobil brand they account for a staggering percentage of all automotive oil and lubricants either bought by consumers directly or used at Speedy Lube, Jiffy Lube, et al. , again under the Mobil brand or sold in numerous other store labels.
They also have the fuel contracts at over 20 commercial airports in the US including JFK and LaGuardia.
And this doesn't even touch all the other comapies and brands that they own under other names.
If you can still say with certainty you've avoided giving them a penny then that is amazing and shows remarkable conviction.
Sadly, that is why they get away with being bad corporate citizens, because they can afford it.
|
|
|
|
|
kimgraves
Jan 11, 2006, 9:20 PM
Post #220 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2003
Posts: 1186
|
Yea, I just found this post too. Thanks. This is why everything has to be tested. If a little guy like Tom Frost can test every single one of his nuts, then surely CCH can too. Chouinard even went so far to stamp "tested" onto every one of his carabiners so that you knew it had been done.
Regards, Kim
|
|
|
|
|
wings
Jan 11, 2006, 9:20 PM
Post #221 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 283
|
In reply to: I am impressed with your ability and willingness to abstain from Exxon products.
I think it's unfortunate that something like this is deemed "impressive" (not to mean any disrespect to md3 ... he's a bystander on this drive-by).
While I hate to admit it, money is power (as are other things). And people must use what power they have to influence the world. Sitting around trying to create the most comfortable life for yourself is not a notable feat in the least.
- Seyil
|
|
|
|
|
kimgraves
Jan 11, 2006, 9:26 PM
Post #222 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2003
Posts: 1186
|
In reply to: In reply to: Exxon handled the accident so poorly that I swore that I would never again buy an Exxon product. I would be very surprised if this is true, although I don't doubt your intentions.
You are of course right. My wife laughs at me because of the holes in my conviction. "It's all one oil company, she says." But I try to not buy Exxon products. I don't buy gas at an Exxon or Mobil station. I don't get my oil changed at Jiffy-Lube. It's the best I can do to show just how pissed off I am.
Regards, Kim
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jan 11, 2006, 9:36 PM
Post #223 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
In regards to Exxon; they did bring in experts to do what they could, and as quickly as possible...
I happen to know this because in the mid 90's I had the pleasure (if you can call it that) of working hand-in-hand with 'Tri-State Animal Rescue' which was brought in to engineer the rescue and cleanup process for the wildlife that was affected by the oil spill.
Ironically, I was working w/ them on the largest inland waterway oil spill in the US (Bolivar, Ohio & Ashland Oil). Ashland brought in Tri-State, and I was actually the only individual allowed to paddle the affected entire length of the Tuscarawas River, mapping out where the cleanup engineers needed to place their collection booms. I had been a river guide, and was the most capable paddler in the area at the time, and "base camp" just happened to be at a friends canoe livery... Because portions were registered as a wildlife refuge, helicopters couldn't fly as low as they normally would, because it would have scattered the oil into the wetland inlets above the dam.
While the Exxon tragedy was insane to say the least, many things were in fact done. Also, contrary to popular belief, since the water is so cold, there was a benefit to not sucking from the seafloor, because it was already coagulated and would quickly settle well below the sand-bed, where it would be harmlessly reabsorbed into the bedrock.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 11, 2006, 9:39 PM
Post #224 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
I've been trying like mad to stay out of these threads, but that doesn't mean that I haven't been doing quite a bit of research on my own. I have spoken with many different sources; some could be considered biased, some most likely are not. Very few people are willing to speak on the record about this, but I have enough information corroborrated by sources unaffiliated with each other that I feel comfortable saying a few things. So, if this thread is going to go the distance like the others, I need to correct a couple points that have already come up.
1. No Aliens have ever been recalled by anybody for any reason. CCH never initiated a recall and neither did REI. REI did pull their entire stock of orange Aliens from the sales floor and send them all back to CCH. This may seem like I'm arguing semantics, but there is a valid difference between a "recall" and a "return," most notably the party that initiated the action and the extent to which either party goes to retreive the units in question. In this case, REI initiated a VOLUNTARY RETURN of units still in stock, not a RECALL.
2. CCH did address the mis-drilled axle hole issue... passively. We have several reports of buyers calling CCH with the problem units and CCH saying, in effect, Send it in and we'll replace it. CCH did not initiate the REI return mentioned above. REI did.
At this point, that's about all I feel comfortable saying on the matter.
Thanks,
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 11, 2006, 9:49 PM
Post #225 of 522
(69393 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
I've been trying like mad to stay out of these threads, but that doesn't mean that I haven't been doing quite a bit of research on my own. I have spoken with many different sources; some could be considered biased, some most likely are not. Very few people are willing to speak on the record about this, but I have enough information corroborrated by sources unaffiliated with each other that I feel comfortable saying a few things. So, if this thread is going to go the distance like the others, I need to correct a couple points that have already come up.
1. No Aliens have ever been recalled by anybody for any reason. CCH never initiated a recall and neither did REI. REI did pull their entire stock of orange Aliens from the sales floor and send them all back to CCH. This may seem like I'm arguing semantics, but there is a valid difference between a "recall" and a "return," most notably the party that initiated the action and the extent to which either party goes to retreive the units in question. In this case, REI initiated a VOLUNTARY RETURN of units still in stock, not a RECALL.
2. CCH did address the mis-drilled axle hole issue... passively. We have several reports of buyers calling CCH with the problem units and CCH saying, in effect, Send it in and we'll replace it. CCH did not initiate the REI return mentioned above. REI did.
I know that's not much more than what's already been said at this point, but that's about all I feel comfortable with right now.
Thanks,
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Jan 11, 2006, 9:58 PM
Post #226 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
Geez Jay, couldn't you at least pretend to get swept up in the hysteria? Maybe even a condemnation of CCH biz practices, or some sort of I-told-you-so to this 'cult of alien lovers?'
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 11, 2006, 10:04 PM
Post #227 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
In reply to: If a little guy like Tom Frost can test every single one of his nuts, then surely CCH can too. Chouinard even went so far to stamp "tested" onto every one of his carabiners so that you knew it had been done. Regards, Kim
For me, and I am sure with many others it was CCH's handling of this gear failure and other recent deficiencies that we found more alarming then the incident's themselves. We even gave CCH another chance and begged Dave to re-think, re-word his response and give us something we could live with and carry on being die-hard alien users.
The unfortunate individual with the decapitated orange Alien handled the whole thing admirably despite being accused of everything from using the wrong cam in the wrong rock to staging an elaborate hoax. :roll:
Yet STILL most of us remain hopeful that in the end CCH will come around, step up to the plate and do the right thing.
I think Exxon would have been hard pressed to find this level of dedication and support. Support that dwindles with each day of inaction on CCH's part.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jan 11, 2006, 10:05 PM
Post #228 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Sigh... oh, OK.
Aliens! Run!
:D
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 11, 2006, 10:11 PM
Post #229 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
Should rename the thread to:
"AREA 51 - ALIENS and CONSPIRACY THEORIES"
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 11, 2006, 10:20 PM
Post #231 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: This may seem like I'm arguing semantics, but there is a valid difference between a "recall" and a "return," ....
Certainly there has been some discussion between REI and CCH as to why the return or whatever. I hope REI didn't make up that the return concerned a smaller than expected expansion range.
Good point about the difference between "return" and "recall". Odd that "Jeremy" of REI did not dispute the title of the thread "REI Recall Orange Alien."
|
|
|
|
|
throb
Jan 11, 2006, 11:15 PM
Post #232 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2005
Posts: 63
|
I never buy gas at Exxon or Mobile, but I had forgotten why. It just seemed wrong. I now rememer it was because of the Exxon Valdez disaster. I stopped buying gas there and then forgot why, but the relationship between Exxon and bad was formed. Most of my Aliens are nearly 20 years old so hopefully there ok.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Jan 12, 2006, 12:40 AM
Post #233 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
I have taken numerous and big falls on every alien I own. I'm going to trust them.
I don't want to believe that there is a problem with alien. Us users of aliens have time and time again seen their magical ability to catch falls other cams couldn't have. And an even more magical ability to place solidly where nothing else on the market could have. Assuming they won't break and have been drilled right, they have no rival, no-one else is even close.
I worked there 6 years ago, my jobs included cleaning out the machines, deburring cam lobes, and sandblasting steel heads. I was there less than 2 months, I hated that job. The dogs incessantly barked and shit on the floor. I was the only employee that climbed. And the workers simply didn't get it "If man was meant to climb, god would have given him 8 arms" was something I heard on numerous occasions.
I didn't work there long enough to learn much of the processes, here is something I recall vividly. Dave sitting at a table downstairs, visually inspecting and reinspecting aliens before he'd send them out. I remember him bringing 10 and 15 aliens upstairs at a time to be rebuilt because something (inperceptable to me) was wrong. I remember deburring a cam lobe too close, and he'd notice. Or chamfering a brass sleeve too far, and he'd notice.
Dave was the most caring a concerned owner of a patent you could imagine, he put all of himself into every unit that went out. I can't hardly imagine what has changed. I sincerely hope that they recover from this. Without aliens, we are simply without aliens, there is nothing to replace them. The climbing community will suffer a great loss if aliens dissappear.
CCH has my business for life, though I may not buy any new ones this year.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jan 12, 2006, 12:47 AM
Post #234 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Dave was the most caring a concerned owner of a patent you could imagine, he put all of himself into every unit that went out. I can't hardly imagine what has changed. I sincerely hope that they recover from this. Without aliens, we are simply without aliens, there is nothing to replace them. The climbing community will suffer a great loss if aliens dissappear. CCH has my business for life, though I may not buy any new ones this year.
I thought it bore repeating angry. Thanks.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
avitripp
Jan 12, 2006, 1:06 AM
Post #235 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 19, 2004
Posts: 67
|
anyone wanting to rid themselves of those aliens pm me. cash on the barrel head. i'm serious.
|
|
|
|
|
porcelainsunset
Jan 12, 2006, 1:33 AM
Post #238 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2005
Posts: 289
|
So I just emailed REI today to try and get ahold of their buyer. I did this after I called and talked to the manager of my local store who knew nothing of the events. I wanted to post this so that you all can see what REI is doing about this, it is on all three forums relating to the issue. I was also wondering what any of you thought about what I am asking of REI. I typically am not their greatest fan, but figured that they would have the best bet of whipping CCH into shape. I hate to see their product go downhill. Anyway, this is what the email said.
Hello,
I am trying to get a hold of the buyer in charge of dealing with CCH and their product Aliens. They make a rock climbing cam that you sell.
Recently on Rockclimbing.com there has been an issue of strong concern regarding aliens. A person posted that he had one of his Aliens (Orange) fail on him at a very low impact. The cam cables separated at the point of the braze. This caused the cam to pretty much break. The customer posted this alarming incident online at the following thread.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=104150&postdays=0&postorder=asc&topic_view=&start=0
This is how CCH responded to the claim.
The Silver brazed connections on Aliens are made by experienced ,skilled people who take great care in the quality of the braze. The accusations being made on this site are quite serious .
An examination by a certified metallurgical lab on the device in question is necessary in order to prove or disprove the claims made regarding alleged failure of the brazed connection. Without an actual report by a lab we will assume this is a staged hoax.
The cable on a 1.5 orange alien will hold over 3500 pounds, far more force than a falling climber could ever generate. When tested on a machine the cable will break ,not pull out of the cable eye.
David Waggoner at CCH
The thread where that post is made is http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=104279&postdays=0&postorder=asc&topic_view=&start=0
Following the post made by Dave, there is 16 pages of outrage and concern made largely by CCH supporters who where offended at the response to the troubling situation.
In response to the post, Mountain Gear, who was following the thread, said that they decided to do a test of their own. After their test they found that 33% of the cams from random batches and sizes failed at a rate below the standard given to them by CCH.
The link to that thread is below
http://www.rockclimbing.com/topic/104768
The reason why I am writing is to try and get a hold of the buyer from REI to see if these issues have been brought to your attention.
I recently bought over $300 worth of CCH Aliens from your Portland Oregon, and Tualatin Oregon stores. I was wondering if you had the batch numbers that both of these stores have received so I could figure out what batch number my cams belonged to. Please check my account to see when I bought them if you need to, I don’t have the receipts, but it was about a week ago. I bought all of them except the blue and the yellow at Portland, and the blue and yellow I bought at Tualatin because Portland was out.
I was also wondering about your return policy on these items. REI dose have a 100% guarantee, but I am not positive that the guarantee applies to rock Protection, or climbing ropes and harnesses. This would be good to know.
I was wondering if you could look into the fiasco and see if a re-call is needed. Although I am a loyal member of the CCH cult (I love their cams) I do not feel safe with my purchase because of the recent failures. CCH has a history of not issuing recalls of defective gear even when the problems where brought to their attention. For an example, a few months ago there was an issue with the drilling of the Orange cam lobes. This resulted in the cams strength being compromised at best, and rendered useless at worse. There still has been no recall of these cams.
CCH currently dose not individually test their cams, and I hold the burden to pressure CCH into a policy of doing so in the hands of REI. It is not your responsibility to test their product, nor is it mine. (I do understand that my life is in my own hands while climbing and I will test my own gear before I use it, however, one should feel safe and assured that they are being sold quality product from a store as professional as yours. Asking CCH to test their product through the use of NDT (Non Destructive Testing) to make sure that it holds under reasonable situations would fulfill this requirement.)
I ask that the situation be looked into fully, and that REI plays a part in assuring its customers that the cams purchased from their stores are safe to climb with. If there is any compromise to safety through cam strength I ask that a recall be put into action.
I would also recommend that REI monitor the threads that I listed above. I would find it wise of you to make a post on each of these forms letting your customers know that you are doing everything in your power to assure your customers of their safety and the quality of the products that you are selling. Much like Mountain Gear has, and unlike CCH. I understand that these forms are not the arena for these proceeding to take place, however they are a great resource for communicating to the climbing community. Many are concerned, and there is talk of a massive boycott of CCH, possibly resulting in its termination.
I urge you to play a part in the forthcomings of these events, for the interest of yourself, climbers, and the community as a whole.
Sincerely,
Taylor Anderson
REI should respond by the end of tomorrow, and I will let you know what they have to say about it. They are still selling possibly defective cams, and their store managers are not aware of these issues.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpstrength
Jan 12, 2006, 1:39 AM
Post #239 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 285
|
sunset,
I called my local rei earlier today. The gentleman I spoke with told me there is an internal safety warning and all CCH products have been removed from rei shelves. He told me that while there may not be an official recall notice, the company (rei) has acknowledged that there is an issue and has chosen to remove the product from their shelves. He told me along with the safety notice there is the effort, as always with rei, to return/exchange/refund for any reason.
|
|
|
|
|
climboard
Jan 12, 2006, 2:44 AM
Post #240 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2001
Posts: 503
|
In reply to: I didn't work there long enough to learn much of the processes, here is something I recall vividly. Dave sitting at a table downstairs, visually inspecting and reinspecting aliens before he'd send them out. I remember him bringing 10 and 15 aliens upstairs at a time to be rebuilt because something (inperceptable to me) was wrong. I remember deburring a cam lobe too close, and he'd notice. Or chamfering a brass sleeve too far, and he'd notice. Dave was the most caring a concerned owner of a patent you could imagine, he put all of himself into every unit that went out. I can't hardly imagine what has changed. I sincerely hope that they recover from this. Without aliens, we are simply without aliens, there is nothing to replace them. The climbing community will suffer a great loss if aliens dissappear. CCH has my business for life, though I may not buy any new ones this year.
Perhaps this system worked up until this year, but obviously QA slipped somewhere along the way, perhaps due to increased volume? For all we know it could have been one less than skilled employee.
I am glad to hear Dave cares deeply about his product, I just hope he cares enough to re-evaluate his QA process and fix what is broken.
I too believe Aliens are a great product deserving of the reputation they've had up until this point but I don't see myself buying any in the future unless I know they've introduced more stringent quality controls.
|
|
|
|
|
shazinky
Jan 12, 2006, 2:46 AM
Post #241 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 86
|
In reply to: 1. No Aliens have ever been recalled by anybody for any reason. CCH never initiated a recall and neither did REI. REI did pull their entire stock of orange Aliens from the sales floor and send them all back to CCH. This may seem like I'm arguing semantics, but there is a valid difference between a "recall" and a "return," most notably the party that initiated the action and the extent to which either party goes to retreive the units in question. In this case, REI initiated a VOLUNTARY RETURN of units still in stock, not a RECALL. Jay
I spoke with the store manager at my local REI Santa Rosa,Ca and asked them if they had recalled the orange alien and she said yes. Can't be anymore clear than that. she did not say "oh no this is a voluntary return" I also spoke with CCH got a hold of them first try and they answered my questions adequately. And they are paying for the testing of the shattered cam.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Jan 12, 2006, 4:30 AM
Post #242 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: In reply to: Dave was the most caring a concerned owner of a patent you could imagine, he put all of himself into every unit that went out. I can't hardly imagine what has changed. I sincerely hope that they recover from this. Without aliens, we are simply without aliens, there is nothing to replace them. The climbing community will suffer a great loss if aliens dissappear. CCH has my business for life, though I may not buy any new ones this year. I thought it bore repeating angry. Thanks. DMT
When things like this come up, I believe it is important to maintain a proper perspective. I personally think CCH has a serious QC related manufacturing issue to address--that may have existed for some time. Does that mean that Dave doesn't care about what goes out the door at CCH? No. Does that mean that Aliens are crap? No. This merely means that CCH must step up to the plate, admit there is a problem and then fix the problem. Trying to make more out of the current Alien problem and turn it into some sort of RC.com soap-opera really serves no good purpose.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
barc
Jan 12, 2006, 4:57 AM
Post #243 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 19, 2002
Posts: 116
|
I don't mean to be a dick, but the Exxon analogy is stupid. It doesn't apply here at all. I'm not saying you're just letting us all know how dedicated you are to your cause, but ... j/k
Plus, now we all have to read everyone else's uneducated opinion about Exxon. There are plenty of blogs out there for that.
I'm still going to climb on my aliens. See, I never eat chicken...
|
|
|
|
|
kimgraves
Jan 12, 2006, 12:56 PM
Post #244 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2003
Posts: 1186
|
In reply to: I don't mean to be a dick...
:lol: :lol: :lol: Okay, dude, how old are you really?
In reply to: I never eat chicken...
Perfect for your tombstone! But you'll rest easy. I'll be honored to nominate you for a Darwin award.
In reply to: I don't mean to be a dick...
:lol: :lol: :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 12, 2006, 1:48 PM
Post #245 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
I too want to reiterate that I think most of us following these threads probably believe Dave is passionate about and deeply committed to Aliens and CCH. But that isn't an issue here as much as the need and willingness to grow CCH's culture and processes in tandem with the demands of large contracts like the one with REI. At some point it just can't stay a one-man show. Neither Dave nor anyone else can "do it all" and still expect to scale the business. Somewhere along the way it takes more than one person to insure everything gets done and done right. My sense is CCH needs a someone to own sales and customer service, another for [manufacturing] operations, and a third to run the business. Maybe he can manage one or two of those roles, but I think what we are seeing is an inability to be "everything to everyone". No matter how passionately he would like to hold on to all those reins, all this probably means it's time to risk letting go of some of them and allow other's to help out. Now that can be an understandably scary prospect for a lot of growing businesses, but it's one they all have to make somewhere along the way if they want to play and grow in the real world.
|
|
|
|
|
oldrnotboldr
Jan 12, 2006, 5:02 PM
Post #246 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2005
Posts: 306
|
I, like others, have been reading these posts with interest. A couple points I noticed is that although the CCH management replied to the issue(s) in a not very customer oriented manner, they are paying for the testing on the cam and have responded to others calls.
Also, Scottquig noted that a cam could pass inspection and visual checks yet fail when equal or greater force is applied. The indication is that a material flaw may or may not be visually noticable and may or may not fail the first time.
There have been two(?) documented braze failures,, out of how many manufactured? Looking at these points, maybe the issue is not so much the QA but in the material procurement or supplier QA. Yet either way it is CCH's responsibility to correct and monitor their suppliers. And from other posts, it sounds like they are putting some effort into actions.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 12, 2006, 5:17 PM
Post #247 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: There have been two(?) documented braze failures.
I believe MGear's testing brings it up to five brazing failures, two climbing and three testing...
|
|
|
|
|
oldrnotboldr
Jan 12, 2006, 5:22 PM
Post #248 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2005
Posts: 306
|
Healyje wrote:
In reply to: I believe MGear's testing brings it up to five brazing failures, two climbing and three testing...
Yes, I just noted my error there. Thanks much.
|
|
|
|
|
bspisak
Jan 12, 2006, 6:14 PM
Post #249 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2002
Posts: 74
|
I'm sure REI found out about this from local stores after the first orange alien post on this site. I recieved an orange alien for my birthday in early November from REI and it had the off-center axel problem. I returned it and talked to the store manager who asked that I send the info off the thread. I'm sure I'm not the only one out there who did so. Eventually corporate pulled the cams.
Fyi, here's the thread from Feb 2005 when quitemonk had a failure.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=80507
|
|
|
|
|
qtm
Jan 12, 2006, 8:43 PM
Post #250 of 522
(65238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2004
Posts: 548
|
In reply to: In reply to: Hey everyone, I wanted to let you in on another interesting little factoid that I learned today. The e-mail address listed on cch's website is old and no longer in use. Their new e-mail address is: cchaliens@aol.com Thought you might want to know. Kevin From a marketing perspective, I find it to be BEYOND BIZARRE that any company would choose to switch to a third party email account, rather than using an email account based upon their own domain...
Probably just the volume. Maybe on a regular day they get 1000 messages, but that's jumped to 10,000 a day. Their local ISP might not be able to handle all that mail, but for the AOL mail servers it's just a drop in a bucket. Maybe it's bandwidth, all the mail coming in their small pipe is affecting their website, so they reroute it to the AOL servers. It's not unheard of.
|
|
|
|
|
phaedrus
Jan 13, 2006, 1:35 AM
Post #251 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2002
Posts: 3046
|
Dave... thank you for taking the time to post this. I will move it to World Climbing News so that it gets the attention it deserves.
|
|
|
|
|
phaedrus
Jan 13, 2006, 1:36 AM
Post #252 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2002
Posts: 3046
|
phaedrus moved this thread from General to World Climbing News.
|
|
|
|
|
tattooed_climber
Jan 13, 2006, 1:38 AM
Post #253 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2003
Posts: 4838
|
just my luck....my very first alien is recalled...thanks for posting up...i'll hlep spread the word
|
|
|
|
|
josephgdawson
Jan 13, 2006, 1:51 AM
Post #254 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 20, 2004
Posts: 303
|
Thanks Dave
|
|
|
|
|
chanceboarder
Jan 13, 2006, 1:56 AM
Post #255 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 1348
|
thanks guys, well all appreciate it i'm sure.
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Jan 13, 2006, 2:01 AM
Post #257 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
Anybody save the close up pictures that Insaino posted of his came that the head came off of at IC? I'm interested in seeing if the failed cam has the dimple
|
|
|
|
|
gullwing19
Jan 13, 2006, 2:08 AM
Post #259 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 121
|
So when may I expect my replacement cam? If my past dealings with your company are an example of the importance you place on customer service...would I be a wee bit smarter taking them back to the place of purchase and asking for my money back? And will those places of purchase honor this recall? Truthfully...I'll be damned if I'm gonna send you my defective Alien and then expect a replacement before August of 2009. I want my money back. TCU's and Camalots from here on out!!
|
|
|
|
|
chanceboarder
Jan 13, 2006, 2:11 AM
Post #260 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 1348
|
In reply to: Anybody save the close up pictures that Insaino posted of his came that the head came off of at IC? I'm interested in seeing if the failed cam has the dimple |
|
|
|
|
kimgraves
Jan 13, 2006, 2:17 AM
Post #261 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2003
Posts: 1186
|
Dave,
I'm glad you've figured out what happened and issued an appropriate recall.
But a question remains: What positive steps are you going to take to assure me that adequate QA is done and that this won't happen again? Will you commit to testing every cam? How do I know that the Aliens I have (without the dimple) are okay?
I'm sorry, but until I hear of positive steps to improve QA I am loath to buy additional CCH products or use the products I have. After all, defective cams slipped through your current QA procedures for over a year. And reports of failure were met with derision rather than prompt investigation.
I personally feel that you've handled this question of a defective safety product very badly. But we live and learn. You do have a unique and special product. As one small businessperson to another I wish you the best and hope to hear of new QA that will restore my faith in CCH and allow me to purchase and use your products again.
Sincerely, Kim Graves
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 13, 2006, 2:36 AM
Post #262 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
Most of all I would love to know what the turn around time will be before I see (11) of my cams on my rack again :cry:
Please post an "expected" replacement time on your website!!!
Past history of replacements have been dismal to say the least
Thank You
(I hope the retailers will participate in this recall)
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Jan 13, 2006, 2:41 AM
Post #263 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
In reply to: Dave, I'm glad you've figured out what happened and issued an appropriate recall. But a question remains: What positive steps are you going to take to assure me that adequate QA is done and that this won't happen again? Will you commit to testing every cam? I'm sorry, but until I hear of positive steps to improve QA I am loath to buy additional CCH products. After all, defective cams slipped through your current QA procedures for over a year. And reports of failure were met with derision rather than prompt investigation. I personally feel that you've handled this question of a defective safety product very badly. But we live and learn. You do have a unique and special product. As one small businessperson to another I wish you the best and hope to hear of new QA that will restore my faith in CCH and allow me to purchase your products again. Sincerely, Kim Graves
I agree. Though I'm not an Alien customer so I guess my opinion doesn't matter. At the very least there should be an apology on this forum, in particular to the person that was slandered as creating a hoax about defective Aliens.
While they have been contacted now, the Consumer Products Safety Commissionis probably blissfully unaware of the lack of attention CCH gave to previous reports of defective cams. Im sure they would appreciate an email referring them to the way these earlier reports were treated by CCH.
Aliens are a great cam design, but the way they treat customers is not a recipe for success.
|
|
|
|
|
eyecannon
Jan 13, 2006, 3:02 AM
Post #264 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 4, 2004
Posts: 517
|
Thanks for the recall, here's to hoping that things get sorted out quickly, and that we can get replacements in a timely fashion.
|
|
|
|
|
sandstonejunkie
Jan 13, 2006, 3:21 AM
Post #265 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 1, 2005
Posts: 43
|
Personally I am still uneasy about my recent Alien purchase. 5 Aliens. None have the "dimple", all stamped 1005.
Will we get a more detailed explanation at some point? What went wrong in the manufacturing process? How was it determined that the defective units are marked with a dimple? Can I really be assured that the cams I purchased, stamped as manufactured after November 2004 are defect free?
Honestly I still think my best course of action is to return the cams to REI. I just don't think I'll be able to climb above them and feel safe. I really, really want to but my confidence in them is totally destroyed.
CCH, I really want to have faith in your product, currently I do not, I hope you can restore it someday.
James Glover
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jan 13, 2006, 3:22 AM
Post #266 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
In reply to: While they have been contacted now, the Consumer Products Safety Commissionis probably blissfully unaware of the lack of attention CCH gave to previous reports of defective cams. Im sure they would appreciate an email referring them to the way these earlier reports were treated by CCH.
While the initial CCH response was less than flattering, it cannot be changed. We also have no way of knowing the hells that Dave and CCH have gone through in this matter from the moment he was first made aware of this incident, but I'm quite sure it's something that neither I nor any of you would ever want to be faced with.
This is a very small industry, and as a community, we cannot afford to loose any more manufacturers than we already have. While I don't personally own any Aliens, I will make it a point to get a set as soon as the bugs are corrected and I can afford them...
This is no doubt a devastingly costly situation, and I feel pretty strongly that we can all participate in helping CCH to recover, because it's times like this when we need to be our brothers' keeper!
Tim Greene
|
|
|
|
|
daithi
Jan 13, 2006, 3:38 AM
Post #269 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2005
Posts: 397
|
In reply to: Basically, why would that punch have been put on selective cams?
It's intriguing isn't it? I would love to know what it indicates. Let 13 pages of speculation ensue! :)
I find the influence of rc.com on the industry in the US fascinating. The mgear test, the CCH recall etc. were all unlikely to happen (at least not as promptly) without the pressure put on by the members of rc.com.
|
|
|
|
|
haas
Jan 13, 2006, 3:39 AM
Post #270 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 27, 2005
Posts: 80
|
I have aliens some new, some old and have taken huge whippers on all of them. I constantly find placements where Aliens fit that camalots and TCUs do not. Most of my rack is BD and I'm a die hard camalot fan, but Aliens fill that nitch other cams cannot. I will continue to use my cams because on dicey leads when you are runnout on suspect rock, they still inspire more confidence in me than anything else. I am sorry this has happened to CCH and I hope this does not destroy them economically. Good luck Dave
|
|
|
|
|
sandstonejunkie
Jan 13, 2006, 3:45 AM
Post #271 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 1, 2005
Posts: 43
|
In reply to: In reply to: Honestly I still think my best course of action is to return the cams to REI. I just don't think I'll be able to climb above them and feel safe. I really, really want to but my confidence in them is totally destroyed. Many many many people have taken whippers on Aliens and they held fine. Plenty of automobiles have had recalls, but do you feel unsafe driving a Ford or Chevrolet now? One bad batch shouldn't ruin it for you, I love my Aliens and I have enough faith in humanity to believe that CCH would not knowingly allow defective cams to be used by customers. Of course, only time will tell if other batches are affected as well.
You're right. Many Aliens have held falls. Some have not.
CCH admits discovering a problem in their manufacturing process, a problem dating back over a year. The Aliens I don't trust were manufactured during that time period. To me, that makes them suspect.
Perhaps CCH's previous responses have jaded me on trusting the "dimple" identification method without more information.
Personally I don't want to be the one to identify another bad batch.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpstrength
Jan 13, 2006, 3:46 AM
Post #272 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 285
|
and their website is updated with recall information where?
|
|
|
|
|
dynosore
Jan 13, 2006, 3:57 AM
Post #273 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
In what seems to be typical CCH style, there is no photo on their website. I did find these gems however:
In reply to: Quality connections. The main cable is individually silver brazed 10mm deep to the stainless cable eye fitting. Nicopress copper cable fittings are used for the swaged connections. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quality control. All machined parts are manufactured in our shop with modern computer numeric controlled equipment. This allows us to control the manufacturing processes from start to finish, eliminating possible errors from outside contractors.
After all this there is no way in the world I believe that they did extensive enough testing to ensure that lack of a dimple means the cam is bomber.
Questions that need answered:
Did all the MGear cams that failed have dimples?
Did the now notorious orange alien that started this all have the dimple?
Does CCH pull test each cam to some load less than break?
Does CCH test every lot?
If CCH is subcontracting production do they test the units made, or leave it up to the subcontractor?
If it's so hard to get aliens now, how long will it take to get replacements when they have a slew of them to replace?
In haste to save face and replace said aliens, are we to believe QC and production standards will be better?
|
|
|
|
|
giza
Jan 13, 2006, 4:12 AM
Post #274 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 315
|
In reply to: I have aliens some new, some old and have taken huge whippers on all of them. I constantly find placements where Aliens fit that camalots and TCUs do not. Most of my rack is BD and I'm a die hard camalot fan, but Aliens fill that nitch other cams cannot. I will continue to use my cams because on dicey leads when you are runnout on suspect rock, they still inspire more confidence in me than anything else. I am sorry this has happened to CCH and I hope this does not destroy them economically. Good luck Dave
I couldn't agree more. I have fallen on all of my Aliens and they have performed true to their reputation. I will continue to use them and to support CCH in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jan 13, 2006, 4:31 AM
Post #275 of 522
(65966 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
I`m definitely not wanting to kill any legitimate debate but it is now time to allow CCH to get on with the job of rectifying a horrid situation. Please keep this thread open for legitimate developments as they come to hand. I`m sure that most people will be vitally interested in how CCH handle the recall and the timely return of items.
In a few days I will be condensing the various Alien threads into one or perhaps two threads for future reference. If you have further general discussion to add to the issue then do feel free to post to the original threads.
Thank you one and all for all of the discussion so far which has obviously helped to bring the matter to a head from which it is hoped a successful resolution will be forthcoming.
Phil Box for rc.com site management.
P.S. disclosure of conflict of interest, I am of the cult of Alien worshippers. I still love my Aliens, I am very saddened by the current problems at CCH and I wish them all the very best in their endeavours to rectify the defective items.
|
|
|
|
|
superbum
Jan 13, 2006, 4:44 AM
Post #276 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2002
Posts: 822
|
Thanks Philbox for condensing all of this craziness! I am in "the cult" as well and am very bummed out by this whole thing....I also am thirsty (as are many others) for more information/specifics.
More constructive facts/discussions
and
Less arguments, staticstic pissing contests, and jumping to conclussions...
word.
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jan 13, 2006, 4:55 AM
Post #277 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
I`m really wanting to encourage all of us to stick to the facts as they are now known and remove the hysteria from the threads from this point forward. As I said I am not wanting to discourage legitimate debate. Let`s all move away from the keyboard and give the man some room now that he has issued the recall.
Do feel free to drop new news into this thread and keep debate in one of the other threads.
|
|
|
|
|
thatnameisalreadychosen
Jan 13, 2006, 7:12 AM
Post #278 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2005
Posts: 45
|
i just took my orange alien back to REI two days ago (manhattan beach) and they returned it for store credit - no questions asked - they guy behind the counter didnt really want to listen to my explaination that there is a recall comming down
they did, however, have all the aliens in the display case for sale
im sure that wont last long - im taking the other 3 i bought from REI back tommorow given all the other threads about them
which SUCK A_S because aliens kick ass
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jan 13, 2006, 1:33 PM
Post #282 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
I'd like to know what happened to the original photos on this thread. Why were they removed?
GO
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Jan 13, 2006, 1:59 PM
Post #283 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
In reply to: In a few days I will be condensing the various Alien threads into one or perhaps two threads for future reference. If you have further general discussion to add to the issue then do feel free to post to the original threads.
Condensed threads may be more readable but it isn't the truth. It sounds as if you plan to preserve in history how you feel about the issue or perhaps a story more forgiving of CCH.
In reply to: Let’s all move away from the keyboard and give the man some room now that he has issued the recall.
I am happy that CCH believes they have determined the problem and instituted a recall. But they have not explained anything, and done little to assure Alien user that units they have without dimples are safe. I have not seen anything that assures us as to why there won’t be future problems.
I like others here need more information so I can judge for myself whether I want to trust CCH in the future. My climbing is my responsibility. Without that information I cannot improve my safety evaluation involving trusting Aliens and will simply avoid them.
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 13, 2006, 2:08 PM
Post #284 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
Me too, I actually wanted to look at something on that cam.
|
|
|
|
|
kappydane
Jan 13, 2006, 2:27 PM
Post #285 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2004
Posts: 119
|
In reply to: I`m really wanting to encourage all of us to stick to the facts as they are now known and remove the hysteria from the threads from this point forward. As I said I am not wanting to discourage legitimate debate. Let`s all move away from the keyboard and give the man some room now that he has issued the recall. Do feel free to drop new news into this thread and keep debate in one of the other threads.
I really just want one big question answered. WHAT DOES THE DIMPLE DESIGNATE? If it is, as has been speculated, a sub-contractor, then my faith in the non-dimples goes up a lot since they are produced by the original factory. But, if it denotes something else, I would like to know what.
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Jan 13, 2006, 2:38 PM
Post #286 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
I would still need more information. If the dimples are intentionally made solely by an unreliable subcontractor for purposes of identification, then I don't want to rely on him to put a dimple on every unit.
I simply want more and truthful information. If dimples were made by a fixture at which was necessary in manufacture and was located at one location that would be more reliable.
|
|
|
|
|
happiegrrrl
Jan 13, 2006, 2:49 PM
Post #287 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
better try emailing the photo poster direct....He may not be reading this ground-breaking thread( a joke).
|
|
|
|
|
scrapedape
Jan 13, 2006, 3:25 PM
Post #288 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 2392
|
I hesitate to say that we are owed anything by CCH, but it seems to me that it would be prudent for Dave and CCH to be a little more transparent. The CCH recall sucessfully answers what? but does little to address the equally important question of why?. When I climb I am constantly asking why it is that we do things a certain way or that certain things work and others don't. It would be difficult for me to have confidence in an Alien, with or without the Dimple of Defectiveness, without understanding why the dimple denotes a defective cam. I will refrain from repeating the various explanations that others have offered, but suffice to say that the different explanations for the dimple may have significantly different ramifications.
I think that until this is clarified, not only will I not be buying any Aliens of my own, but I will not be climbing above any from my partner's rack either.
|
|
|
|
|
lewisiarediviva
Jan 13, 2006, 3:28 PM
Post #289 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2004
Posts: 527
|
In reply to: If you are not sure if your cams are included in the recall, please contact us at (307)721-9385.
For those of you saying you want more information call the number above. :roll: Don't ask all of us who don't have anything to do with CCH. Go get the answer for yourselves. Don't ask us to call and find out for you! My question has been answered- my aliens are fine.
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Jan 13, 2006, 3:38 PM
Post #290 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
In reply to: I hesitate to say that we are owed anything by CCH, but it seems to me that it would be prudent for Dave and CCH to be a little more transparent. The CCH recall sucessfully answers what? but does little to address the equally important question of why?. When I climb I am constantly asking why it is that we do things a certain way or that certain things work and others don't. It would be difficult for me to have confidence in an Alien, with or without the Dimple of Defectiveness, without understanding why the dimple denotes a defective cam. I will refrain from repeating the various explanations that others have offered, but suffice to say that the different explanations for the dimple may have significantly different ramifications. I think that until this is clarified, not only will I not be buying any Aliens of my own, but I will not be climbing above any from my partner's rack either.
-concur-
Well, how about quitemonks alien, which he reported back on Feb 2005 as having come detached and failing.....did that have a dimple?
What time frame were the defective aliens made? Are there tags or stamps to identify product other than a dimple to identify them?
|
|
|
|
|
lewisiarediviva
Jan 13, 2006, 3:55 PM
Post #291 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2004
Posts: 527
|
In reply to: In reply to: I hesitate to say that we are owed anything by CCH, but it seems to me that it would be prudent for Dave and CCH to be a little more transparent. The CCH recall sucessfully answers what? but does little to address the equally important question of why?. When I climb I am constantly asking why it is that we do things a certain way or that certain things work and others don't. It would be difficult for me to have confidence in an Alien, with or without the Dimple of Defectiveness, without understanding why the dimple denotes a defective cam. I will refrain from repeating the various explanations that others have offered, but suffice to say that the different explanations for the dimple may have significantly different ramifications. I think that until this is clarified, not only will I not be buying any Aliens of my own, but I will not be climbing above any from my partner's rack either.
My goodness, you guys really do like instant answers. Do you think they fully know? At least they gave us some information instead of waiting 'till they had it all!
Go try brewing your joe, it's so much better than instant!
|
|
|
|
|
booger
Jan 13, 2006, 3:55 PM
Post #292 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2003
Posts: 1163
|
Hey Everyone,
I've got almost a whole rack on order and in a fit of hysteria yesterday (after reading all these boards) rang my mom in the states and asked her to cancel the order. I regretted it after spending two hours at home realizing that although this is all serious, it's not the end of the world.
My mom (jeez, she's awesome) rang CCH and sent me this email:
In reply to: Babe, I did not cancel the order for your camelots. I talked with the man at mountain tools and he said he would not discourage me from canceling but that everyone was making a mountain out of a mole hill. You can send him any questions you have on email and he will answer plus alien will be posting a large explanation of the failure of one camelot. Your camelots are not even ready and they will be checked thoroughly and even more thoroughly because of the failure before they are sent both by alien and mountain tools the seller
Anyway, I guess I'm just saying that CCH will be providing information very soon, and it might be a good idea for everybody to calm down a bit and hold off making any rash decisions or statements until they have a chance to actually investigate. I wouldn't post until I had all the facts if I were them either. Also, I think flaming them for not running around to the 100+ worldwide climbing boards and posting every single bit of information or misinformation is b.s. I'm sure they'll post the moment they have enough information to make a coherent statement. If you have questions in the meantime, it may be better to ask them via email instead of asking a bunch of anonymous board-monkeys... just a thought... :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jan 13, 2006, 4:05 PM
Post #293 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: In reply to: Basically, why would that punch have been put on selective cams? It's intriguing isn't it? I would love to know what it indicates. Let 13 pages of speculation ensue! :) I find the influence of rc.com on the industry in the US fascinating. The mgear test, the CCH recall etc. were all unlikely to happen (at least not as promptly) without the pressure put on by the members of rc.com.
People who fail to appreciate how a mob behaves and morphs intgo a creature of its own desire, feeding itself, are doomed to be surprised by this. A few weill get trampled.
This was a good mob action, don't get me wrong. But free open forums with independant voices? By definition a mob.
We've gotten it wrong far more times than right, us internet forum climbers. We've gotten people fired for no good reason, for example.
So while we're patting ourselves on the back, justifiably imo, let's remember that despite the mob nature of this issue, we stayed mostly on topic and it never degenerated.
THAT seems to be quite an evolution.
Cheers!
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jan 13, 2006, 4:17 PM
Post #294 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Hey Everyone, I've got almost a whole rack on order and in a fit of hysteria yesterday (after reading all these boards) rang my mom in the states and asked her to cancel the order. I regretted it after spending two hours at home realizing that although this is all serious, it's not the end of the world. My mom (jeez, she's awesome) rang CCH and sent me this email: In reply to: Babe, I did not cancel the order for your camelots. I talked with the man at mountain tools and he said he would not discourage me from canceling but that everyone was making a mountain out of a mole hill. You can send him any questions you have on email and he will answer plus alien will be posting a large explanation of the failure of one camelot. Your camelots are not even ready and they will be checked thoroughly and even more thoroughly because of the failure before they are sent both by alien and mountain tools the seller Anyway, I guess I'm just saying that CCH will be providing information very soon, and it might be a good idea for everybody to calm down a bit and hold off making any rash decisions or statements until they have a chance to actually investigate. I wouldn't post until I had all the facts if I were them either. Also, I think flaming them for not running around to the 100+ worldwide climbing boards and posting every single bit of information or misinformation is b.s. I'm sure they'll post the moment they have enough information to make a coherent statement. If you have questions in the meantime, it may be better to ask them via email instead of asking a bunch of anonymous board-monkeys... just a thought... :wink:
Most of us anonymous board monkeys know that CCH has nothing to do with camelots, which are made by Black Diamond.
How about you?
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
wings
Jan 13, 2006, 4:27 PM
Post #295 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 283
|
In reply to: In reply to: Hey Everyone, I've got almost a whole rack on order and in a fit of hysteria yesterday (after reading all these boards) rang my mom in the states and asked her to cancel the order. I regretted it after spending two hours at home realizing that although this is all serious, it's not the end of the world. My mom (jeez, she's awesome) rang CCH and sent me this email: In reply to: Babe, I did not cancel the order for your camelots. I talked with the man at mountain tools and he said he would not discourage me from canceling but that everyone was making a mountain out of a mole hill. You can send him any questions you have on email and he will answer plus alien will be posting a large explanation of the failure of one camelot. Your camelots are not even ready and they will be checked thoroughly and even more thoroughly because of the failure before they are sent both by alien and mountain tools the seller Anyway, I guess I'm just saying that CCH will be providing information very soon, and it might be a good idea for everybody to calm down a bit and hold off making any rash decisions or statements until they have a chance to actually investigate. I wouldn't post until I had all the facts if I were them either. Also, I think flaming them for not running around to the 100+ worldwide climbing boards and posting every single bit of information or misinformation is b.s. I'm sure they'll post the moment they have enough information to make a coherent statement. If you have questions in the meantime, it may be better to ask them via email instead of asking a bunch of anonymous board-monkeys... just a thought... :wink: Most of us anonymous board monkeys know that CCH has nothing to do with camelots, which are made by Black Diamond. How about you? DMT
I just assumed girldrifter's mother had heard the words "camalot" and "alien" and assumed they were all the same thing.
Otherwise, I suppose the "man at mountain tools" found all of this rather perplexing.
- Seyil
|
|
|
|
|
heiko
Jan 13, 2006, 4:29 PM
Post #296 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 1505
|
In reply to: In reply to: Hey Everyone, I've got almost a whole rack on order and in a fit of hysteria yesterday (after reading all these boards) rang my mom in the states and asked her to cancel the order. I regretted it after spending two hours at home realizing that although this is all serious, it's not the end of the world. My mom (jeez, she's awesome) rang CCH and sent me this email: In reply to: Babe, I did not cancel the order for your camelots. I talked with the man at mountain tools and he said he would not discourage me from canceling but that everyone was making a mountain out of a mole hill. You can send him any questions you have on email and he will answer plus alien will be posting a large explanation of the failure of one camelot. Your camelots are not even ready and they will be checked thoroughly and even more thoroughly because of the failure before they are sent both by alien and mountain tools the seller Anyway, I guess I'm just saying that CCH will be providing information very soon, and it might be a good idea for everybody to calm down a bit and hold off making any rash decisions or statements until they have a chance to actually investigate. I wouldn't post until I had all the facts if I were them either. Also, I think flaming them for not running around to the 100+ worldwide climbing boards and posting every single bit of information or misinformation is b.s. I'm sure they'll post the moment they have enough information to make a coherent statement. If you have questions in the meantime, it may be better to ask them via email instead of asking a bunch of anonymous board-monkeys... just a thought... :wink: Most of us anonymous board monkeys know that CCH has nothing to do with camelots, which are made by Black Diamond. How about you? DMT
Geez Dingus... :roll:
The quoted message was written by a 50+ year-old woman that has nothing to do with climbing except for taking care of her daughter's gear order. Why should she be bothered with analities like "camalot", "camelot", "camming device", "alien", "friend", whatever. If girldrifter talks about Aliens, believe me she means Aliens.
Thanks for your constructive post anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
rigger
Jan 13, 2006, 4:44 PM
Post #297 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 4
|
Food for thought,
Why is CCH's "Quality" statement suddenly "404 Not Found"
http://aliencamsbycch.com/quality.html
(If anyone cares to read what use to be there, do a google on that URL and click on the "Show Google's cache of aliencamsbycch.com/quality.html" link.)
Also, for things related to safety, I agree that a basic recall/release that is put out quicker without all the info is better than a later more complete release. But don't let that prevent the full story from coming out eventually!
:-)
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jan 13, 2006, 4:47 PM
Post #298 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Geez Dingus... :roll:
"Geez Anonymous Board Monkey" you mean...
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Jan 13, 2006, 5:34 PM
Post #299 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
I bought 3 aliens recently, all labeled 1105, a red, a grey and an orange. Only the orange had the dimple. (I also looked at all my old aliens just in case, no dimple.)
I looked at the other two, and both had a faint 'N' etched into the stem, between the braze and the cam lobes.
Feel pretty good about climbing on those, just though folks might be interested.
|
|
|
|
|
nuts_r_us
Jan 13, 2006, 5:35 PM
Post #300 of 522
(65327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2005
Posts: 172
|
In reply to: RE: Letter To CCH I just got off the phone with Dave at CCH after calling him to let him know about the above email. Though obviously very busy he did answer the phone and take some time to speak with me. He understandably probably can't fully respond to all of the above answers immediately and does not currently have all the information yet himself(like whether Kevin's orange cam that sparked all this or the 3 MGear cams that failed testing had the dimple marking). I let him know I'm not looking for an immediate response but rather would prefer he wait until he feels he can reasonably craft a response that addresses my[/our] concerns. Dave expressed a clear understanding that there may be lingering questions and doubts not specifically addressed by the Brazing Recall notice and a sincere desire to address all those concerns. He definitely "gets it" that he has fiercely loyal customers that nevertheless still have some [legitimate] doubts about their cams. I attempted to reiterate that I am one of those customers, use his products, and that I felt that every climbing gear manufacturer we have is "precious" and valued and absolutely no one wants to see him do anything but continue to make and sell the products that have built him a this vocal following. So again, Dave said he would respond to the questions in my letter and we may all see his response at the same time, but if his response comes via email I will let everyone know at that time. So let's give him a some time to get on with this recall, do some more research, and get back to us. Joseph Healy Portland, Oregon
Somebody who can, please trophy Joseph Healy's last 2 posts. Thanks Joe.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 13, 2006, 6:05 PM
Post #301 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: In reply to: RE: Letter To CCH Somebody who can, please trophy Joseph Healy's last 2 posts. Thanks Joe.
Super letter. Super follow through with the call to CCH. Thanks for posting and hope it lessens some of the distracting noise Dave is undoubtedly hearing.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 13, 2006, 6:08 PM
Post #302 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: I bought 3 aliens recently, all labeled 1105, a red, a grey and an orange. Only the orange had the dimple. (I also looked at all my old aliens just in case, no dimple.) I looked at the other two, and both had a faint 'N' etched into the stem, between the braze and the cam lobes. Feel pretty good about climbing on those, just though folks might be interested.
aww, you can still climb on the one with the dimple. You wouldn't get caught up in all of this histeria, now would you? :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Jan 13, 2006, 6:13 PM
Post #303 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
In reply to: In reply to: I bought 3 aliens recently, all labeled 1105, a red, a grey and an orange. Only the orange had the dimple. (I also looked at all my old aliens just in case, no dimple.) I looked at the other two, and both had a faint 'N' etched into the stem, between the braze and the cam lobes. Feel pretty good about climbing on those, just though folks might be interested. aww, you can still climb on the one with the dimple. You wouldn't get caught up in all of this histeria, now would you? :lol:
Actually, I'm going to return the orange alien in response to CCH's recall. Which is a little different from the hysteria taking place in various threads.
I also inspected the braze on the orange. While I'm no metallurgist, the braze was thick and uniform all the way around the joint. I suspect the braze is ok. I'd test it myself, but CCH is doing a recall, and I'm going to respect that.
For those interested, I still think bobreuf is an idiot. 8^)
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 13, 2006, 6:33 PM
Post #304 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
I think it's clear now that Dave understands our concerns and realizes that we want and need more information. So may I suggest that unless your query is specifically whether a cam "that YOU own" is affected by this recall, we refrain from calling CCH and allow them to get on with replacing our cams.
I assume that people have nothing better to do when it is revealed that some of the most vocal posters do not even own a single Alien! To those I say, turn on Oprah or Jerry Springer and yell at the TV instead of burdening those of us affected, with endless hair-splitting drivel about test sampling, statistical calculations, etc. etc.
Thanx :D
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Jan 13, 2006, 7:16 PM
Post #305 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
In reply to: In reply to: In a few days I will be condensing the various Alien threads into one or perhaps two threads for future reference. If you have further general discussion to add to the issue then do feel free to post to the original threads. Condensed threads may be more readable but it isn't the truth. It sounds as if you plan to preserve in history how you feel about the issue or perhaps a story more forgiving of CCH.
There is too much dispersion among closely-related threads at the moment. Joe Healy pointed it out, as have others elsewhere (Werner Braun, for example). Those that follow closely related themes will be merged. Those that do not, won't. It's as simple as that. The purpose of the consolidation is to put useful, related information into a natural representation, so that related posts appear together.
Timestamps, verbiage, etc. will not be altered (there is no means for moderators to do so), and shadow threads should redirect visitors from elsewhere to the merged topics. Therefore, I assert that the attentive reader should be easily able to reconstruct the sequence of events as they transpired on the Interweb. Leaving aside the question of whether this isn't a trivial ancillary to what happened with those brazes in real live-fire use, I claim that this ought to be sufficiently unbiased for any usage, and that no significant information is lost in the process.
CCH does not advertise with Rockclimbing.com, so we legitimately have no reason whatsoever to bias coverage of their recall. I take offense at your suggestion that anyone who volunteers their time to the site would do so, or if they did, that the rest of us would let it stand. I own three sets of Aliens up to an Orange; so far, I have not found any dimpled cams (many of my CCH cams are from the 90's, and I have not found one from 2005), but like most others, I was concerned by the possibility that a hidden flaw could result in unnecessary injury or death, due to no fault of mine or the rock's. It is our moral obligation to retain an accurate record of the development of this recall and its resolutions, so that others with similar concerns can evaluate the information for themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 13, 2006, 7:38 PM
Post #307 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
Ahhh gee wiz, that (edit: regarding the condensing of Alien threads) was just a typical misunderstanding between poster and reader. "Condense" did kind of sound like modification. On the other hand, I've seen nothing but professionalism at RC.com.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Jan 13, 2006, 11:11 PM
Post #309 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
True, the winds can shift; but it doesn't seem like your friend posted a pic of the cam actually experiencing a structural failure as we have witnessed in this latest round of problems.
All gear is capable of failing. I feel very confident of a nut in a buried constriction. I feel confident that a hand-sized Camalot in a parallel crack, placed in the direction of fall, is going to catch a lob. As cams get smaller, and nuts get tiny, I feel less and less confident of a catch, to the point that I get a little nervous climbing above a blue Alien or a micronut, and always try to back them up if I have to rely upon them, despite the fact that I have been caught on a 35-footer by a #3 micronut. This is pretty generic practice; most sane people do this (look at the Brits who headpoint things with a nest of wires at the crux). Brazes failing are pretty bad, though. If you back up a poorly brazed Alien with another poorly brazed Alien, let's say in a natural belay anchor, you could expose yourself to total failure of the anchor at loads far below the rated capacity, especially if the leader took a winger right off the belay. That's a pretty serious concern.
It is a much greater concern than your friend's Alien popping out intact, which would seem to indicate that the placement (rather than the piece) failed. If you have further details beyond your friend's helpful and sober-minded analysis of the event, please post them; but otherwise, it seems like your friend's Alien placement failed for the reasons he suggested, rather than reasons related to the manufacturing process.
I'm not saying that Aliens are good or bad -- I think they are tools to be employed as appropriate. If the head came flying off my hammer on the first swing, I would be pissed at the manufacturer. If I hit my thumb with the hammer, I'm pissed off at myself. Kind of an important distinction.
|
|
|
|
|
climboard
Jan 13, 2006, 11:26 PM
Post #310 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2001
Posts: 503
|
In reply to: To answer the questions on the (9) Nine Alien cams Mountain Gear had tested: All (3) Three that had failed brazes had dimples. Please do not climb or let your friends climb on Aliens or Hybrid Aliens covered by the recall notice from CCH. Paul
Thanks Paul, that is very helpful information! You already had my business but I think you are earning a lot more customers.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 13, 2006, 11:29 PM
Post #311 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
dup
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 13, 2006, 11:31 PM
Post #312 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: To answer the questions on the (9) Nine Alien cams Mountain Gear had tested: All (3) Three that had failed brazes had dimples. Please do not climb or let your friends climb on Aliens or Hybrid Aliens covered by the recall notice from CCH. Paul
Paul, that's half the story. In order to be able to correlate the dimple with the failure rate, we also need to know how many of the non-failures had (or didn't have dimples).
If none of the non-failures had dimples, that tells a much different story than, say, at the other extreme, tht all of the non-failures also had dimples. In the first case, there would be strong evidence of a connection; in the second, there would be no evidence.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 14, 2006, 12:06 AM
Post #313 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: If none of the non-failures had dimples, that tells a much different story than, say, at the other extreme, tht all of the non-failures also had dimples. In the first case, there would be strong evidence of a connection; in the second, there would be no evidence.
Yeah, but I would still expect them to recall on the dimpled batches. I know you would too.
I realize the information that you asked for would impart more knowledge. But in my opinion we don't need all the details right now - just slows them boys down. I say hold our questions until CCH has some more time to research and respond to Joe's letter. It's CCH's baby anyway; why take up Paul's time with it?
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 14, 2006, 12:10 AM
Post #314 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
If we knew how many of the non-failing cams carried the dimple, we would only learn a bit more about how affected the population of outsourced cams might be. This information, at least to me, is of little interest. The most important thing is that all of the cams that failed had dimples.
This supports CCHs statement connecting the cams with dimples to the failure rates.
Beyond this, I'm not too interested in how extensive the failure rate is amongst the 'dimpled' cams. It is enough for me to know they are potentially dangerous. I'm not trying to calculate my odds of being caught by a group of cams I already know to be bad.
|
|
|
|
|
rocknap
Jan 14, 2006, 12:35 AM
Post #315 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 18, 2004
Posts: 39
|
In reply to: In reply to: If none of the non-failures had dimples, that tells a much different story than, say, at the other extreme, tht all of the non-failures also had dimples. In the first case, there would be strong evidence of a connection; in the second, there would be no evidence. I realize the information that you asked for would impart more knowledge. But in my opinion we don't need all the details right now - just slows them boys down.
I think what Jay was getting at was that you cannot assume that the non-dimpled aliens are safe without knowing anything about the six that passed. Knowing that all failures were dimples doesn't say anything about non-dimples or non-failures.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 14, 2006, 12:46 AM
Post #316 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: If none of the non-failures had dimples, that tells a much different story than, say, at the other extreme, tht all of the non-failures also had dimples. In the first case, there would be strong evidence of a connection; in the second, there would be no evidence. I realize the information that you asked for would impart more knowledge. But in my opinion we don't need all the details right now - just slows them boys down. I think what Jay was getting at was that you cannot assume that the non-dimpled aliens are safe without knowing anything about the six that passed. Knowing that all failures were dimples doesn't say anything about non-dimples or non-failures.
Exactly. The partial information that Paul released suggests that the dimpled Aliens are problematic, but actually says nothing about the non-dimpled ones. As helyje more eloquently put it, many of us, who have sworn by Aliens for many years, now have nagging doubts about the product's quality, and would like to know whether the problem was exclusively limited to the dimpled Aliens, or is more pervasive. Knowing the failure rate of the non-dimpled Aliens would thus be helpful.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 14, 2006, 1:00 AM
Post #317 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
The information that Jay is requesting would totally satisfy me for now.
I don't need to know failure rates, I think at this point they are irrelevant as it is clear the dimpled cams and not safe.. period.
Knowing that the cams that did not fail were all non-dimpled would go a long way to restoring confidence for many of us I am sure.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 14, 2006, 1:11 AM
Post #318 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: The information that Jay is requesting would totally satisfy me for now. I don't need to know failure rates, I think at this point they are irrelevant as it is clear the dimpled cams and not safe.. period. Knowing that the cams that did not fail were all non-dimpled would go a long way to restoring confidence for many of us I am sure.
The information Jay is requesting may be absolutely worthless. Consider that Paul's post of the test results stated explicitly that this was not a random sampling. Also consider that it is possible that Dave may have specifically requested Paul to test some arbitrary of dimpled ones (edit: that is, to focus on testing dimpled ones) - not to be sneaky but to test a hypothesis.
So what? Now that Paul gives this additional bit of info now we need just a little bit more?? (edit: if it doesn't go this way it could go another) Let them work awhile. Let us give it a rest.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 14, 2006, 1:58 AM
Post #319 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
... or Jay and skinner get what they want but Bill wants just one more thing ....
|
|
|
|
|
climb_ian
Jan 14, 2006, 2:09 AM
Post #320 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 28, 2005
Posts: 77
|
ok im proably gona get yelled at for this because its already been awnsered ..but i cant read all 5 pages at the moment but i found that dimple on my orange alien.. is it ok to return that one, and keep the ones with out the mark even thoe they are new cams?.. i mean i imagine they were made after 2004 but my yellow and green dont have them .. kk thanks
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 14, 2006, 2:21 AM
Post #321 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
(removed, because I realized it was too ridiculous of a post to even comment on)
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 14, 2006, 2:27 AM
Post #322 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
In reply to: ok im proably gona get yelled at for this because its already been awnsered ..but i cant read all 5 pages at the moment but i found that dimple on my orange alien.. is it ok to return that one, and keep the ones with out the mark even thoe they are new cams?.. i mean i imagine they were made after 2004 but my yellow and green dont have them .. kk thanks
Yes return the orange one, keep the rest.. I'm curious what lot# is on that one?
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 14, 2006, 2:30 AM
Post #323 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: (removed, because I realized it was too ridiculous of a post to even comment on) |
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 14, 2006, 3:02 AM
Post #324 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
Bill I am curious, in your long and illustrious career how many Aliens have you acquired, and how many are affected?
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 14, 2006, 3:05 AM
Post #325 of 522
(65435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: Exactly. The partial information that Paul released suggests that the dimpled Aliens are problematic, but actually says nothing about the non-dimpled ones. As helyje more eloquently put it, many of us, who have sworn by Aliens for many years, now have nagging doubts about the product's quality, and would like to know whether the problem was exclusively limited to the dimpled Aliens, or is more pervasive. Knowing the failure rate of the non-dimpled Aliens would thus be helpful. Jay
Ok, I get what you're after now. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're thinking that if all 6 passing cams were non-dimpled, then that would attest towards the strenght of supposed 'in-house' cams?
I think this would offer some evidence (albeit very weak) to indicate the problem is exactly as CCH states it.
But, I'm affraid any other mix of dimpled, non dimpled, or even if all 6 were dimpled, we wouldn't learn much. The only results that would carry any weight towards said presumption would be if all 6 cams were non-dimpled.
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 14, 2006, 3:10 AM
Post #326 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: Knowing the failure rate of the non-dimpled Aliens would thus be helpful. Jay
Well, right now it is zero, no matter how many cams had dimples in the passing cams.
Knowing how many non-dimpled cams passed tells us nothing about their failure rate.
I'm with you though, I'd be thrilled to see some very extensive testing of aliens accross the board, all years. Doesn't sound like much in house testing has ever gone on.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Jan 14, 2006, 3:26 AM
Post #327 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: In reply to: Knowing the failure rate of the non-dimpled Aliens would thus be helpful. Jay Knowing how many non-dimpled cams passed tells us nothing about their failure rate.
Tell me you didn't really mean this, before I have to flame you badly.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 14, 2006, 3:31 AM
Post #328 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
In reply to: Tell me you didn't really mean this, before I have to flame you badly. Curt
Fire up the flame thrower
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 14, 2006, 4:04 AM
Post #329 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Gentleman,
Would it be possible to hold off on the stat wars for the moment? I think we can all agree that more data would be helpful and that it would be good to have a broader dataset on both "dimpled" and "undimpled" cams; but for the moment let's settle for finding out the three brazing defect cams in MGear's testing did in fact have the "center punch dimple" CCH identified in their recall notice. It would similarly be good to know the same about Kevin's (the OP) cam and I have emailed him for that info. But please, for now, let's hold off a bit and give Dave a chance to get his arms around all this, deal with this recall, and hopefully in the end he'll provide us with a more comprehensive statement or reporting.
And Paul, thank you so very much for following up on this matter and finding out that info. As was just stated above, your stepping up and representing retail interests in our industry is a real service and credit to you / MGear. You get my next order...
|
|
|
|
|
mistertyler
Jan 14, 2006, 4:44 AM
Post #330 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 9, 2003
Posts: 197
|
Do you like
Dimples on your stems?
I do not like them, cam I am
I do not like dimples on my stems!
Would you like them
here or there?
I would not like them
here or there.
I would not like them anywhere.
I do not like
Dimples on my stems.
I do not like them, cam I am.
Would you like those dimples bigger?
Maybe put them on the trigger?
I do not like those
dimples bigger.
I do not want them
on the trigger.
I do not like them
here or there.
I do not like them
anywhere.
/ad nauseam, just like these threads
//apologies to Theodore Geisel
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 14, 2006, 5:21 AM
Post #331 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Knowing the failure rate of the non-dimpled Aliens would thus be helpful. Jay Knowing how many non-dimpled cams passed tells us nothing about their failure rate. Tell me you didn't really mean this, before I have to flame you badly. Curt
Excuse me, Curt, I should have saith that this tells us nothing new abouth their failure rate.
say 6 cams pass the test, and are all without dimples.
Terrific, I'm thrilled, none of my cams have dimples.
...but...these 6 are a drop in the bucket next to the hundreds or thousands of aliens that have passed 'field testing'. This is no new evidence.
As far as anyone knows there is no problem with un-dimpled aliens.
There is no evidence at this point (in the form of failed gear) that would indicate that the aliens sans dimple are unsafe. On the contrary, there have been years of field tests to prove they are safe. So far we've got quitemonk's brazing failure which we don't know much about, insano's failure (dimpled) and three mountain gear failures of cams all with dimples. CCH has said the problem only exists in the cams with dimples. So far there is ZERO evidence to tell us otherwise. There is a zero mechanical failure rate on non-dimpled cams (as far as we know at this point).
Now, this does not mean I do not have my doubts as to the safety of my 'undimpled' aliens. As I mentioned before, It doesn't seem that there's much testing going on at the cch shed. I'd be thrilled to see some tests accross the board.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 14, 2006, 5:28 AM
Post #332 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: Bill I am curious, in your long and illustrious career how many Aliens have you acquired, and how many are affected? |
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 14, 2006, 5:36 AM
Post #333 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: Bill I am curious, in your long and illustrious career how many Aliens have you acquired, and how many are affected? |
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 14, 2006, 5:51 AM
Post #334 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
As I suspected :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 14, 2006, 6:00 AM
Post #335 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: As I suspected :roll: |
|
|
|
|
jersteck
Jan 14, 2006, 6:06 AM
Post #336 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 10
|
I'm a long time Alien fan, avid trad climber, and a mechanical engineer involved in new product development for a US safety products manufacturer. We make fall protection, mostly industrial and some recreational.
We should not be so quick to dismiss CCH as a competent manufacturer of high quality climbing equipment because of this one quality issue. We should not be overly critical of CCH because of their initial response to 1 incident. Few companies will perform a recall based on 1 defect. Many companies have went under because they have reacted on 1 data point by being overly cautious. Random flukes are inherent to any manufacturing process. The important thing to consider is that CCH did react with a quick investigation, and eventually a recall, based on an Internet discussion.
Many companies have sustained such situations by giving detailed explanations of the issue at hand and providing data to support their findings. CCH should explain why the dimple is the sole identifier of this defect. CCH should also supply some data to support this claim.
Fortunately the rock climbing community is a different demographic than the general public that most companies have to deal with. In general, these folks are a tight knit community, and more importantly are folks who take responsibility for their own actions. Let's use common sense here, let CCH conduct additional testing, and await the results.
I've witnessed alien cams to hold several falls myself, and so have countless others. Since no one has been hurt as a result of this issue, let's give CCH some time to react to this issue and base our opinions and support of this company on the way they respond to this issue.
|
|
|
|
|
jersteck
Jan 14, 2006, 6:10 AM
Post #337 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 10
|
Are CCH Aliens certified to any US or international test standards? I see no product markings on the product. I know at Black Diamond at a minimum is CE certified.
|
|
|
|
|
aeray
Jan 14, 2006, 7:04 AM
Post #338 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2003
Posts: 53
|
remember--- absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
an old archaeological saw.
|
|
|
|
|
sumo
Jan 14, 2006, 7:10 AM
Post #339 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 28, 2005
Posts: 176
|
In reply to: Are CCH Aliens certified to any US or international test standards? I see no product markings on the product. I know at Black Diamond at a minimum is CE certified.
On the tag it says "Alien Cams are UIAA and CE tested and approved!"
I would scan the rest of it, but scanner doesn't seem to be working.
S
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 14, 2006, 8:03 AM
Post #340 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
Bill, please don't take this as a personal attack, because it is anything but.
It does re-enforce what I said earlier, that many of the posters who have been the most vocal, are not directly affected by this. Of course someone was quick to point out that all climbers are affected..
The truth is "all climbers" may be indirectly affected.
There are those of us who are *directly* affected, myself to the tune of 11 dimpled Aliens.
So please don't tell me what I should or shouldn't do.
I have every right in an open forum to ask for the clarification or additional information with regards the statement made by mgear.
Do you really think that we are impeding them from investigating or doing their jobs by posting here? :shock:
Do you think that the staff of CCH and mgear, drop what ever they are doing and crowd around the computer because another post popped up in rc.com?
Them having to answer the phone constantly will certainly have some effect, which is why I have refrained from calling.
But as far as this thread goes, they can chose to read it or not, at their leisure, which I am sure that is exactly what they do.
And in reading if Paul realizes that knowing if the cams that did- not fail were dimpled or not, is something that we feel is important, and he decides to pass this information on, then great.
There is nothing wrong with posting a short legitimate questions. It will not affect CCH or mgears work day in anyway.
Huge posts bantering back and forth especially by people not *directly affected* just adds noise and clutter to the thread. This could definitely have an affect as CCH and mgear attempt to filter through it all seeking out legitimate comments and concerns.
BTW: I sugested that all the actual statements made be CCH and mgear be copied into their own thread.. and the thread locked for this very reason. Keep the comments, questions, suggestions, etc. and the actual information separate. Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 14, 2006, 4:39 PM
Post #341 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: Bill, please don't take this as a personal attack, because it is anything but.
In reply to: It does re-enforce what I said earlier, that many of the posters who have been the most vocal, are not directly affected by this. Of course someone was quick to point out that all climbers are affected.. The truth is "all climbers" may be indirectly affected.
In reply to: There are those of us who are *directly* affected, myself to the tune of 11 dimpled Aliens. So please don't tell me what I should or shouldn't do. I have every right in an open forum to ask for the clarification or additional information with regards the statement made by mgear.
In reply to: Do you really think that we are impeding them from investigating or doing their jobs by posting here? :shock:
In reply to: Do you think that the staff of CCH and mgear, drop what ever they are doing and crowd around the computer because another post popped up in rc.com? Them having to answer the phone constantly will certainly have some effect, which is why I have refrained from calling. But as far as this thread goes, they can chose to read it or not, at their leisure, which I am sure that is exactly what they do. And in reading if Paul realizes that knowing if the cams that did- not fail were dimpled or not, is something that we feel is important, and he decides to pass this information on, then great.
In reply to: There is nothing wrong with posting a short legitimate questions. It will not affect CCH or mgears work day in anyway. Huge posts bantering back and forth especially by people not *directly affected* just adds noise and clutter to the thread. This could definitely have an affect as CCH and mgear attempt to filter through it all seeking out legitimate comments and concerns.
We both think each other posts are unnecessary noise but not our own. Probably not surprising to anyone and probably not a serious problem for either one of us.
In reply to: BTW: I sugested that all the actual statements made be CCH and mgear be copied into their own thread.. and the thread locked for this very reason. Keep the comments, questions, suggestions, etc. and the actual information separate. Any thoughts?
Skinner (and Jay), I regret that my tone was directive to you. I apologize. I do tend to be biased about giving investigators room to work when I assume they undoubtedly need it. But I went a little too far.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
ronolsen
Jan 14, 2006, 4:55 PM
Post #342 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 8, 2003
Posts: 47
|
In reply to: The important thing to consider is that CCH did react with a quick investigation, and eventually a recall, based on an Internet discussion. |
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 14, 2006, 4:56 PM
Post #343 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: Exactly. The partial information that Paul released suggests that the dimpled Aliens are problematic, but actually says nothing about the non-dimpled ones. As helyje more eloquently put it, many of us, who have sworn by Aliens for many years, now have nagging doubts about the product's quality, and would like to know whether the problem was exclusively limited to the dimpled Aliens, or is more pervasive. Knowing the failure rate of the non-dimpled Aliens would thus be helpful. Jay Ok, I get what you're after now. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're thinking that if all 6 passing cams were non-dimpled, then that would attest towards the strenght of supposed 'in-house' cams?
Not exactly. What it would do is allow us to compare the failure rate among dimpled cams vs non-dimpled ones. If those numbers were 100% vs 0%, then that would be evidence supporting CCH's claim that the brazing problem was restricted to the outsourced cams. However, if even a single non-dimpled cam failed below rated strength (out of 6), then I would consider all non-dimpled cams -- at least recently manufactured ones -- to be suspect, as well.
I agree with you that just knowing that no non-dimpled cams failed is not sufficient to completely restore my faith in Aliens. I really need to know that CCH has corrected whatever systematic errors led to these and other recently reported problems. However, it would be a step. Remember, we have no evidence at this point WHATSOEVER that the problem is restricted to the dimpled cams. The partial test results that Paul has released do not support this assertion (they don't contradict it either). Furthermore, the fact that Paul has not released this information adds to my suspicion. I'm asking him to post one single-digit number that he has at his finger tips. That is not a huge burden.
Additionally, as I think tgreene pointed out a couple days ago, the wording of Paul's initial message that the dimpled cams failed below rated strength "at the braze" is ambiguous. The wording allows for the interpretation that the non-dimpled cams also failed below rated strength, but not at the braze. I realize that this might just have been sloppy wording on his part. I make my living by writing unambiguously, and obviously not everybody else does. Nonetheless the ambiguities are there, and need to be addressed before I, and others, from what I gather, will have our faith in CCH restored.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 14, 2006, 5:39 PM
Post #344 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: We took nine units of various sizes and date stamps dating back to the earliest we had in stock which is 0605 for pull testing. Of the nine Aliens tested, three brazes failed and the cable pulled out at below the CCH-stated max strength for that size. The failures were from different sizes and date stamps, and included both Hybrid and regular Aliens.
In reply to: To answer the questions on the (9) Nine Alien cams Mountain Gear had tested: All (3) Three that had failed brazes had dimples.
I'm sorry if I'm missing something, but are you infering that there were possibly more than three cams that failed testing?
I think that Paul from mgear has been very forthcoming in all of this, and would find it very hard to believe that he would withold information of additional failures from us. While I can see the loophole in the wording I think you're reffering to, what you are suggesting would be a horrific thing for Paul to do to say the least. I'm personally content to trust him based on the credebility he has built throughout this ordeal.
If Paul is being honest, then we've got 3 cams that fialed, all at the braze, and all of which had dimples. I'd take tht as evidence to support CCH's claim.
Otherwise, he'd be witholding very pertinant information, and would have very seriously decieved us.
While I'll give you credit for being very shrewd in your analysis of this situation (especially on the previous statistics debate), I'm content that Paul's not misleading us, intentionally or otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Jan 14, 2006, 5:49 PM
Post #345 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Exactly. The partial information that Paul released suggests that the dimpled Aliens are problematic, but actually says nothing about the non-dimpled ones. As helyje more eloquently put it, many of us, who have sworn by Aliens for many years, now have nagging doubts about the product's quality, and would like to know whether the problem was exclusively limited to the dimpled Aliens, or is more pervasive. Knowing the failure rate of the non-dimpled Aliens would thus be helpful. Jay Ok, I get what you're after now. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're thinking that if all 6 passing cams were non-dimpled, then that would attest towards the strenght of supposed 'in-house' cams? Not exactly. What it would do is allow us to compare the failure rate among dimpled cams vs non-dimpled ones. If those numbers were 100% vs 0%, then that would be evidence supporting CCH's claim that the brazing problem was restricted to the outsourced cams. However, if even a single non-dimpled cam failed below rated strength (out of 6), then I would consider all non-dimpled cams -- at least recently manufactured ones -- to be suspect, as well. I agree with you that just knowing that no non-dimpled cams failed is not sufficient to completely restore my faith in Aliens. I really need to know that CCH has corrected whatever systematic errors led to these and other recently reported problems. However, it would be a step. Remember, we have no evidence at this point WHATSOEVER that the problem is restricted to the dimpled cams. The partial test results that Paul has released do not support this assertion (they don't contradict it either).
We don't even know whether any "non-dimpled" cams were tested. It could be that nine "dimpled" cams were tested--and three of them failed. I too would like for Paul to simply tell us what the make-up was of the original set of cams tested.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Jan 14, 2006, 5:59 PM
Post #346 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
What I really want to know...is how CCH decided to change their manufacturing process (or contracters), and never fucking tested the new process.
I mean honestly; you change the setup and never test it?!?
Is this common? Or did CCH just F* up? Condoms get random batch tests...why doesn't climbing gear?
These friggin things have been back-ordered out the ass for years, now once they finally catch up on supply....they have 2 recalls in 1 year!
They should sell the design to someone else that knows what the hell they're doing.
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
clayman
Jan 14, 2006, 7:28 PM
Post #347 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2004
Posts: 296
|
Maybe this has been discussed already, can't seem to keep up with all these threads. But, has CCH said anything about the recall of non-dimpled cams yet? What assurance is there that the party responsible for the faulty braze wasn't also negligent in putting a dimple on every unit?
It would seem more appropriate to recall units by date and model than by this dimple.
cl
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 14, 2006, 7:38 PM
Post #348 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: What assurance is there that the party responsible for the faulty braze wasn't also negligent in putting a dimple on every unit? cl
excellent point
|
|
|
|
|
porcelainsunset
Jan 15, 2006, 12:23 AM
Post #349 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2005
Posts: 289
|
Yeah I will agree with that as well. Somebody else mentioned that they had several cams from the same batch, some with Dimple of Death (DOD), some without. I too have the same issue, my Aliens are marked as follows:
Blue, no DOD, Batch #0205
Yellow, no DOD, Batch #0705
Grey, DOD, Batch #0205 (Note, same as the Blue above)
Red, DOD, Batch #0305
Orange, DOD, Batch #805
Violet, no DOD, Batch #0105
What concerns me about the Recall being limited to cams only with DOD is that I have both a blue and gray from the same batch #, one with DOD and one without. At the same time, I have no idea if this means anything or not. What I want answered at some point by these investigations is what the batch number represents, and weather or not there can be both affected and unaffected cams with the same batch number, as I am currently led to believe.
This is only a guess here, so please don't take my word for it, but I think that the batch number is relative to the month and year that the cams where manufactured. Example, 0705 would indicate that the cam was made in July of 05. If this was the case, then that would mean that we could not identify the problem by batch number, but only by DOD, which I would believe to be the mark that separates In house from out of house. If this is the case, then I sincerely hope that this DOD came pre-fabricated and sent to the contractor, or was an unavoidable part of the manufacturing process, otherwise, the scope of this problem would not only be limited to Cams marked with the DOD.
Hopefully this was of usefull imput to the discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 15, 2006, 1:41 AM
Post #350 of 522
(65639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Folks,
There is no doubt we'd all like more answers and my conversation with Dave at CCH left me pretty confident we'll get them but they are going need a bit of time to fully respond. This could take days or weeks, he is just one person and is pretty consumed right now dealing with this recall...
|
|
|
|
|
erockrings
Jan 15, 2006, 8:24 PM
Post #351 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 28, 2004
Posts: 23
|
Does anyone else have cams with the dimple on the center of the axle head? I'm wondering if i have a blue alien suffering from misplaced dimple symdrome. This dosent instill confidence in me, Like who is putting the dimple on the cam? it's probably easy to mess up...
After inspecting the weld on the cam i noticed a small gap in the brazing. What would you do? any ideas? I have pictures too.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 15, 2006, 8:27 PM
Post #352 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Please take or send your dimpled cams back to the retailer where you purchased your cam.
|
|
|
|
|
timm
Jan 15, 2006, 8:30 PM
Post #353 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 4, 2005
Posts: 314
|
In reply to: Does anyone else have cams with the dimple on the center of the axle head? I'm wondering if i have a blue alien suffering from misplaced dimple symdrome. This dosent instill confidence in me, Like who is putting the dimple on the cam? it's probably easy to mess up... After inspecting the weld on the cam i noticed a small gap in the brazing. What would you do? any ideas? I have pictures too.
I just recently bought 5 sets of aliens and, of those, 18 have dimples. All of mine that have the dimple are gold, orange, purple, and clear but suposedly there are a small number of other sizings that can be affected. The dimple is almost always centered on the ones that I have. There are a couple where the dimple is a little off center but not by much.
I haven't noticed any problems with gaps in the brazing on my aliens.
Hope this helps.
Tim
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 15, 2006, 8:32 PM
Post #354 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
In reply to: After inspecting the weld on the cam i noticed a small gap in the brazing. What would you do? any ideas? I have pictures too.
Post the pictures, I would certainly be interested in seeing the suspect brazing. I personally have not noticed *gaps* in any of mine, however.. I did notice some have a nice smooth bead around the connection, and some appear to have no exposed brazing showing at all.
|
|
|
|
|
thatnameisalreadychosen
Jan 15, 2006, 8:57 PM
Post #355 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2005
Posts: 45
|
My DOD is:
Hybrid 1/2-3/4" (Green/Yellow) batch 0305
|
|
|
|
|
fredo
Jan 15, 2006, 9:09 PM
Post #356 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2002
Posts: 501
|
In reply to: Does anyone else have cams with the dimple on the center of the axle head?
I plan on waiting until CCH releases some more info on what cams (lots etc) were specifically effected. and how to act on this info. But yes, my Grey 1104, has this as well.
foimt
|
|
|
|
|
erockrings
Jan 15, 2006, 9:10 PM
Post #357 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 28, 2004
Posts: 23
|
so i gather that other people have cams with the dimple at the centre of the axle head. i'll post the picture of the weld anyways for those that are curious.
http://storage.msn.com/...Mto8pc3FXxmx5Yth3BxQ
You can see that there is absolutley No dimple at the base of the head. but you can just barely see the dimple on the centre.
The left side of the weld is were the gap is . it's not huge. I think the overall look of the weld just looks way sloppy compaired to the others i own ( smooth and continuous). I'll also add that i don't even think that iv'e placed this one yet ( just purchased as a suppliment to the aid rack)
Maybe i'm just paranoid, but i think i have the right to be a little worried.
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 15, 2006, 9:12 PM
Post #358 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
In reply to: Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2006 6:33 pm
Colorado Custom Hardware, (CCH) has recently completed an investigation and extensive testing to identify and isolate safety issues concerning the brazing on CCH Alien cams. The safety of our customers is our number one priority.
We sincerely apologize for this inconvenience and we are doing everything possible to correct it quickly. There will be a photograph on our web site to help to identify the cams that need to be returned. The Web site address: Aliencamsbycch.com
In reply to: from *another meassge board* Re:Alien Recall From CCH - 2006/01/13 10:06 why would cch's website not have the recall posted on it?
The poster has a good point.
I think CCH should clarify which website is actually their official site, and if they are using 2 domains BOTH should at the very least contain a link to the recall notice;
http://www.aliencamsbycch.com as posted above by CCH does not contain a recall notice or any reference to one. It *could* very well leave one with the impression that they are not making an honest effort to make everyone aware of this recall.
The recall notices and photos are in fact on an entirely different domain.
http://www.aliencams.com/
http://www.aliencams.com/recall.html
If they truly want to make everyone aware of this issue, I think this *possible oversight* should be rectified.
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 15, 2006, 9:23 PM
Post #359 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
hrmm.. batch #0305 seem to be coming up a lot.
I have 2 purples with the DoD from batch #0305 which do not have the round ball that the axle goes through, rather one that is flat on either side.
|
|
|
|
|
heiko
Jan 15, 2006, 10:06 PM
Post #360 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 1505
|
In reply to: The poster has a good point. I think CCH should clarify which website is actually their official site, and if they are using 2 domains BOTH should at the very least contain a link to the recall notice; http://www.aliencamsbycch.com as posted above by CCH does not contain a recall notice or any reference to one. It *could* very well leave one with the impression that they are not making an honest effort to make everyone aware of this recall. The recall notices and photos are in fact on an entirely different domain. http://www.aliencams.com/ http://www.aliencams.com/recall.html If they truly want to make everyone aware of this issue, I think this *possible oversight* should be rectified.
This website issue... I checked the WHOIS entries. The domains have been registered by different people. I wonder what the connection is and why the seemingly "official" CCH website has no mention of the recall.
Domain Name: ALIENCAMSBYCCH.COM
Polzer, Philip
Philip Polzer
718 S. 5th St.
Laramie, WY 82070
US
Domain Name: ALIENCAMS.COM
Registrant:
Sumner Ohye
Alien Cams #1350
4739 University Way N.E.
Seattle, Washington 98105
United States
Registered through: EZOSHosting
(For those who don't know: anyone can do this... https://secure.registerapi.com/services/whois.php)
|
|
|
|
|
clayman
Jan 15, 2006, 10:10 PM
Post #361 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2004
Posts: 296
|
In reply to: In reply to: Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2006 6:33 pm
Colorado Custom Hardware, (CCH) has recently completed an investigation and extensive testing to identify and isolate safety issues concerning the brazing on CCH Alien cams. The safety of our customers is our number one priority.
We sincerely apologize for this inconvenience and we are doing everything possible to correct it quickly. There will be a photograph on our web site to help to identify the cams that need to be returned. The Web site address: Aliencamsbycch.comIn reply to: from *another meassge board* Re:Alien Recall From CCH - 2006/01/13 10:06 why would cch's website not have the recall posted on it?I think CCH should clarify which website is actually their official site, and if they are using 2 domains BOTH should at the very least contain a link to the recall notice; http://www.aliencamsbycch.com as posted above by CCH does not contain a recall notice or any reference to one. It *could* very well leave one with the impression that they are not making an honest effort to make everyone aware of this recall. The recall notices and photos are in fact on an entirely different domain. http://www.aliencams.com/ http://www.aliencams.com/recall.html If they truly want to make everyone aware of this issue, I think this *possible oversight* should be rectified.
you know what, this is really pissing me off. I have been scratching my head for the past few days wondering why and the hell CCH doesn't have a recall notice on their webpage aliencamsbycch.com, now to find out they have another website where the recall is. You've got to be kidding me! There is no link from aliencamsbycch.com to the other website or any mention of the recall whatsoever! What are these people doing? I'm all for giving them time to figure out how to solve this problem, but there is really no excuse (unless I'm missing something) for not posting, on what I would say is their primary site, that at least there is a recall in progress.
cl
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 15, 2006, 10:14 PM
Post #362 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
Exactly
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 15, 2006, 11:48 PM
Post #363 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: Domain Name: ALIENCAMSBYCCH.COM Polzer, Philip Philip Polzer 718 S. 5th St. Laramie, WY 82070 US Domain Name: ALIENCAMS.COM Registrant: Sumner Ohye Alien Cams #1350 4739 University Way N.E. Seattle, Washington 98105 United States Registered through: EZOSHosting
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
highangle
Jan 16, 2006, 1:58 AM
Post #364 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2004
Posts: 151
|
Yet no recall posted on the site that he referred us to? Sucks when I REALLY want to give CCH the benefit of the doubt, but inconsistencies keep showing up.
edited to delete duplicating skinner's above post......DOH!
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 16, 2006, 2:25 AM
Post #365 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
Seems like a month since the original post but it's only been a single "working day" (edit: maybe almost two; not sure of OP time) - and well there is a recall posted with a picture on a website which may very well be connected with CCH; just not the one above. Perhaps they'll clean up a bit of this slow-motion train wreck on the second working day (tomorrow).
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 16, 2006, 2:29 AM
Post #366 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
The pictures of the stem on page ten are back!
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 16, 2006, 3:31 AM
Post #367 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
You're right Bill, it does seem longer then it has been. Then again if it was my company and this was hanging over my head, I doubt I would be going home and putting my feet up for the weekend, like it was business as usual. I have owned and operated my own business for 20+ years and have had to deal with various emergencies and crises over the years.
I learned early on that the quicker I responded and the sooner I could ensure everyone involved was satisfied, the less of an event it became.
Then again, that's just me
Ok Bill, tell us honestly.. you work for or have some affiliation with CCH don't you? Related maybe? :D
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 16, 2006, 4:00 AM
Post #368 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: You're right Bill, it does seem longer then it has been. Then again if it was my company and this was hanging over my head, I doubt I would be going home and putting my feet up for the weekend, like it was business as usual. I have owned and operated my own business for 20+ years and have had to deal with various emergencies and crises over the years. I learned early on that the quicker I responded and the sooner I could ensure everyone involved was satisfied, the less of an event it became. Then again, that's just me
The only positive spin I could put on that is he's been burning the midnight oil tracking down the whole problem and building up his QA - "no time for this new-fandangled web stuff - let the outsource guy manage that!" But I won't.
In reply to: Ok Bill, tell us honestly.. you work for or have some affiliation with CCH don't you? Related maybe? :D
:lol: No - I have no affiliation with CCH at all - zero. Probably, I am just guilty of being too easy with sympathy for someone in a bind like CCH is now. But too many more of these "Aw shits" and I'll be looking for my torch and pitchfork.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Jan 16, 2006, 4:28 AM
Post #369 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
In reply to: In reply to: Sell the Alien brand to... You read my mind. I'd be thrilled to hear that another well know climbing company purchased the rights to Aliens. I'm sure those of you who sell them would be thrilled as well!
^^^
I think this is worth reading again.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 16, 2006, 6:31 AM
Post #370 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
I would suspect the aliencams.com website was put up by a well-meaning person in the U-District in Seattle who didn't consider the confusion the site might represent. I have emailed Sumner and asked him to add a notice/disclaimer to both pages of his web site to let folks know it is not associated with CCH in any way and that he was simply attempting to help out with what we can assume was an attempt at community service.
|
|
|
|
|
rockvoyager
Jan 16, 2006, 7:53 AM
Post #371 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 84
|
In reply to: Colorado Custom Hardware, (CCH) has recently completed an investigation and extensive testing to identify and isolate safety issues concerning the brazing on CCH Alien cams. The safety of our customers is our number one priority. Testing has revealed that there was a brazing issue with specific cams made after November blah blah blah blah blah
Unbelievable. This is fire control pure and simple. His initial response on the other thread was crap. It was that sudden realization that he was about to lose it all that motivated him to do what should have been done in the first place.
I can't get over it, suggesting the guy with the broken cam, complete with pictures of the fall and the cam blowing by, was attempting a hoax.....what a jerk. Oh and let's not forget some of you "room temperature IQ types" that suggested it was a troll or someone with an agenda. Good job guys, but what's your assesment now?
Here's what I think. It's a good product (although they look like their made in a high school automotive class, which is why I don't use them), they have a great following in our community and an owner that managed to jam his foot in his mouth all the way up to his a$$.
What I want to hear is an APOLOGY. Not too me or to the community as a whole but to the guy he said was trying to rip off his company with that "HOAX".
Until then my suggestion is to take a couple of courses that deal with responding to customers in a fair, well thought out and equitable manner.
Brad
|
|
|
|
|
brent_e
Jan 16, 2006, 12:10 PM
Post #373 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 5111
|
In reply to: hrmm.. batch #0305 seem to be coming up a lot. I have 2 purples with the DoD from batch #0305 which do not have the round ball that the axle goes through, rather one that is flat on either side.
are they black??? pretty sure that the black cams don't have the "ball" at the end of the axle because they are so small and it would interfere with the expansion range.
Brent
|
|
|
|
|
phugganut
Jan 16, 2006, 1:07 PM
Post #374 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2003
Posts: 648
|
I mark my gear with fingernail polish, and my aliens have a thick layer around where the dimple is. It doesn't appear that any have dimples, but it's hard to be sure b/c of the nail polish. I think they might be getting returned to REI (the only place to get them around here) b/c I can't be sure. Maybe I will just replace them with Zeros :(
|
|
|
|
|
daithi
Jan 16, 2006, 1:57 PM
Post #375 of 522
(71126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2005
Posts: 397
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: CCH: "The centerpunch identified the company that made the braze."We still don't know is whether the punch is immanent to their production process (= guaranteed) or if it was made manually ( = can't be sure). The "center punch dimple" is just that, a punch mark placed manually with a center punch by the subcontractor that did the brazing.
Exactly. The procedure would have gone something like this:
Place centerpunch over area to be marked.
Pick up hammer.
Give it a whack.
Done.
Of course it is hit with a special hammer to avoid microfractures! :)
|
|
|
|
|
daithi
Jan 16, 2006, 2:08 PM
Post #376 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2005
Posts: 397
|
In reply to: The left side of the weld is were the gap is . it's not huge. I think the overall look of the weld just looks way sloppy compaired to the others i own ( smooth and continuous). I'll also add that i don't even think that iv'e placed this one yet ( just purchased as a suppliment to the aid rack) Maybe i'm just paranoid, but i think i have the right to be a little worried.
I can't see your picture but any voids in the exposed filler material at the top of the brazed joint is bad news. Of course you couldn't really tell if the integrity of the joint was compromised without an ultrasound or similar NDT test.
From my own perspective if I had any doubt about the integrity of my gear I would return it in a heartbeat. In the current climate I'd imagine REI et al. would replace any alien you sent back to them regardless of whether it had a dimple or not.
erockrings, can you upload the picture to rc.com so I can have a look please.
|
|
|
|
|
clayman
Jan 16, 2006, 2:45 PM
Post #377 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2004
Posts: 296
|
I know it's been only 4 or so days since CCH posted their recall notice here on rc.com. So I DON'T expect these questions to have answers yet, but they are on my mind so I thought get them out there.
-Is the faulty braze due to utter incompetence (ie was somebody stoned) or was it something more "understandable" like a faulty temp gauge on a welder or mislabeled brazing material?
-Is there any other way, other than the dimple, to trace the suspect cams back to the outside agent who assembled them?
-Will this same contractor still be used by CCH? Also, how long has CCH been employing this particular contractor.
-Why weren't (or was there) at least a sampling of the cams that were assembled by this outside agent tested to failure?
-Has CCH always outsourced their cams?
cl
|
|
|
|
|
mistertyler
Jan 16, 2006, 2:58 PM
Post #378 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 9, 2003
Posts: 197
|
Thanks to Mr. Healy (and some others) for 'taking the bull by the horns' and working in a professional manner with CCH to get the answers to the questions so many of us have had about this issue and keep the ball rolling to resolve it quickly. (Instead of just complaining but doing nothing.)
|
|
|
|
|
bkboyd
Jan 16, 2006, 3:02 PM
Post #379 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 28, 2003
Posts: 75
|
I just returned two non-dimpled aliens to REI on Friday. They told me that mine were not in the recall list, but were happy to refund my money regardless. For now, at least, I'm not comfortable leading on any of the recently made aliens. Mine were bought in November and December, and they gave me a full refund.
|
|
|
|
|
sandstonejunkie
Jan 16, 2006, 3:41 PM
Post #380 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 1, 2005
Posts: 43
|
In reply to: I just returned two non-dimpled aliens to REI on Friday. They told me that mine were not in the recall list, but were happy to refund my money regardless. For now, at least, I'm not comfortable leading on any of the recently made aliens. Mine were bought in November and December, and they gave me a full refund.
I felt the same way, just too many questions to trust leading on them.
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 16, 2006, 4:07 PM
Post #381 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
There is enough people that are calling CCH and posting the results of their conversations that I really believe if we all "grabbed the bull by the horns" it would only be detrimental to the process at hand.
Without a doubt some of this has been unnecessary and unproductive b*tching, but much of it has been discussion.
The reality of the situation is that rc.com has been the driving force behind this issue which message boards all over the world have referred to when attempting to inform others. Through all the negative comments and spew these threads could very possibly be responsible for sparing someone from serious injury or death.
Hopefully someone at CCH will take the time to read though them eventually and get an idea of how their customers and the climbing community in general feel about how such things were and should be handled. If approached with the proper attitude many positive changes within CCH could take place (and I could finally get my hands on a full set of hybrids) which we could all benefit from.
I think you would be hard pressed to find a climber that wants to see CCH out of business.
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Jan 16, 2006, 4:20 PM
Post #382 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
In reply to: I got a quick response from Dave/CCH regarding the questions I emailed him. No doubt we will get a more comprehensive information once he has a chance to do a real post mortem but for now here are now the answers he sent: ------------------------------------------ Remaining Questions Stem Braze Failure 1) Why were cams marked with a "center punch dimple"? What purpose did this mark serve? CCH: "The centerpunch identified the company that made the braze." 2) An orange cam failure reported on RockClimbing.com sparked the investigation leading to this recall - was that cam marked with a "center punch dimple"? CCH: "Yes." 3) MGear tested nine cams resulting in 3 stem brazing failures - were those 3 cams marked with the "center punch dimple"? CCH: "Yes." 4) Has there been any reported or tested stem brazing failures of cams without the "center punch dimple"? CCH: "No." Mis-drilled Axle Holes 5) Do you know what product (dates, sizes, and type) were affected by this defect? CCH: "0305 is the date associated with the axle hole issue. All the cams I have seen with the axle hole off are 0305. Perhaps it extends to 0405. It is not a safety concern according to tests I have made. They hold well in excess of 3000. 6) Is this erronous displacement of the axle hole from its designed location the same on all defective cams or does it vary from cam to cam? HEALYJE: See #5. 7) Will you issue a seperate recall for this defect? HEALYJE: See #5. ------------------------------------------ Dave followed up these answers with: CCH: "I will keep you informed on this matter. I will be talking to more experts on brazing in the next few days - Dave" I let Dave know I very much appreciated his quick response and again, I have no doubt we will hear more on the matter as information is available to CCH... Joseph Healy Portland, Oregon
I've been refraining from posting so as not to fill up this thread with more dead space.
I have to now to post to say:
A) Thank Joseph for getting the facts. THANKS FROM ALL OF US.
B) Suggest that Dave show up, leave the pride and hubris at home and lay down an authentic, heartfelt apology. I can understand how he may have thought it was a hoax originally, but when it was found not to be, he should have apologized. You handled yourself poorly Dave.
C) Mgear rules ! It is unclear how much this will cost them financially because they went so far beyond what was needed or required of THEM by testing some of their CCH stock on hand to discover/confirm the problem: but if they even saved 1 life with their quick actions......well, not much you can say except step back in some kind of awe and wonder.
I'm done posting on this and suggest that others do as well unless they have facts or something significant to add.
regards:
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Jan 16, 2006, 4:23 PM
Post #383 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
In reply to: I think you would be hard pressed to find a climber that wants to see CCH out of business.
Very true.
Dave, thanks for taking a big step in the right direction with this recall.
Joe, thanks for doing some of the leg work to get some additional answers.
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 16, 2006, 4:28 PM
Post #384 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
The recall covers "center punch dimpled" cams as described in the CCH Brazing Recall Notice. Return those cams as soon as possible. No doubt REI will accept other recently purchased non-dimpled cams. But be aware that at this point no cams without a "center punch dimple" have been identified as having this brazing defect.
I do not know what the long term result of returning "non-dimpled" cams will be. REI can probably absorb a number of them, but if too many get returned then I suspect it will create yet another problem for CCH. It is certainly a personal decision, but we don't want to loose CCH and Aliens. So at this point unless you have one that is "center punch dimpled" or has an obviously mis-drilled axle hole (in an orange) then I would say think twice about the affect of returning "non-dimpled" cams on this small company. Dave and CCH are attempting to address the defectively brazed cams in good faith at this point. I personally would counsel a bit of restraint, let them deal with these specific problem cams, and then let this play out a bit more before creating a secondary problem that at the moment is unwarranted by the facts at hand. Again, you'll all have to make that call for yourselves...
|
|
|
|
|
sandstonejunkie
Jan 16, 2006, 5:00 PM
Post #385 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 1, 2005
Posts: 43
|
In reply to: The recall covers "center punch dimpled" cams as described in the CCH Brazing Recall Notice.
In reply to: I do not know what the long term result of returning "non-dimpled" cams will be. REI can probably absorb a number of them, but if too many get returned then I suspect it will create yet another problem for CCH. It is certainly a personal decision, but we don't want to loose CCH and Aliens. So at this point unless you have one that is "center punch dimpled" or has an obviously mis-drilled axle hole ( in an orange) then I would say think twice about the affect of returning "non-dimpled" cams on this small company. Dave and CCH are now attempting to address the defectively brazed cams in good faith at this point. I personally would counsel a bit of restraint, let them deal with these specific problem cams, and then let this play out a bit more before creating a secondary problem that at the moment is unwarranted by the facts at hand. Again, you'll all have to make that call for yourselves...
Now, I'm going to follow billcoe_'s lead and stop posting in this thread, I doubt that I have anything more to add to the discusssion.
Thanks again to Joe for his efforts and best of luck to CCH, I look forward to my next Alien purchase when all of this is resolved.
James
edited for spelling
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 16, 2006, 5:25 PM
Post #386 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Joe, I thank you for all of your efforts in communicating with CCH for all our benefit, but I question your ecouragement of others to think of CCH and the climbing community as a whole above their own personal responsibility (to their safety) if they have questions about the reliability of their Aliens. I would remind everyone that you alone are responsible for you own safety. Do what you think is right for yourself.
James,
If you re-read my last post I very much urge people to follow their own thoughts in the matter. But I also ask that they first think twice before rushing to return non-recalled Aliens. Again, I for one don't want to lose CCH and Aliens and feel that there are currenly no facts whatsoever to sustain a recall of "non-dimpled" cams. Decide for yourself, but I believe if any evidence were to emerge of problems with "non-dimpled" cams from this point forward the scope of the Brazing Recall Notice will be formally changed and you will still have ample opportunity to return those as well if need be. But again as we've both now said, everyone will have to decide for themselves...
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 16, 2006, 5:30 PM
Post #387 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: 1. The subcontractor quenched the braze joints after braze heating. What quenching does is to harden materilas by sticking the red hot part in a water or oil solution to rapidly cool the part. This is usually used for forging car parts. You never want to quench brazed joints because it causes the materials to cool at different times and temperatures and the braze will not adhere to the parts being brazed. I guess he took it upon himself to do the quenching, instead of allowing the braze joint to air cool.
Piton - Do you know this to be a fact? Or are you speculating that this what occured? At this point I have no knowledge of the details of the defect, but I am certainly far from the only conduit of information in this whole affair...
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 16, 2006, 6:31 PM
Post #388 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
Between Paul, healyje and piton, which I have no idea how he obtained this information, but trusting it is accurate, all my questions have been answered. I hope that as this recall progresses CCH will include a list of lot# on their website as well.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 16, 2006, 6:37 PM
Post #389 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Piton's information is from a source I consider reliable.
|
|
|
|
|
elvislegs
Jan 16, 2006, 6:50 PM
Post #390 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2002
Posts: 3148
|
does anyone know if it is common for gear makers to outsource parts of the manufacturing process like this?
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 16, 2006, 7:05 PM
Post #391 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Suffice it to say climbing-related gear is manufactured all around the world and it is quite difficult to make sweeping generalizations about such practices across the industry. I suspect, however, that it is more common to outsource the manufacture of entire products rather than to outsource a specific manufacturing step.
|
|
|
|
|
fjclimbsrocks
Jan 16, 2006, 7:40 PM
Post #392 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 26, 2004
Posts: 145
|
For what it's worth, I've got 5 aliens, Blue, Green, Yellow, Red, Grey, all of which have the 0305 batch code. Only the green has a dimple.
|
|
|
|
|
waltereo
Jan 16, 2006, 10:03 PM
Post #393 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 11, 2003
Posts: 151
|
Hi,
I also have a blue with that dimple.
My question is, who pay the shipping ? CCH ? I didn't see anywhere
regarding who pay shipping ?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
wings
Jan 16, 2006, 10:30 PM
Post #394 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 283
|
In reply to: I also have a blue with that dimple. My question is, who pay the shipping ? CCH ? I didn't see anywhere regarding who pay shipping ?
You are.
- Seyil
|
|
|
|
|
waltereo
Jan 16, 2006, 10:44 PM
Post #395 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 11, 2003
Posts: 151
|
[quote="wings"][quote="waltereo"]I also have a blue with that dimple.
My question is, who pay the shipping ? CCH ? I didn't see anywhere
regarding who pay shipping ?
You are.
- Seyil
Not suppose to be me , IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 17, 2006, 4:59 AM
Post #396 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: I also have a blue with that dimple. My question is, who pay the shipping ? CCH ? I didn't see anywhere regarding who pay shipping ? You are. - Seyil Not suppose to be me , IMO.
We're talking about a dollar here, right?
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Jan 17, 2006, 6:20 AM
Post #397 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
In reply to: In reply to: CCH: "The centerpunch identified the company that made the braze."We still don't know is whether the punch is immanent to their production process (= guaranteed) or if it was made manually ( = can't be sure).
Dude, the brazes are done by hand too...on ALL the Aliens it seems like. If you can't be sure of someone doing a centerpunch...what can you trust?
The fact that these things were hand brazed, and that this outsourcer's work was never tested is most concerning. I don't see how we're using a product that is completly dependant on one workers small braze. (and for the record, I know a thing or two about brazing...I actually have some rods in my room right now {custom crampon work done recently} )
Call me paranoid....but I don't like that. I'd feel better if it was a machine brazing these things that doesn't have "monday and friday" work.
Assuming CCH has the money to pull off this recall...I won't be buying from them till their manufacturing process changes.
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
wings
Jan 17, 2006, 3:32 PM
Post #398 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 283
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: I also have a blue with that dimple. My question is, who pay the shipping ? CCH ? I didn't see anywhere regarding who pay shipping ? You are. - Seyil Not suppose to be me , IMO. We're talking about a dollar here, right? Jay
Well ...
Given CCH's reputation (earned or not) about their supposed deficiencies when returning cams, I sent mine registered. $12 for peace of mind that I'll have proof they received my cam. Not thrilled about it, but as someone pointed out earlier, we have a choice - milk them for all they're worth, or help them struggle past this episode. I've chosen the latter, but it's not without doubts.
- Seyil
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 17, 2006, 3:45 PM
Post #399 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Given CCH's reputation (earned or not) about their supposed deficiencies when returning cams, I sent mine registered. $12 for peace of mind that I'll have proof they received my cam. Not thrilled about it, but as someone pointed out earlier, we have a choice - milk them for all they're worth, or help them struggle past this episode. I've chosen the latter, but it's not without doubts. - Seyil
Good choice from my perspective as I think getting through this together, intact and alive, as a community of manufacturers, retailers, and climbers is the best possible outcome. That is also an outcome that happens to show this on-line world can rise above - well, to be perfectly blunt - itself once in awhile, and accomplish something positive in the real world...
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Jan 17, 2006, 4:13 PM
Post #400 of 522
(65705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: In reply to: Technical Documentation CCH is committed to answering all of your questions concerning this recall, regardless of how technical or specific. We are currently working to provide documentation explaining the reasons behind the recall and what steps we have taken to improve our already stringent quality control measures. Please check back regularly for updates.
Here's to hoping for transparency!
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 17, 2006, 4:28 PM
Post #401 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
I just wanted to say thank you to every one who has positively contributed to this issue. Thank you for raising your voices and asking for answers. And I especially want to thank Paul of Mountain Gear and Mal for taking me seriously.
And finally, thank you Dave for issuing the recall.
Through all of us, I firmly believe that we prevented someone from getting hurt or killed.
Now, everyone should let Dave work and we should go out and do what we enjoy most. Climbing.
Thanks again,
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
waltereo
Jan 17, 2006, 5:07 PM
Post #402 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 11, 2003
Posts: 151
|
[quote="wings"][quote="jt512"][quote="waltereo"][quote="wings"][quote="waltereo"]I also have a blue with that dimple.
My question is, who pay the shipping ? CCH ? I didn't see anywhere
regarding who pay shipping ?
You are.
- Seyil
Not suppose to be me , IMO.
We're talking about a dollar here, right?
Jay
Well ...
Given CCH's reputation (earned or not) about their supposed deficiencies when returning cams, I sent mine registered. $12 for peace of mind that I'll have proof they received my cam. Not thrilled about it, but as someone pointed out earlier, we have a choice - milk them for all they're worth, or help them struggle past this episode. I've chosen the latter, but it's not without doubts.
- Seyil
Right ! I didn't mean that I don't want to pay, as healyje said, let's get through this together.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 17, 2006, 7:31 PM
Post #403 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: I also have a blue with that dimple. My question is, who pay the shipping ? CCH ? I didn't see anywhere regarding who pay shipping ? You are. - Seyil Not suppose to be me , IMO. We're talking about a dollar here, right? Jay Well ... Given CCH's reputation (earned or not) about their supposed deficiencies when returning cams, I sent mine registered. $12 for peace of mind that I'll have proof they received my cam. Not thrilled about it, but as someone pointed out earlier, we have a choice - milk them for all they're worth, or help them struggle past this episode. I've chosen the latter, but it's not without doubts. - Seyil
Registered mail is intended for valuable or irreplaceable items, not $60 cams. If you merely wanted proof of delivery, you could have gotten a delivery receipt for under $1.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
clayman
Jan 17, 2006, 7:51 PM
Post #404 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2004
Posts: 296
|
Just wanted to say thanks to first Dave at CCH for getting his website in order, I really hope this works out in his and our favor. What can I say, I love Aliens, don't wanna lose em'! Second, thanks to everybody here, esp healyje, for keeping us informed and keeping a cool head in these troubling
times (think of the children!). I guess living in NE is paying off in this case, my rack want see the light of day for another three months anyway.
peace
cl
|
|
|
|
|
kappydane
Jan 17, 2006, 7:56 PM
Post #405 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2004
Posts: 119
|
I'm not a lawyer and don't play one on TV but I would think that the company doing the faulty brazing should be the one taking the biggest hit financially since it appears to be their work that was not up to the required specifications. If that is the case it should be easier for CCH to weather the storm.
|
|
|
|
|
wings
Jan 17, 2006, 8:09 PM
Post #406 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 283
|
In reply to: Registered mail is intended for valuable or irreplaceable items, not $60 cams. If you merely wanted proof of delivery, you could have gotten a delivery receipt for under $1. Jay
Not from Canada I couldn't (at least according to the Canada Post worker whom I spoke to).
That's a nice service you have there for under $1. Pretty much a no-brainer to use it.
- Seyil
|
|
|
|
|
yetanotherdave
Jan 17, 2006, 8:36 PM
Post #407 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 19, 2005
Posts: 243
|
In reply to: Not from Canada I couldn't (at least according to the Canada Post worker whom I spoke to). |
|
|
|
|
geekerella
Jan 17, 2006, 9:15 PM
Post #408 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 9, 2005
Posts: 32
|
In reply to: Not from Canada I couldn't (at least according to the Canada Post worker whom I spoke to).
You can go to: http://www.canadapost.ca/.../bin/rc_res_us-e.asp
and use Canada Posts "rate calculator"to figure out the shipping cost.
Delivery Conformation and $100.00 Coverage for loss or damage are both included in the base price.
The cost really doesn't look that bad from Ole Cow Town.
or..
if you are really worried about the $5 - $10, send it C.O.D. and lets us know how that turned out :D
|
|
|
|
|
wings
Jan 17, 2006, 10:06 PM
Post #409 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 283
|
In reply to: You can go to: http://www.canadapost.ca/.../bin/rc_res_us-e.asp and use Canada Posts "rate calculator"to figure out the shipping cost.
Delivery Conformation and $100.00 Coverage for loss or damage are both included in the base price.
The cost really doesn't look that bad from Ole Cow Town.
or..
if you are really worried about the $5 - $10, send it C.O.D. and lets us know how that turned out :D
Not to hijack this thread, but that calculator gives inconsistent results. I especially like how I can ship a 20cm x 5cm x 2cm 200g parcel (with no delivery confirmation) for $10.85 minimum, yet if I were to put the package into a larger box of dimensions 37cm x 24cm x 2cm (same weight, no delivery confirmation), I can do it for $4.95. Either Canada Post is really stupid or that calculator is, and I wouldn't put it past both.
- Seyil
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 17, 2006, 10:22 PM
Post #410 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
Oh my God!
Can we please keep this thread restricted to information directly related to this recall!
Yak about Canadian postage with your PMs.
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Jan 17, 2006, 10:40 PM
Post #411 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
In reply to: Oh my God! Can we please keep this thread restricted to information directly related to this recall! Yak about Canadian postage with your PMs.
Just to emphasize this point, I'd ask everyone do the same in regards to all posts in this thread. Thanks.
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
porcelainsunset
Jan 18, 2006, 9:17 AM
Post #412 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2005
Posts: 289
|
Insainio, thank you so much for keeping a cool head, and for reminding us what is important here, Climbing. However, lets keep in mind that we all don't live in Colorado, so for some of us RC.com is the only way to pass time during the winter, in Portland, it last half the year.
|
|
|
|
|
jsj42
Jan 19, 2006, 6:30 PM
Post #413 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 24, 2002
Posts: 374
|
Here's a little update -- I posted this on January 3rd:
In reply to: I can't comment on the mis-drilled axle issue or on the head popping off of the stem, but I would like to share my experience with customer service. In late October I mailed in an Alien that needed trigger wire repair. I included my address and number as they requested, but never heard from them. A phone call in early November confirmed that they had received the cam and were in the process of repairing it -- it would be sent back to me that week. Two weeks went by (early December now) and hadn't received the Alien. Worried that it might have been lost in the mail, I placed a phone call. CCH informed me that the Alien was done but they hadn't sent it to me. I gave them my address a second time -- perhaps they didn't have it? I should add that on several occasions I spoke to a woman at CCH who couldn't answer my questions but promised to pass my message on to someone who could. My calls were never returned however, every time I had to call back. It's now early January. I called again today and was told that my Alien was still there, and ready to go. I mentioned that I thought I would have received it weeks ago and was surprised to still not have it. CCH confirmed my address a second time. I then asked if they had an estimate on WHEN it would be shipped. CCH told me that it would go out today - I guess we'll see....
As you might have guessed, I still haven't seen it. No big surprise anymore. I called AGAIN today. This time I made sure I was talking to Dave. At least he remembers me -- he seemed to remember that we spoke five times on the phone or so. Well, he couldn't tell me ANYTHING. He said he didn't know what happened and that he would have to talk to Laurie (?). He said Laurie handles repairs/shipping. He promised me that he would call me back THIS AFTERNOON. Of course, I had to give him my number again -- who knows if he even had it.
|
|
|
|
|
jsj42
Jan 20, 2006, 5:00 AM
Post #414 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 24, 2002
Posts: 374
|
Well I'll be darned, CCH called me back this afternoon. It was a woman who called (but I got the name wrong it wasn't Laurie -- maybe Maggie or something like that). She was very apologetic about the whole thing and she claims that it was her fault -- she had the repair sitting in a box and she just never shipped it. She said she was UPS-ing today and that I should see it Friday or Monday. For some reason this time I think it may have worked.
Update:
And it did... I finally got the Alien today (Jan 20). Let's hope their eyes have been opened which is a good thing for everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Jan 21, 2006, 12:27 AM
Post #415 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
The world climbing news forum "Alien recall from CCH" thread has been condensed to newsworthy items only. It has also been locked. If there is any other newsworthy items for inclusion to that thread I am very happy to open the thread for particular posts to be included. Please PM me for the thread to be opened. Once included the thread will once again be locked.
Please feel free to continue to place commentary and opinion in this thread.
The WCN forum thread is here. Alien Recall From CCH.
Phil Box for rc.com site management.
|
|
|
|
|
superbum
Jan 21, 2006, 5:05 AM
Post #416 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2002
Posts: 822
|
word.
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Jan 30, 2006, 8:27 PM
Post #417 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
Hey everyone,
Just wanted to let you know that I talked to Dave this morning and he informed me that CCH is now pull testing every cam that they produce. In the case of the orange, to 2500 lbs.
Also, they are shipping out replacements if you haven't received one yet.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Jan 30, 2006, 8:34 PM
Post #418 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
(This post was edited by the_mitt on Nov 19, 2006, 6:21 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 30, 2006, 9:02 PM
Post #419 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: Hey everyone, Just wanted to let you know that I talked to Dave this morning and he informed me that CCH is now pull testing every cam that they produce. In the case of the orange, to 2500 lbs. Also, they are shipping out replacements if you haven't received one yet. Kevin
This is excellent news, way to go CCH for using this as a catalyst to make a better product.
I should say though, that this is excellent news for all who have yet to purchase a set of aliens.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 30, 2006, 9:41 PM
Post #420 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Mitt,
I agree a full blown formal QA system would be desirable, but I have repeatedly suggested to Dave that simply jig testing cam lobe runs for proper axle locations and pull testing individual cams would be fast and simple QA fixes for the defects we've seen and ones that would immediately go a long way towards boosting and restoring confidence in their products as they sort out the implementation of longer term QA fixes. I stand by that assessment and I for one am glad to see Dave begin pull testing individual cams. It is another sign he now has a firm grasp of the situation and of the necessity to implement changes in CCH's manufacturing processes. It also tells us he's working hard on these problem and towards solutions. That's good for CCH and good for us. Again, when he gets a break I'm sure we'll get a formal statement from CCH as they formalize their long term plans.
Thanks for the word Kevin.
Joseph Healy
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
|
|
wings
Jan 30, 2006, 10:13 PM
Post #421 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 283
|
In reply to: I should say though, that this is excellent news for all who have yet to purchase a set of aliens.
Good point.
At this point, I have many options:
1. Continue using my aliens and ignore the demons in my head. This won't happen as my demons are particularly loud and obnoxious.
2. Return what aliens I can back to the retailers (in this case, return 7 aliens to REI and eat the rest). I don't want to do this because this just punishes REI.
3. Retire all of my aliens. This is economically painful.
4. Find a way to regain faith in my aliens.
5. Sell my aliens. This is an odd option given that I am selling an item which I do not trust, and so the guilt factor would weigh heavily on me if I knew someone else was depending on them with their lives.
Option 4 is preferable. However, I don't know how I would accomplish this. Someone mentionned bounce testing. I don't aid so I have no idea how much force is generated in a bounce test.
What are other people planning on doing? Any other suggestions?
- Seyil
|
|
|
|
|
chanceboarder
Jan 30, 2006, 11:08 PM
Post #422 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 1348
|
Like many of you I too have questioned my Aliens and sent 4 (2 for myself and 2 for my partner) to CCH to be replaced as part of the recall. I'm also very pleased to hear that they are now pull testing each cam they produce and it goes a long way towards easing my mind and restoring some of my lost faith in Aliens.
For those of you wondering how long its taking to get replacements for the cams you send in, USPS confirmed that the 4 cams I sent them were delivered on 1/20/06 and I just received all 4 replacements today 1/30/06. I'm sure not everyone will be the same but it gives you an idea of how fast their getting replacements out to people.
Jason
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 31, 2006, 12:12 AM
Post #423 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: 4. Find a way to regain faith in my aliens. Option 4 is preferable. However, I don't know how I would accomplish this. Someone mentionned bounce testing. I don't aid so I have no idea how much force is generated in a bounce test. What are other people planning on doing? Any other suggestions? - Seyil
The recalled cams have a "center punch mark" at the base of the axle bar. If you want to bounce test cams just plug one in crack, clip an aider or joined slings onto it and body weight it. If that holds bounce on it some. It generates a lot of force. Just be sure to do it in a way/place that if one pops, either out of the rock or fails, that you'll be alright. Locker had a "dimpled" [recall] Alien fail under body weight while testing his recently. My recommendation is don't bother testing recalled cams, just send them back. For non-recall cams just be careful while testing.
|
|
|
|
|
gordo
Jan 31, 2006, 1:38 AM
Post #424 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 5, 2005
Posts: 111
|
In reply to: USPS confirmed that the 4 cams I sent them were delivered on 1/20/06 and I just received all 4 replacements today 1/30/06. |
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Jan 31, 2006, 2:37 AM
Post #425 of 522
(65648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
(This post was edited by the_mitt on Nov 19, 2006, 6:24 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
locker
Jan 31, 2006, 3:51 AM
Post #426 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 14, 2004
Posts: 130
|
healyje does in fact speak the truth concerning me and my "DIMMPLED" Alien blowing up with just my body weight of 150lbs... I only test two of the five and though one failed and the other did not, I immediately decided to take this way more seriously than I have been. I did not Test the others and am in fact sending the five back in ASAP!!! I am going to request a "FULL REFUND" as I am not very trusting of any NEW gear coming from a company that made such a huge error in judgement by Farming Out their product...
I will say howver, that I have trusted Aliens for many years and have taken many falls on thier gear never to have a single cam fail until the DIMPLED ones did today (Bounce testing)... I have loved them but no longer do...
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Jan 31, 2006, 4:10 AM
Post #427 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
In reply to: O.K so they have achieved step one to gaining our trust. Its a good start, now lets see how long it takes to get an official report with a solution to their QA problem. So we are at approx. 3 weeks and counting and nothing official since the recall. Mitt
Well, I doubt they're out playing 18 holes of golf in the mean time.....
It's not BD we're dealing with...it's a small company with much more limited resources. And, you probably have every other person with a rack of aliens calling in and asking the same 5 questions...50 times a day.
Let em get back on track and complete their investigation, then you can start ripping on em. In the mean time, everytime we call em up and bitch, it's that much longer we have to wait for an official statement.
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Jan 31, 2006, 10:24 AM
Post #428 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
(This post was edited by the_mitt on Nov 19, 2006, 6:23 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 31, 2006, 10:40 AM
Post #429 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: I would say that they are working very hard on this problem as well...Finally (after how many complaints). I could care less about the size of the company or how hard they are working, what I do care about is my and others safety. If peoples phone calls are stopping their investigation into this then their problems are so much deeper than just one manufacturing issue. Mitt
Mitt,
It is quite clear to them and everyone involved with them over the years that this is as much a cultural issue as one of process. The issues over time have also had to do with capacity, service, and communication. But, they are awake and they do need time and space to execute on the recall and try to come up with a formal, longer term game plan for dealing with all these issues. In short they know they need to change, they've started down that road and folks hassling them unnecessarily will just slow the process down. If you have cams covered by the recall send them in asap. If you don't see them back inside of 3-4 weeks call them and ask about them though they are turning them in more like 10-14 days right now.
Speculatively imposing QA generalities on them without knowing anything about their history, processes, or resources is never going to be a productive exercise. Dave "gets it" at this point and will be back with a status and plan as soon as possible. Again, please give them a chance to simply execute on this recall.
|
|
|
|
|
tisar
Jan 31, 2006, 10:47 AM
Post #430 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2004
Posts: 2577
|
Joseph,
I truely hope that Dave knows what you did for him and CCH in the last weeks - and for all the shaken Alien users out there. I hope if CCH is ever looking for a PR Specialist, they hire you!
And this is far from being ironic. Props to you!
- Daniel
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 31, 2006, 11:09 AM
Post #431 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Thanks Daniel, I'm just as concerned as everyone else in this whole affair and simply trying to help keep the dialogue with CCH one of constructive engagement. There's no doubt we can all use the Internet to just rip them up - hell, that's no challenge at all and happens in about every other thread here. From my perspective the real challenge is to try and stay objective while engaging them such that they respond in a constructive way resolving the issues we have with them. If we manage that, then I think we'll be able to say that, as a community, we can use Internet as something other than just another heavy, blunt instrument.
|
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Jan 31, 2006, 8:30 PM
Post #432 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
(This post was edited by the_mitt on Nov 19, 2006, 6:23 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 31, 2006, 10:43 PM
Post #433 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
I just received a letter from Mountain Equipment Co-op.
Dear Member,
according to our records you purchased one or more CCH Alien Cams from Mountain Equipment Co-op. CCH has recently recalled a series of those cams; please see posting below pasted from their website.
Pictures and more information on the recall can found at aliensbycch.com
In reply to: Colorado Custom Hardware, (CCH) has recently completed an investigation and extensive testing to identify and isolate safety issues concerning the brazing on CCH Alien cams. The safety of our customers is our number one priority. Testing has revealed that there was a brazing issue with specific cams made after November 2004. The units to be identified are marked with a small center punch dimple at the base of the round ball where the axle goes through the cable eye. Although few failures have been reported, CCH recommends immediately discontinuing the use of any Aliens with this mark. CCH is recalling the cams with the identifying punch mark. Please return them to CCH for a new replacement unit. You can mail your cams to: Colorado Custom Hardware, Inc ATTN: Brazing Recall 115 E. Lyon St Laramie, WY 82072 If you are not sure if your cams are included in the recall, please contact us at (307)721-9385. We sincerely apologize for this inconvenience and we are doing everything possible to correct it quickly. There will be a photograph on our web site to help to identify the cams that need to be returned. The Web site address: Aliencamsbycch.com Sincerely, Colorado Custom Hardware, Inc 115 E. Lyon St Laramie, WY 82072
Please return any affected Alien cams with this letter to an MEC store near you for a full refund or exchange. You may also send them via insured parcel post mail to the address below (please include your membership number, daytime phone number, and this letter). You have the option of receiving a full refund or using the credit from the return towards new cams We will refund the shipping costs to return the cams to MEC and cover the shipping to send you replacements, should you choose that option
MEC RETURNS
3-13333 Vulcan Way
Richmond, B.C. V6V 1K4
|
|
|
|
|
wings
Jan 31, 2006, 10:49 PM
Post #434 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 283
|
In reply to: We will refund the shipping costs to return the cams to MEC and cover the shipping to send you replacements, should you choose that option
I know some people who slag MEC for various reasons, but this is an example of why I will always look to purchase from them first.
- Seyil
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 31, 2006, 11:44 PM
Post #435 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Skinner, thanks for the post - that's MEC stepping up to being a good retail partner to both climbers and CCH.
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 1, 2006, 12:55 AM
Post #436 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
Wings, take your time and all available information to decide, then do whatever you feel is best. I would never do any bounce testing, especially at my home where conditions are difficult to control. I would be pretty wary to use any of the equipment outside a "trad" situation, where people may aid a little, but should not fall and in any case must not fall heavily. The company has not exactly proved itself reliable, like let's say petzl or black diamond or many other companies do. Your life and your health is the only thing which is irreplaceable.
I have been thinking a lot about this story, although I don't own any aliens. One buys cams for their obvious advantages instead of getting much cheaper nuts or hexes or even pitons; one assumes that stuff is as reliable as an old school piton, that is to say, as reliable as its placement is. Yes, any mechanism that is more complex has more potential to fail; but that additional risk should be pretty negligible, even taking into account the possible user mistakes. I don't think there are many more casualties from the petzl grigri (which personally I hate and don't own or use) - even considering the idiots that exchange the two sides of the rope - than there are casualties from a munter hitch or a figure eight, despite the fact that many parts of the grigri could fail, that a grigri is very hard on the anchors, that the user may make mistakes (and they do... look at the lever brake...) and even considering the fact that climbers using a munter hitch or an 8 are usually more experienced climbers. Now, back to the cams: what is the added failure potential with respect to an old style protection? That is very important in countries like USA where most "sport" routes have no fixed protection. And where people tend to put protection in the same way the fixed protection is put in sport routes (rather than "I am not going to fall, and if in this passage I'm in doubt, I'll put something every meter and perhaps even double it, 'cuz I dont want to die yet"). But the whole topic is not debated a lot. And I'd love to get people's insight.
As far as I'm concerned, I forecast that my future will hold more nuts and hardly any more cams - of course, as always, from excellent brand names that can afford any recall operation, should it -heaven forbid- be necessary, but can't afford damages to their image. That is to say, to my butt.
Daniela
In reply to: At this point, I have many options: 1. Continue using my aliens and ignore the demons in my head. This won't happen as my demons are particularly loud and obnoxious. 2. Return what aliens I can back to the retailers (in this case, return 7 aliens to REI and eat the rest). I don't want to do this because this just punishes REI. 3. Retire all of my aliens. This is economically painful. 4. Find a way to regain faith in my aliens. 5. Sell my aliens. This is an odd option given that I am selling an item which I do not trust, and so the guilt factor would weigh heavily on me if I knew someone else was depending on them with their lives. Option 4 is preferable. However, I don't know how I would accomplish this. Someone mentionned bounce testing. I don't aid so I have no idea how much force is generated in a bounce test. What are other people planning on doing? Any other suggestions? - Seyil |
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 1, 2006, 4:31 PM
Post #437 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: I would never do any bounce testing, especially at my home where conditions are difficult to control. I would be pretty wary to use any of the equipment outside a "trad" situation, where people may aid a little, but should not fall and in any case must not fall heavily.
Daniela,
Not exactly sure why you wouldn't attempt a simple bounce test if you doubted a piece of gear; it isn't particularly difficult to do it. Also not sure exactly what you are trying to say in the rest of the paragraph - maybe you could clarify what you mean by "any of the equipment"...
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 1, 2006, 5:08 PM
Post #438 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
Mistakes that happen on a production line are likely to happen in every production line if all of them work in a similar fashion. My guess is that the sh. hit the fan on the orange ones just because they are bigger and people trust them more and actually fall on them. Keep in mind the event that initiated the recall was a climber falling on one of them - not the producer figuring out something was wrong. Also, if a society cannot handle quality control in normal operation, it has no chance to deal with a relatively massive return, and with all added problem (like people phoning in to insult them, i am sure that happens too), and with nerve wrecked owners and workers. They will replace the dimpled cams with other nondimpled cams (are they more reliable? Likely yes. Are they reliable? Make your own decision about that) as long as they have in stock. When the stock is finished? Who knows what they'll do and how. HAve a look at the other thread "thanks to CCH" and it appears that the mess is already started. I am sure everybody wondered why turnaround time was so quick (when it's a well known fact that in the past it was very long). The answer is I think pretty transparent, they replaced the cams to give an impression of efficiency. What when they finish the stock? You tell me.
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Feb 1, 2006, 5:18 PM
Post #439 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: Mistakes that happen on a production line are likely to happen in every production line if all of them work in a similar fashion. My guess is that the sh. hit the fan on the orange ones just because they are bigger and people trust them more and actually fall on them. Keep in mind the event that initiated the recall was a climber falling on one of them - not the producer figuring out something was wrong. Also, if a society cannot handle quality control in normal operation, it has no chance to deal with a relatively massive return, and with all added problem (like people phoning in to insult them, i am sure that happens too), and with nerve wrecked owners and workers. They will replace the dimpled cams with other nondimpled cams (are they more reliable? Likely yes. Are they reliable? Make your own decision about that) as long as they have in stock. When the stock is finished? Who knows what they'll do and how. HAve a look at the other thread "thanks to CCH" and it appears that the mess is already started. I am sure everybody wondered why turnaround time was so quick (when it's a well known fact that in the past it was very long). The answer is I think pretty transparent, they replaced the cams to give an impression of efficiency. What when they finish the stock? You tell me.
I think you're taking all of this a little too far.
They're replacing the dimpled (outsourced) cams w/ in house cams. Reading your post, I'm not sure you got that point.
The reason for the fast turnaround is likely that they are giving priority to recall customers.
I'll be the first to say that I now trust there manufacturing process less after this. But you sound like a conspiracy theorist.
What's all of that about the stock running out. They didn't inherit thousands of cams from a long lost relative. They are in the business of manufacturing them they are able to replenish their supply by making more.
And finally, if you've at all followed this topic, or CCH service in the past, you'd know that they pretty apparently aren't that worried about efficiency.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 1, 2006, 5:32 PM
Post #440 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Mistakes that happen on a production line are likely to happen in every production line if all of them work in a similar fashion. My guess is that the sh. hit the fan on the orange ones just because they are bigger and people trust them more and actually fall on them. Keep in mind the event that initiated the recall was a climber falling on one of them - not the producer figuring out something was wrong. Also, if a society cannot handle quality control in normal operation, it has no chance to deal with a relatively massive return, and with all added problem (like people phoning in to insult them, i am sure that happens too), and with nerve wrecked owners and workers. They will replace the dimpled cams with other nondimpled cams (are they more reliable? Likely yes. Are they reliable? Make your own decision about that) as long as they have in stock. When the stock is finished? Who knows what they'll do and how. HAve a look at the other thread "thanks to CCH" and it appears that the mess is already started. I am sure everybody wondered why turnaround time was so quick (when it's a well known fact that in the past it was very long). The answer is I think pretty transparent, they replaced the cams to give an impression of efficiency. What when they finish the stock? You tell me.
Daniela,
One would suspect that CCH's logical response might very well be to replace as many recalled cams as possible with like good cams they have in stock. That would allow them to begin addressing the problem as quickly as possible. This is not a surprise, unexpected, or all that notable. As for the recall glitch we saw in the other thread - well, my take would be that while they are awake to all these issues now and working overtime on the recall, cultures and available resources likely don't change overnight so a glitch or two may yet happen. Hopefully anyone not happy with a recall result will immediately call CCH and find out what might have happened. As to what happens when they run out of stock on hand relative to replacing recalled cams, that's not exactly rocket science either - they'll have to either start making them if they've currently stopped in the interim or they'll have to start repairing the ones folks are sending in. That's also not unexpected or a surprise. When they arrive at that crossroads maybe it will take longer to turnaround folks' recalled cams and maybe it won't. Given they're doing an exceptional ten days now I could easily imagine that stretching out as far as three or four weeks. Again, if the cams aren't immediately available what can they or anyone else do but work hard at making them available? At this point I don't know how productive a bunch of speculation about conditions, processes, or resources internal to CCH is really going to be when none of us here work for the company - I would suggest it's better to simply stick to dealing with facts that we have in hand and with new ones as they become available.
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 1, 2006, 6:35 PM
Post #441 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
The whole problem, the whole and entire lack of reliability (not to say outright "danger") comes from the inability of CCH to produce aliens quickly enough. Once upon a time that stuff was manifactured in a very artisanal way by a few people. THOSE aliens I would trust as much as I trust homemade gear made by a fellow climber that does something at the best of their ability and would use those themselves; that is to say, quite alot, I would probably think that a big brand name piece is slightly (not "much") more reliable, but it's certain that the artisanal one has an original design I like and I cant buy elsewhere, and YES sure I'd climb on those.
Now back to the facts. At a point, Aliens became fashionable. Everybody wanted them. Big retailers started carrying them. Pushing to receive bunches of them by the deadline, sending notices about so many pieces backordered and how they were in a hurry to fill the orders. It was impossible to keep producing all of them in the garage. Production was outsorced to incompetent and criminals subcontractors and the management, whom I guess is not stupid, realized this very well and ignored it. A huge problem came out. Now you tell me: if they could not produce quickly, efficiently, and reliably when they were not pressed, are they now going to do so? Are they going now to find the excellent subcontractor that they "could not afford" two years ago? Perhaps. As far as I am concerned, I would not bet my life on that.
|
|
|
|
|
landgolier
Feb 1, 2006, 6:37 PM
Post #442 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 714
|
In reply to: What's all of that about the stock running out. They didn't inherit thousands of cams from a long lost relative. They are in the business of manufacturing them they are able to replenish their supply by making more.
CCH's ability to manufacture more stuff when the supply gets low has proven to be pretty spotty in the past. They never seem to have much stock on hand, and now they've lost a subcontractor and added a step to the manufacturing process. I think it's valid to be worried about them falling behind on producing replacements for the recall.
I was a CCH loyalist and defender up until now, because I'd like to be in their shoes, making great stuff and doing it on their own terms, but if Sanven4's experience with getting the same defective cam mailed back to him with no explanation turns out to be true, I'm going over to the dark side. Like I said in the other thread, this has passed from stoner nonchalantness into the realm of sheer crackhead tendencies. Joseph is a little more loyal than I am I guess, but I'd think any sane person has to eventually reach a limit, and sending a defective unit back to a customer after issuing a recall is mine.
|
|
|
|
|
wings
Feb 1, 2006, 6:47 PM
Post #443 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 283
|
In reply to: and sending a defective unit back to a customer after issuing a recall is mine.
We don't know that the unit sent back is defective. We don't know whether it's been repaired or tested or whatnot.
And really ... that's the problem. WE DON'T KNOW. Not knowing causes doubt. And CCH is doing a piss poor job of assuaging our doubts.
As it stands, we still do not know all of the facts. However, for many people, they know enough to make the right decision for themselves.
- Seyil
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 1, 2006, 7:10 PM
Post #444 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
First off, other than two sets of hybrids, I climb on Metolius cams with a few big BD's thrown in only because Metolius doesn't go big. I am not and never have been a CCH fan or loyalist. In fact I wouldn't have any Aliens at all if Metolius made hybrids. What I am is concerned that we as a sport don't lose yet another manufacturer and that we engage CCH as constructively as possible.
Daniela, I can sympathize your being late to the conversation and wanting to be heard, but so far you are basically rehashing a history, events, conjecture, and the plainly obvious - all of which by and large we've already gone over ad nausem at this point. Again, if we aren't going to engage CCH constructively I miss the point. And given you aren't an Alien customer if you have something that can move things forward in some constructive way great, otherwise I suppose you can keep speculating and venting but I'm not entirely sure to what end.
I can't believe anyone in their right mind expects CCH's culture, processes, and resources to miraculously change overnight because that clearly isn't going to happen. But they are awake and trying to make things right. Does that mean the recall will be flawless? Not very likely. Does that mean that they will be able to service every recall customer in ten days until all the bad cams are returned? Again, pretty unlikely. So if you get realistic about the situation you can see that they are now operating in good faith, they are trying to turnaround cams as fast as they can with what cams they have available, and when those run out they'll either make new ones or repair returned ones as fast as humanly possible. In the immediate term, while they are trying to execute on this recall, what more do you folks think we can actually expect of them?
Return your cams covered by the recall; if you don't get back something that satisfies you call CCH and find out what happened; buy or don't buy Aliens in the future - but please, allow them to get on with it.
Joseph Healy
Portland, Oregon
P.S. I've heard from Dave that they have prepared a press release they will be putting out in the next day or so. Stay tuned...
|
|
|
|
|
landgolier
Feb 1, 2006, 7:13 PM
Post #445 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 714
|
In reply to: In reply to: and sending a defective unit back to a customer after issuing a recall is mine. We don't know that the unit sent back is defective. We don't know whether it's been repaired or tested or whatnot. And really ... that's the problem. WE DON'T KNOW. Not knowing causes doubt. And CCH is doing a piss poor job of assuaging our doubts. As it stands, we still do not know all of the facts. However, for many people, they know enough to make the right decision for themselves. - Seyil
Like I said, the above is conditional on getting the facts. But there are 5 possibilities here:
-Same cam was sent back untouched due to outright idiocy. Pass me the zeroes.
-CCH pull tested the cam and sent it back after it passed. Not acceptable in my book as it was still made under a known bad process, but if that's what they did they should have told the customer. Those metolius ultralights look sweet.
-CCH repaired the cam by melting the braze, cleaning the joint, and rebraising it right. I highly doubt this as cleaning that joint would suck and they'd probably have to redo the trigger wires too, plus then you've got customers who are mad because they got refurbs when others got new, and unless you mark the cam somehow and everybody knows two marks mean repaired you're going to get the some of the same units back if they get sold or traded or bootied. Plus there's still the lack of explanation. I'd buy a set of the smaller new flexcams if I didn't think I'd get them stuck.
-CCH determined the cam wasn't an affected size and just had a ding that looked like the dimple or something unlikely like that. Again, no note. I've always wanted to try ballnutz.
-The story is bunkum. Praise God and pass the hybrids
I'm not trying to add to the speculation, just proving that there's no scenario other than the story being false that makes me want to buy any more aliens.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 1, 2006, 7:20 PM
Post #446 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Like I said, the above is conditional on getting the facts. But there are 5 possibilities here: - Same cam was sent back untouched due to outright idiocy. Pass me the zeroes. - CCH pull tested the cam and sent it back after it passed. Not acceptable in my book as it was still made under a known bad process, but if that's what they did they should have told the customer. Those metolius ultralights look sweet. - CCH repaired the cam by melting the braze, cleaning the joint, and rebraising it right. I highly doubt this as cleaning that joint would suck and they'd probably have to redo the trigger wires too, plus then you've got customers who are mad because they got refurbs when others got new, and unless you mark the cam somehow and everybody knows two marks mean repaired you're going to get the some of the same units back if they get sold or traded or bootied. Plus there's still the lack of explanation. I'd buy a set of the smaller new flexcams if I didn't think I'd get them stuck. - CCH determined the cam wasn't an affected size and just had a ding that looked like the dimple or something unlikely like that. Again, no note. I've always wanted to try ballnutz. - The story is bunkum. Praise God and pass the hybrids I'm not trying to add to the speculation, just proving that there's no scenario other than the story being false that makes me want to buy any more aliens.
You're right, we don't know yet but I have asked CCH to look into it. It is possible that it's just a screwup, but again, the odds are good the recall won't be executed to perfection. So if it's looks to be the exact same dimpled cam you sent in the odds are probably pretty good it is and that it accidentally went straight from the IN to the OUT bin. Chuck it and walk away, call CCH, or send it to me and I'll birddog it.
But forward is the only real option we have at this point...
|
|
|
|
|
bortoletto
Feb 1, 2006, 7:40 PM
Post #447 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2005
Posts: 16
|
I noticed that REI is not selling Aliens. I got two last month and I tried to order more two. No way. Anyone knows if REI started any recall?...strange.
good winds
bortoletto
|
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Feb 1, 2006, 8:03 PM
Post #448 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
(This post was edited by the_mitt on Nov 19, 2006, 6:24 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
redpoint73
Feb 1, 2006, 8:06 PM
Post #449 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2002
Posts: 1717
|
In reply to: I noticed that REI is not selling Aliens. I got two last month and I tried to order more two. No way. Anyone knows if REI started any recall?...strange. good winds bortoletto
Aliens are completely gone from REI's website, and should be pulled from the store shelves. There was a memo that went out to all stores to cease all sales of Aliens, but the letter was vague and did not give details on the problem. No word on a recall yet.
|
|
|
|
|
redpoint73
Feb 1, 2006, 8:09 PM
Post #450 of 522
(70767 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2002
Posts: 1717
|
In reply to: I noticed that REI is not selling Aliens. I got two last month and I tried to order more two. No way. Anyone knows if REI started any recall?...strange. good winds bortoletto
Aliens are completely gone from REI's website, and should be pulled from the store shelves. There was a memo that went out to all stores to cease all sales of Aliens, but the letter was vague and did not give details on the problem. No word on a recall yet.
|
|
|
|
|
redpoint73
Feb 1, 2006, 8:11 PM
Post #451 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 20, 2002
Posts: 1717
|
In reply to: I noticed that REI is not selling Aliens. I got two last month and I tried to order more two. No way. Anyone knows if REI started any recall?...strange. good winds bortoletto
Aliens are completely gone from REI's website, and should be pulled from the store shelves. There was a memo that went out to all stores to cease all sales of Aliens, but the letter was vague and did not give details on the problem. No word on a recall yet.
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Feb 1, 2006, 8:14 PM
Post #452 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: Here is a quick list of the facts: 1. Complaint of poorly manufactured lobes - Not proven but also not addressed by the company. (unsatisfactory) 2. Complaint of failing orange cams - Proven, first address by the company was that it was a hoax. (unsatisfactory) 3. Only after much discussion here and a major buyer proves them unsafe do they issue a recall. (if this forum did not exist would we have seen a recall?? I think not. unsatisfactory) 4. No public apology from CCH to the OP for calling him a fraud. (unsatisfactory) 5. 3 weeks have gone by without any info from CCH. (not abnormal) 6. New complaint of the same recalled cam coming back - Not proven, but if it was then thats not good.
I'd call that a short list of the facts. Total list is about double. Must include that they stated on their website that they'd be issuing a more detailed report on the issue soon, and that they had the wrong contact info up on their website, and that they didn't respond to insano, or attempt to contact him, even after they know about the issue from this site, and that when a recall was announced, it wasn't put up on their page for a while,
I'm sure I'm missing something, but I agree w/ the mitt on this one. While it is commendable to stand by a small climbing company like CCH through some of their fumblings, there comes a point where you have to be a realist about things.
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Feb 1, 2006, 8:17 PM
Post #453 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
In reply to: I noticed that REI is not selling Aliens. I got two last month and I tried to order more two. No way. Anyone knows if REI started any recall?...strange. good winds bortoletto
I returned my bad ones (6 total) to the retailers, not to CCH. Frankly - after some of the stories out there wherein CCH takes 9 months to replace a set of trigger wires, I am very happy to see them turning parts around in a timely fashion. Shocked actually. But it's great to see and hear.
One reason for the fast turn around is that their current big customers (REI) may be refusing shipments so they have the cams on hand to replace them for the individual customers. I think other than that it's all speculation on this board.
When I went to REI to return mine, they had a data sheet which indicated they were returning them to the vendor, and to treat it special, but it is surprising that they haven't done more to support and/or publicize the recall.
the - Mitt makes some good points, but I pretty much concur with Joseph on about every statement he's made so far, and want to thank him again for both getting and posting real facts and information.
To those who no longer trust CCH- (Locker), you might reconsider your position. While it may be true that your original trust was misplaced, I suspect that CCH will be a better company due to this having happened. Testing each cam is one serious indication that is the case.
I've always trusted Metolius 3 cam units. Those things are burly and well made, and have a smaller footprint than an Alien as well, but I plan on using my Aliens moving forward as they are slightly more stable in some placements than the Metolius TCUS, and Metoilius doesn't make offsets.
|
|
|
|
|
landgolier
Feb 1, 2006, 8:37 PM
Post #454 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 714
|
In reply to: You're right, we don't know yet but I have asked CCH to look into it. It is possible that it's just a screwup, but again, the odds are good the recall won't be executed to perfection. So if it's looks to be the exact same dimpled cam you sent in the odds are probably pretty good it is and that it accidentally went straight from the IN to the OUT bin. Chuck it and walk away, call CCH, or send it to me and I'll birddog it. But forward is the only real option we have at this point...
(Just to be clear for anybody reading, it's not my cam in question)
I'm sympathetic to your position here, and while I agree it's important to be constructive, let's also be objective. I want CCH to pull it out, I really do; I know even if they went bust somebody else would scoop up the design and tooling, and the quality control and customer service would probably go way up, but the recent HB offset/DMM-WC goat rodeo shows that even that outcome might not be as good as it sounds. On the other hand, how much should we really be willing to put up with from CCH? They've proven they can't do quality control (twice), can't do customer service, can't keep up with demand, can't do PR, and now it looks like they can't even keep the trash out of the mail.
I'd maybe have a little more patience if they were some quirky little luthier or something and the necks were popping off guitars because they were keeping the glue in the fridge in mayo jars and somebody accidentally grabbed the hellman's during a double shift production push. But I once saw the same kind of thing play out with a small manufacturer of tools in MO. These guys were a lot like CCH, a bunch of thoroughly nice dudes making a living out of a small production facility that stressed handmade ethics and experienced workers over lab coats and laser-guided precision. I saw the place myself, and they swept the floors and oiled the machines themselves and generally maintained a level of artisanship you'd associate with a bygone era. They turned out stuff that, to the naked eye, looked really top-quality and that a lot of people in a certain niche depended on. All was well until one day some guy was using one of their tools to for some legit purpose, with the requisite safety gear on, and the thing just shattered. A big chunk of it shot up under his shop glasses, blinded him for good in that eye, and was on a pretty good trajectory for the gray stuff when it came to a halt. Everybody said, man, what a freak accident, and I don't think even the guy who got hurt wanted see legal action other than getting his medical bills paid, but then the various insurance companies started sniffing around and inquiring into their quality control practices and testing procedures. Turns out they pretty much weren't doing any, didn't have the knowhow to have done it right if they had been doing it, and, sorry as they were for what happened, didn't even really understand that there was any need to do such a thing. The affair put them out of business, which wasn't a good thing for their families or their community. Ultimately, though, I have to believe that the world is a better place for not having stuff with flaws that can maim or kill you even when used correctly and with all due precautions hanging on the wall at the hardware store, even if it was made by honest craftsmen who would never wish anything of the sort on anybody.
Sorry if that was long and expository, but I want you to know where I'm coming from here.
|
|
|
|
|
wings
Feb 1, 2006, 8:46 PM
Post #455 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 283
|
In reply to: I'm sure I'm missing something
The thing that bothers me most:
Let us assume for the moment that every cam that was not subcontracted out is "good". This implies that every "bad" cam came out of the subcontractor.
How do we know, for certain, that every cam that came out of the subcontractor has the dimple? As far as I can tell, this question has not been answered.
If the answer is, "all the dimples were marked by CCH themselves", then if you assume that the quality of work within CCH itself is of the highest quality, then you can gain some measure of confidence.
If the answer is, "the dimples were marked by the subcontractor", then there's a big problem with trust.
There are other issues, of course, but my feeling is that this is one of the key questions which have not been answered.
- Seyil
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 1, 2006, 8:51 PM
Post #456 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Mitt and Bob (et al),
As Bob said, that's a very short list. But given all the facts at hand and the pressure of the recall I have no problem saying that I think you both have somewhat unrealistic expectations of CCH as the company exists today. Hell, Toyota doesn't do a flawless recall let alone a craft shop in crisis. Maybe it's just that I've been climbing since a time when all the gear manufacturers were garages and basements, but these are real people in a small company trying to turn their act around and service their first recall at the same time - they are clearly under stress and they are going to occasionally show it as we all go down the road together. Not many of our industry has graduated to the sleek automated, post-industrial, and on-demand smb's IBM and Microsoft like to portray in their ads. CCH is clearly at the back of the class in that process - and maybe even a bit jaded after years of relentless demand for their product - but they've f#cked up, acknowledged it, and are attempting to move past it. Give them more than a couple of weeks to accomplish all that has landed on them like an avalanche (even if it's one they triggered).
Again - what outcome are you shopping for here? You want them shut down? Don't buy anymore Aliens and talk sh#t about them from here on out and convince as many of your friends as possible to do the same. Want them to stick around and get an act together? Well, trust me, that's what they are trying to do and clubbing them in the middle of it isn't going to contribute to that latter outcome. My advice? Take a deep breath and expect this whole affair to take a few months to play out. Dave will get back to us with a statement of some sort. And given their track record on customer communications to-date it's entirely possible we may have to do a few iterations while they learn on that front as well.
I'm simply operating on my own preference that they stay in business and improve - both of you and everyone else will have to follow their own counsel in the matter as it should be...
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Feb 1, 2006, 9:04 PM
Post #457 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
In reply to: Again - what outcome are you shopping for here? You want them shut down? Don't buy anymore Aliens and talk sh#t about them from here on out and convince as many of your friends as possible to do the same.
That certainly seems to be the preference of many round these parts.
I'm not really sure what purpose most of these continued complaints serve. CCH is obviously a small company of dubious business saavy (read: it's one guy.) If you don't want to do business with CCH, you don't have to.
If people really want answers to their burning question, the best bet seems to be calling up CCH and asking. Because it's fairly obvious they don't check this extremely important website very often.
Although, I can't help but be amused by all the requests that CCH sell the patent to a larger company. Is this the same bunch that is always lamenting the fate of the North Face?
Sell the Alien patent to Vanity Fair, says I!
|
|
|
|
|
landgolier
Feb 1, 2006, 9:24 PM
Post #458 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 714
|
In reply to: Although, I can't help but be amused by all the requests that CCH sell the patent to a larger company. Is this the same bunch that is always lamenting the fate of the North Face? Sell the Alien patent to Vanity Fair, says I!
I don't think anybody necessarily wants that outcome, but it is what's going to happen if they go under. Besides, the difference with the TNF/A5/Anker thing was that the companies made a whole bunch of different stuff and decisions got made about what got made and what got dumped. CCH only makes one thing, if someone were to buy them out or whatever it would be because they wanted to make aliens. But again, look at the HB/DMM situation with the offsets -- total CF.
|
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Feb 1, 2006, 9:28 PM
Post #459 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
(This post was edited by the_mitt on Nov 19, 2006, 6:24 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Feb 1, 2006, 9:32 PM
Post #460 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
In reply to: CCH only makes one thing, if someone were to buy them out or whatever it would be because they wanted to make aliens. But again, look at the HB/DMM situation with the offsets -- total CF.
Exactly. What if someone buys the patent, and then discovers they can't mass produce it at a competitive price? Either we get more handmade, and likely more expensive aliens, or we get no aliens at all.
Although I don't know what the value of the alien patent is, seeing as how it is probably close to expiring. Climb Axe 'Martians' available in a couple years?
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Feb 1, 2006, 9:36 PM
Post #461 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
In reply to: I think that is all anyone is asking. Achieve all of these simple tasks and win me back as a customer. Think about how much more efficient things would go if they were to do these like number 5, Dave would not have to speak to anyone just point people to the website. This all sounds like common sense to me. If they can't do this at the very least then to answer your next question. Yes I want to see them go under. I want to make sure that they don't sell products that will be the cause of peoples deaths. I don't think that those 6 points are too much to ask. Do you?
Hmm, so any company that has some production issues and doesn't follow your little 6 step process, you want to see fail? Well, that's just great.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 1, 2006, 9:46 PM
Post #462 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: In reply to: Mitt and Bob (et al), Again - what outcome are you shopping for here? You want them shut down? Don't buy anymore Aliens and talk sh#t about them from here on out and convince as many of your friends as possible to do the same. Want them to stick around and get an act together? Thats a really good question. Here is my response and I hope Dave reads this. 1. A public apology to insaneo. As their accusation was public. 2. Public acknowledgment of manufacturing, QA, and PR issues. 3. Assurance of a transparent and certified QA system, and when it should be on-line. 4. Assurance that 100% of all cams have been pull tested and marked as being so. Such as a sticker that says tested. 5. Weekly updates on this website or CCH's website until QA process is complete. 6. A full report on the issue, and how they will ensure it will never happen again. I think that is all anyone is asking. Achieve all of these simple tasks and win me back as a customer. Think about how much more efficient things would go if they were to do these like number 5, Dave would not have to speak to anyone just point people to the website. This all sounds like common sense to me. If they can't do this at the very least then to answer your next question. Yes I want to see them go under. I want to make sure that they don't sell products that will be the cause of peoples deaths. I don't think that those 6 points are too much to ask. Do you? Mitt
1. I think that is not unreasonable.
2. A formal consumer recall will essentially do that; to be honest, I'm not sure I want or need a detailed blow by blow of the obvious
3. Transparency to who and what does that mean to you? An ISO9001/2 would be good but could easily take a year or more to achieve.
4. A sticker would be a good marker for their internal QA pull test subprocess; but beyond that we're all climbers, Dave's now awake and knows what's riding on all this, so if he says he's pull testing them now I'll take his word for it.
5. They clearly do not have either the experience, resources, or track record to pull this together in the midst of a crisis. I call this one unreasonable and would not put any more requirement on them beyond that they keep us reasonably informed (and if he wants to win folks back he'll have to learn what that means I suspect).
6. Again, a "full report" is probably not going to happen, but it is reasonable to expect to get a frank statement of what the f#ck happened. A clear statement of what they are going to do to keep it from happening again one would hope would be a no-brainer.
Again, everyone will have to keep their own counsel with regard to how they respond to this whole affair. But I'm again going to say up front that for CCH to get from yesterday's point A to tomorrow's point B is going be a steep learning curve and cultural change for them and it isn't going to happen either overnight or without an occasional two steps forward and one step back. Anyone that has expectations otherwise I think is kidding themselves and should just walk away now....
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Feb 1, 2006, 10:33 PM
Post #463 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: Mitt and Bob (et al), Again - what outcome are you shopping for here? You want them shut down? Don't buy anymore Aliens and talk sh#t about them from here on out and convince as many of your friends as possible to do the same. Want them to stick around and get an act together? Well, trust me, that's what they are trying to do and clubbing them in the middle of it isn't going to contribute to that latter outcome. My advice? Take a deep breath and expect this whole affair to take a few months to play out. Dave will get back to us with a statement of some sort. And given their track record on customer communications to-date it's entirely possible we may have to do a few iterations while they learn on that front as well. I'm simply operating on my own preference that they stay in business and improve - both of you and everyone else will have to follow their own counsel in the matter as it should be...
I am only raising very legitemate concerns that are on my (and many others') minds. I am not 'talking shit" about CCH. I'd love it if they handled everything perfectly. They have made some positive strides in all of this, but definately a few more negative ones.
I'm concerned about the cams I own (sans dimple), and reasonably so. I'd like to see the report they promised weeks ago.
In reply to: Technical Documentation CCH is committed to answering all of your questions concerning this recall, regardless of how technical or specific. We are currently working to provide documentation explaining the reasons behind the recall and what steps we have taken to improve our already stringent quality control measures. Please check back regularly for updates.
Like I said, I want to root for CCH in all of this, but my loyalty has its limits. I'm not going to sit at my computer and make excuse after excuse after excuse for their mistakes. I don't care if they are a super-corporation or a one-man opperation; my expectations as a customer remain the same. We're not talking about faulty airbags here (which likely would never have to be deployed). We're talking about mission critical safety equiptment.
Yes, they are a small company.
Yes, we should give them ample time to respond.
Yes, as climbers we should be supportive of CCH as the recover from all of this.
But most importantly, we should continue to expect the same level of engineering, craftsmanship, customer service, reliability, and safety that we would of anyone else. You slip once, fine. But too many times and its not looking like a random occurence, its looking like a trend.
If you (heavyje) think that any of the information I've expressed a desire to see, or any expectation I laid uppon CCH is unreasonable, please, by all means quote me, and we can talk about that. This isn't talking shit, this is asking for accountability.
-Bob
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Feb 1, 2006, 10:47 PM
Post #464 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: I'd maybe have a little more patience if they were some quirky little luthier or something and the necks were popping off guitars
Hey, I've got a luthier! Sh!t, you mean my soul machine is all funked up too?! :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 1, 2006, 11:04 PM
Post #465 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Bob,
You've been in on these conversations from the beginning and I believe you saw my initial post in the locked recall thread. I was one of the first people to clearly and succinctly call them on all this and I have been on them relentlessly on the here, email, on the phone, via their peers in the industry, and in concert with several engineers - and I've been on it from before the start of this latest round. I have a background in manufacturing systems, am an ISO auditor, and mostly I'm a worried consumer. But the absolute bottom line is that no organization I've worked with - and that's a lot of Fortune 100 manufacturers - none of them, particularly a small craft shop, would be able to respond on the time lines many of you want to see happen and none of them would be doing it online in any but the most guarded and legalistic way. This is a mom and pop - hell, just pop - outfit and it flat out isn't going to happen exactly as some of you seem to insist and envision it must. Most certainly not at the speed you seem to be demanding.
This whole affair essentially is marking a cultural sea-change for these folks and every aspect of their business - selling, sourcing, manufacturing, qa, service, training, communication, shipping, etc. are all going to have to be visited and likely be reworked in some significant way. They are going to have to grow up fast now like the youngest child in a big family who's always gotten by on being cute and adorable and it's going to be a painful iterative process. They are going to go two steps forward and one step back occasionally in every area of the company before they come out the other side - all companies do, big and small. "Accountability" (external) as we'd all like to define it here no doubt will even require a learning curve - that's what the process of getting something like ISO certified is all about - learning new behaviors. Again, anyone not prepared to hang with and give them the time, space, and lattitude it's going to take for them to learn to change should, as I said, turn and run now because it isn't going to necessarily be a clean, quick, or painless ride.
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 1, 2006, 11:15 PM
Post #466 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
"This whole affair essentially is marking a cultural sea-change"
I would rather say the whole affair is making clear to all manifacturers that it is not tolerable to sloppily produce, carelessly market, AND AS IF THAT WASN'T ENOUGH, WILLFULLY SWEEP MANY HINTS OF PROBLEMS UNDER THE RUG, when it's a life-critical piece of equipment.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 1, 2006, 11:24 PM
Post #467 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: "This whole affair essentially is marking a cultural sea-change" I would rather say the whole affair is making clear to all manifacturers that it is not tolerable to sloppily produce, carelessly market, AND AS IF THAT WASN'T ENOUGH, WILLFULLY SWEEP MANY HINTS OF PROBLEMS UNDER THE RUG, when it's a life-critical piece of equipment.
Again, not to be completely harsh and a bummer here (I've been working for about 22 hours straight now) but you are still largely stating the painfully obvious. And besides, all the other manufacturers in our little sporting niche have already done formal recalls and know the drill cold. They are also generally much further down the road in terms of understanding what the various QA paradigms are and how to apply whichever one works best for their operation. I personally have been encouraging the industry to form a trade group with a technical committee that could assist member companies through these types of episodes if they need help and to do peer reviews afterwards. As it is this whole affair has already become a textbook case study for the industry.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Feb 2, 2006, 4:11 AM
Post #468 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
In reply to: "This whole affair essentially is marking a cultural sea-change" I would rather say the whole affair is making clear to all manifacturers that it is not tolerable to sloppily produce, carelessly market, AND AS IF THAT WASN'T ENOUGH, WILLFULLY SWEEP MANY HINTS OF PROBLEMS UNDER THE RUG, when it's a life-critical piece of equipment.
I'm sorry, but get a life. You are responsible for your safety. Not your equipment. Period. The sooner you learn that the better.
CCH fucked up. They know that. They're trying to make it right. You and your whining are not helping in the slightest. I'm very sorry to have to say it, but somebody has to.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 2, 2006, 4:31 AM
Post #469 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
LOL you guys are not far from a cult......
Had any other company produced defective company, it would have taken care of that quickly, and everybody would have demanded that as "the only thing to do"
all reputable companies have recalled stuff for very minor details, like crampons that can have problems under -40C or something, oh, also, petzl recalled a caving headlamp once without no accident report, only the belief it may under certain condition catch fire, recalled it and took care of it! A caving headlamp, important, but hey, lets admit it, not as much as a cam. Companies move their butt after some units (five, eight, ten) have been reported as malfunctioning, and often without any real breakage. But CCH is somewhat in another league, papa's very busy, mama is attending baby, so let the climbers take the toll. If that's life toll, too bad.
Yes there are life critical equipment which is trash, for example it's pretty common in scuba diving, and for the same reason; cults that like to show off the latest gizmo they don't need and can't use and much less evaluate, and the stoopit sharks full of debts that try to get money off them, and sometimes succeed.
Oh, I almost forgot, there's also the Space Shuttle.
By the way I did my homework and my research, and that's why I did not buy Aliens. So I'm not going to buy that the papa managing the business had no hint that something warranted some more investigation; I can only conclude he doesnt give a damn about the life and safety of all of us.
Prove me wrong if you can.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Feb 2, 2006, 4:51 AM
Post #471 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
In reply to: So I'm not going to buy that the papa managing the business had no hint that something warranted some more investigation; I can only conclude he doesnt give a damn about the life and safety of all of us. Prove me wrong if you can.
Prove you wrong? Why should I? Fuck Aliens! Fuck the owner of the company, the workers, the distributors, all of them. I don't know them. I don't care. Why should I care? I care about the fact that they *work* in places where other cams *don't*. And I care about my own climbing. Jesus, you can't be troubled to bounce test a cam? What, you might fall and break a nail? This isn't hopscotch. I'm serious, it really isn't, you could die! If you value your life, don't count on some company that says they follow ISOwhatever guidelines. Stick around, kiddo. You'll see plenty of people get the axe, whether they have the ISOwhatever gear or not. It stinks. It stinks very very bad, but that's part of the game, and there's no hiding from it.
And you say you don't like cams so much now and you're going to rely more on nuts? Uh, yeah great. News flash: they don't work in the same placements, so good luck with that. Of course based on your tone, you already have more than you need. Here's another news flash: buying more gear won't keep you safe, though what's between your ears may.
Okay, I'm done, carry on bashing on whatever gear company displeases you today. Sorry, it but won't make you any more of a climber.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 2, 2006, 4:54 AM
Post #472 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
In reply to: bolts, where someone else is responsible for your safety.
I have no problem with the free market and even less with the freedom of people. I do have problems with false representation. Nowhere and never did anyone say, this is an experimental cam, we did our best, go try it out at the rock; we did our best, but we don't do QA consistently on our products, and actually, our new subcontractor is not outstanding, they're just the best we could afford. Had they said that, or even hinted in the least that it was the case, I'd agree with you.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Feb 2, 2006, 5:11 AM
Post #473 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Laws do not protect people. They punish misdeeds. No laws will keep you from dying, they will just allow your bereaved family to sue.
Of course the gear companies are selling "safety". That's their business model. That's their marketing, their niche strategy, their marketing. But marketing is lies, more so in this case than many. If you can't see through the lies, then that's unfortunate for you. Fact: they're not really selling safety, they're selling tools. You are responsible for your safety. No-one else. Period.
Does it suck if I buy a piece of gear that doesn't perform as advertised? Yup. Whether it's a pair of jeans or a cam. My expectations for the one are no different from the other. I would no more expect the cam to guarantee my safety than I would the jeans. Don't take as gospel a *word* the manufacturer tells you. It's your life on the line, not theirs.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 2, 2006, 5:37 AM
Post #474 of 522
(66059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
Up to a point, I subscribe to your words.
But there is a very different degree in misrepresentation between the statement that a standard climbing carabiner "is safe" (we know that it is not, we even know that aluminum alloys, differently from steel, do not have a "minimum breaking force" such that it will never break, no matter how many times it's pulled, as long as it doesnt reach that force), still, carabiners are pretty much alright, not many casualties are imputable to them when used properly (although a few units every year are), and no one wants to climb with steel carabiners, and pretty large ones too. That's a misrepresentation (I agree with you that it is) which is of a degree very far from
In reply to: " The Silver brazed connections on Aliens are made by experienced ,skilled people who take great care in the quality of the braze. The accusations being made on this site are quite serious . An examination by a certified metallurgical lab on the device in question is necessary in order to prove or disprove the claims made regarding alleged failure of the brazed connection. Without an actual report by a lab we will assume this is a staged hoax. The cable on a 1.5 orange alien will hold over 3500 pounds, far more force than a falling climber could ever generate. When tested on a machine the cable will break ,not pull out of the cable eye. "
In reply to: We took nine units of various sizes and date stamps dating back to the earliest we had in stock which is 0605 for pull testing. Of the nine Aliens tested, three brazes failed and the cable pulled out at below the CCH-stated max strength for that size. The failures were from different sizes and date stamps, and included both Hybrid and regular Aliens. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 2, 2006, 5:57 AM
Post #476 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
Kevin, what you have been doing is invaluable. Keeping cool as very few people would have managed, you have gotten this guys to do as much as it was possible to get them to do. You really do have all of my admiration. And I am sure I'm not the only one to think that.
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Feb 2, 2006, 6:00 AM
Post #477 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
Right on, I'm glad to see they have taken this seriously and are taking steps in the right direction. Now if they'd only make more offsets! :)
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 2, 2006, 7:23 AM
Post #478 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Kevin, what you have been doing is invaluable. Keeping cool as very few people would have managed, you have gotten this guys to do as much as it was possible to get them to do. You really do have all of my admiration. And I am sure I'm not the only one to think that.
Now that on on the otherhand, while also having been said many times in the past, can't be said enough...
|
|
|
|
|
bortoletto
Feb 2, 2006, 9:24 AM
Post #479 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2005
Posts: 16
|
A simple inspection on the gear would be fine. This event for sure was cause by fail process and not for materials fail. Anyway, CCH has to assure that the probability of a fail in Aliens to lead a catastrophic event is extremely improbable (10E-9) like airplanes. How they perform this? Safety Assessment Techniques? Only Quality Control is not sufficient.
What we have to do now?
1-Inspection (mainly the wedding)
2-Report a fail to CCH (much more important)
3-Ask them for findings
have good winds
Borto
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Feb 2, 2006, 12:30 PM
Post #480 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
now we're talking!
Thanks again insano!
|
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Feb 2, 2006, 8:40 PM
Post #481 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
(This post was edited by the_mitt on Nov 19, 2006, 6:25 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 2, 2006, 10:14 PM
Post #482 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
Surely he doesn't come out as a mensch, but I don't care about that, after all he's not anyone I love. Let his family deal with his character and integrity, or lack thereof.
What I care about is that I am sure this avoided a few fatalities, I am sure the toll could easily have been four, five, before someone would have forced this guy to act. We don't know if there have been accidents between the failure report of a year ago and today; I hope the answer is negative, and I hope all the cams out there that have not been produced "perfectly", hold anyway. The very fact that the expansion range is limited by some of the defects limits the available placements and limits the desire of the climber to reach for them, preferring perhaps another one in the rack.
Oh yeah, and I'm sure those people will either outsource to someone reliable, or start telling people that the order won't be able to be filled for whatever time it takes to do it right.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Feb 3, 2006, 2:28 AM
Post #483 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: .... The very fact that the expansion range is limited by some of the defects limits the available placements and limits the desire of the climber to reach for them, preferring perhaps another one in the rack. ....
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 3, 2006, 2:43 AM
Post #484 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
This is very, very difficult to assess, even assuming someone would be willing to do so. Most definitely it can make the difference between a placement that holds and a placement that does not; but it would be possible to argue that the placement is improper and it should be the climber's call not to trust that placement of that specific cam. So while it would be nearly impossible to push the manifacturer into doing extensive testing or a formal recall (even if just precautionary), I do believe that climbers should have not bought such poorly manifactured cams. If the first quality "glitches" had not been encouraged by the market, my guess is that Aliens would have been of decent quality througout the years, they might (but then again might not) have been more rare and more difficult to purchase, but surely not produced with defect after defect after defect till failing on the field (and only plenty of competence in setting up protection and quite a bit of sheer luck have avoided a tragedy).
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 3, 2006, 3:13 AM
Post #485 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: This is very, very difficult to assess, even assuming someone would be willing to do so. Most definitely it can make the difference between a placement that holds and a placement that does not; but it would be possible to argue that the placement is improper and it should be the climber's call not to trust that placement of that specific cam. So while it would be nearly impossible to push the manifacturer into doing extensive testing or a formal recall (even if just precautionary), I do believe that climbers should have not bought such poorly manifactured cams. If the first quality "glitches" had not been encouraged by the market, my guess is that Aliens would have been of decent quality througout the years, they might (but then again might not) have been more rare and more difficult to purchase, but surely not produced with defect after defect after defect till failing on the field (and only plenty of competence in setting up protection and quite a bit of sheer luck have avoided a tragedy).
Daniela,
At this point you seem intent on endless speculation with no shortage of drama. Maybe it's a language thing but again, you are way late to this conversation and it would be far more helpful if you would simply stick to the facts and either provide suggestions that can actually be implemented by us or CCH or, given you aren't even an Alien user, take it elsewhere.
The issue of mis-aligned axle holes has been formally raised both privately and publicly (see the locked Aliens recall notice on the RC home page). The loads held by these mis-aligned cams have been independently both modelled and pull tested. That data has been provided to CCH and they are aware of the problem. They initially disputed there was a problem with them similar to their response with the pulled heads. They now have data to the contrary. This defect, while serious, was produced in limited numbers compared to the bad brazing defect. At the moment the consensus of a number of us that have been working the issue for quite some time has been to give CCH time to deal with the defect that clearly should receive priority - the brazing defect.
CCH has addressed the prevention of this defect by implementing test jigs for each size cam so that one is tested in the jig on each run of cam lobes on the CNC. The mis-aligned axle hole defect will be redressed separately and that is yet another reason everyone with cams covered by the Brazing defect should send them in as soon as possible.
Again, Daniela, the speculation and generalization you keep pursuing in your posts add little value to the conversation or to resolving these issues at this point in the whole episode. Simply put do you have something productive to add?
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Feb 3, 2006, 3:35 AM
Post #486 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: This is very, very difficult to assess, even assuming someone would be willing to do so.
I'm not ragging at you. It just feels like folks who should know better (i.e., CCH) have allowed the expansion range notion to spread without publicly addressing the cam angle issue. Someone correct me if there was a related response by CCH; ... I don't mean the "expansion range" recall itself because I do not think the recall verbage was strong enough unless it was backed by a technical evaluation of the mis-alignment (was there a technical evaluation??).
And unlike some here, I think manufacturers are indeed responsible for keeping significant defects out of their products, especially such defects that are too subtle to be noticed and/or to be properly evaluated by the typical lead climber. Bad brazes and mis-located cam axles are examples.
Bill
Edit: I didn't see Joseph's post below about pull-testing of mis-aligned cams and CCH's having results from those tests.
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 3, 2006, 3:41 AM
Post #487 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
In reply to: you are way late to this conversation
I have followed the whole discussion and in fact I have followed closely the discussion that took place about a year ago, in which a climber that looked honest to me reported a serious malfunction and was bashed by the community. I personally know many other reports of malfunctioning (not failure; but still "red flags") so I was very surprised by the reaction of the board. But it is not my habit to throw around suspicion or to badmouth other people's work without serious reason, so, I shut up. When the present thread was opened, I cannot say I was surprised. But I wrote nothing, because I did not have anything to say, except perhaps "You should have realized that earlier" which, besides being useless and angering people, is a very nasty phrase to say, even when true, so of course I did not.
But now, you are trying to tell people everything's gonnabe alright, everything's gonnabe ok. Seriously, your position is: once the dimpled orange aliens are all removed from circulation, everything is gonnabe ok. It is a position I strongly disagree with. The failure of some dimpled orange aliens below the nominal limit is IMHO the symptom of serious manifacturing problems.
If you, in all honesty, feel you can advise your loved ones to take whoopers on the non-recalled aliens, despite them being different from their own official specifications and so we have at best a very, very indirect evidence that the "new design" is ok; if you honestly feel that way, let me say it again, I urge you to continue advising as you do.
But I, I myself personally, DO NOT feel that way, and you cannot ask me to refrain from saying so.
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 3, 2006, 3:44 AM
Post #488 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
In reply to: you are way late to this conversation
I have followed the whole discussion and in fact I have followed closely the discussion that took place about a year ago, in which a climber that looked honest to me reported a serious malfunction and was bashed by the community. I personally know many other reports of malfunctioning (not failure; but still "red flags") so I was very surprised by the reaction of the board. But it is not my habit to throw around suspicion or to badmouth other people's work without serious reason, so, I shut up. When the present thread was opened, I cannot say I was surprised. But I wrote nothing, because I did not have anything to say, except perhaps "You should have realized that earlier" which, besides being useless and angering people, is a very nasty phrase to say, even when true, so of course I did not.
But now, you are trying to tell people everything's gonnabe alright, everything's gonnabe ok. Seriously, your position is: once the dimpled orange aliens are all removed from circulation, everything is gonnabe ok. It is a position I strongly disagree with. The failure of some dimpled orange aliens below the nominal limit is IMHO the symptom of serious manifacturing problems.
If you, in all honesty, feel you can advise your loved ones to take whoopers on the non-recalled aliens, despite them being different from their own official specifications and so we have at best a very, very indirect evidence that the "new design" is ok; if you honestly feel that way, let me say it again, I urge you to continue advising as you do.
But I, I myself personally, DO NOT feel that way, and you cannot ask me to refrain from saying so.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Feb 3, 2006, 3:54 AM
Post #489 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: The issue of mis-aligned axle holes has been formally raised both privately and publicly ( see the locked Aliens recall notice on the RC home page). The loads held by these mis-aligned cams have been independently both modelled and pull tested. That data has been provided to CCH and they are aware of the problem. They initially disputed there was a problem with similar to their response with the pulled heads. They now have data to the contrary. This defect, while serious, was produced in limited numbers compared to the bad brazing defect. At the moment the consensus of a number of us that have been working the issue for quite some time has been to give CCH time to deal with the defect that clearly should receive priority - the brazing defect.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 3, 2006, 4:00 AM
Post #490 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: But now, you are trying to tell people everything's gonnabe alright, everything's gonnabe ok. Seriously, your position is: once the dimpled orange aliens are all removed from circulation, everything is gonnabe ok.
At no point in any posting here or anywhere else have I made any such assertion.
In reply to: It is a position I strongly disagree with. The failure of some dimpled orange aliens below the nominal limit is IMHO the symptom of serious manifacturing problems.
Again, for about the sixth time, you keep stating, now shouting, what is already both painfully obvious and has been said by me and about a thousand other folks over the past year.
In reply to: If you, in all honesty, feel you can advise your loved ones to take whoopers on the non-recalled aliens, despite them being different from their own official specifications and so we have at best a very, very indirect evidence that the "new design" is ok; if you honestly feel that way, let me say it again, I urge you to continue advising as you do.
Again, at no time in any post have I ever made such comments.
In reply to: But I, I myself personally, DO NOT feel that way, and you cannot ask me to refrain from saying so.
Daniela, what I'm asking you is not to keep endlessly repeating both the obvious and that which has already been said and concluded ad nausem in this and many other threads both here and elsewhere. What I'm asking is that either contribute something constructive to the conversation and the problem or quit spraying.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 3, 2006, 4:11 AM
Post #491 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: In reply to: The issue of mis-aligned axle holes has been formally raised both privately and publicly ( see the locked Aliens recall notice on the RC home page). The loads held by these mis-aligned cams have been independently both modelled and pull tested. That data has been provided to CCH and they are aware of the problem. They initially disputed there was a problem with similar to their response with the pulled heads. They now have data to the contrary. This defect, while serious, was produced in limited numbers compared to the bad brazing defect. At the moment the consensus of a number of us that have been working the issue for quite some time has been to give CCH time to deal with the defect that clearly should receive priority - the brazing defect. Joseph, Was there a discussion or posting somewhere about the pull-testing of mis-aligned cams? If so then point me to it! Else, thanks for the info. Bill
No, that work and discussion has been a backchannel effort by both myself and a couple of folks from the industry and has not been published. It has been presented to CCH but again we don't want that issue distracting them from the tasks they have at hand with the Brazing recall. That is still the consensus at this time among the parties involved.
|
|
|
|
|
danieladaniela
Feb 3, 2006, 4:24 AM
Post #492 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2005
Posts: 71
|
Pardon if I dare, but given that everything's been so painfully obvious for a long time, why did it take at least one failure on the field, for the eggheads to figure out what was going on?
You yourself call "serious" the axle defect, then you say it should not "distract" (LOL) cch from dealing with the other defect (a deadly one), but then you seem to imply that in the interim climbers should keep climbing on those cams; or did I misunderstand you?
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 3, 2006, 4:43 AM
Post #493 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Pardon if I dare, but given that everything's been so painfully obvious for a long time, why did it take at least one failure on the field, for the eggheads to figure out what was going on?
Again, even your verbage here is entirely counter-productive. There were actually at least one other known head pull in 2005 but it wasn't to my knowledge reported either to CCH or online. Fortunately in that case the victim was a dog on flat ground. Because CCH did not pull test cams and the brazing defect was not obvious to the eye it was not discovered by CCH until reported by the Kevin the original poster. And yes, it is quite fortunate no one was injure or killed that we know off as a result.
In reply to: You yourself call "serious" the axle defect, then you say it should not "distract" (LOL) cch from dealing with the other defect (a deadly one), but then you seem to imply that in the interim climbers should keep climbing on those cams; or did I misunderstand you?
Again, your verbage leaves much, much to be desired. No one is explicitly or implicitly suggesting anyone should climb on defective gear from any manufacturer. The misaligned axle hole defect was on a limited number of units, is visually obvious, and given most Alien owners are experienced climbers capable of checking for that defect. As I said the consensus of the group involved has been to let CCH focus their very limited resources on the brazing defect which affects a vastly larger number of units by comparison and represents a far greater objective danger. Again, the issue is one of focus and limited resources. The issue is being addressed, it will simply take longer to deal with in light of the priority of the Brazing recall.
You and other consistently miss the realworld limitations and bandwidth exhibited by most companies within this industry. CCH will deal with the issue and everyone with Aliens, particularly Orange ones should check them for the proper alignment of the axle hole and that they have the specified range.
I'd ask again, do you have something original and constructive to contribute? If not you are really cluttering the thread by simply rehashing these topics again and again.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 3, 2006, 4:45 AM
Post #494 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Pardon if I dare, but given that everything's been so painfully obvious for a long time, why did it take at least one failure on the field, for the eggheads to figure out what was going on?
Again, even your verbage here is entirely counter-productive. There were actually at least one other known head pull in 2005 but it wasn't to my knowledge reported either to CCH or online. Fortunately in that case the victim was a dog on flat ground. Because CCH did not pull test cams and the brazing defect was not obvious to the eye it was not discovered by CCH until reported by the Kevin the original poster. And yes, it is quite fortunate no one was injure or killed that we know off as a result.
In reply to: You yourself call "serious" the axle defect, then you say it should not "distract" (LOL) cch from dealing with the other defect (a deadly one), but then you seem to imply that in the interim climbers should keep climbing on those cams; or did I misunderstand you?
Again, your verbage leaves much, much to be desired. No one is explicitly or implicitly suggesting anyone should climb on defective gear from any manufacturer. The misaligned axle hole defect was on a limited number of units, is visually obvious, and given most Alien owners are experienced climbers capable of checking for that defect the consensus has been to let CCH focus their very limited resources on the brazing defect which affects a vastly larger number of units by comparison and a far greater objective danger. Again, the issue is one of focus and limited resources. The issue is being addressed, it will simply take longer to deal with in light of the priority of the Brazing recall.
You and other consistently miss the realworld limitations and bandwidth exhibited by most companies within this industry. CCH will deal with the issue and everyone with Aliens, particularly Orange ones should inspect them for the proper alignment of the axle hole and that they have the specified range.
I'd ask again, do you have something original and constructive to contribute? If not you are really cluttering the thread by simply rehashing these topics again and again.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 3, 2006, 4:47 AM
Post #495 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Pardon if I dare, but given that everything's been so painfully obvious for a long time, why did it take at least one failure on the field, for the eggheads to figure out what was going on?
Again, even your verbage here is entirely counter-productive. There were actually at least one other known head pull in 2005 but it wasn't to my knowledge reported either to CCH or online. Fortunately in that case the victim was a dog on flat ground. Because CCH did not pull test cams and the brazing defect was not obvious to the eye it was not discovered by CCH until reported by the Kevin the original poster. And yes, it is quite fortunate no one was injure or killed that we know off as a result.
In reply to: You yourself call "serious" the axle defect, then you say it should not "distract" (LOL) cch from dealing with the other defect (a deadly one), but then you seem to imply that in the interim climbers should keep climbing on those cams; or did I misunderstand you?
Again, your verbage leaves much, much to be desired. No one is explicitly or implicitly suggesting anyone should climb on defective gear from any manufacturer. The misaligned axle hole defect was on a limited number of units, is visually obvious, and given most Alien owners are experienced climbers capable of checking for that defect the consensus has been to let CCH focus their very limited resources on the brazing defect which affects a vastly larger number of units by comparison and a far greater objective danger. Again, the issue is one of focus and limited resources. The issue is being addressed, it will simply take longer to deal with in light of the priority of the Brazing recall.
You and other consistently miss the realworld limitations and bandwidth exhibited by most companies within this industry. CCH will deal with the issue and everyone with Aliens, particularly Orange ones should inspect them for the proper alignment of the axle hole and that they have the specified range.
I'd ask again, do you have something original and constructive to contribute? If not you are really cluttering the thread by simply rehashing these topics again and again.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Feb 3, 2006, 5:27 AM
Post #496 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Danieldaniella, now that your eyes have been opened to the fact that gear may fail, no matter how loudly you shout "I have been betrayed! The manufacturers must make it right!" you will not be able to drown out that still small voice whispering in your ear "you will never be safe again". Why can't you drown it out? Why can't the manufacturers make it right? Why won't anyone listen to you? Because the voice is coming from inside your head, not out.
Climbing is not safe. Sometimes gear fails. Sometimes manufacturers screw up. Given this revelation, the fool will scream "give me my safety back!" The wise will watch, listen, file away the information, change their behaviour, and move on.
It is *good* that the problem with CCH cams was brought to light. It is *good* that no-one has been hurt (yet) because of it. It is *good* that CCH has been taking steps to claim responsibility and improve their product. But what each of us should be asking ourselves is: what came to light about *my* safety practices. How does this new information change my assumptions about my *own* best-practices, and how can *I* improve what I do and how I do it, in light of these events. In the end, that's all you control. The fact that you dismissed out of hand the idea of bounce-testing your cams speaks more volumes than all your hand-wringing posts about CCH.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Feb 3, 2006, 5:31 AM
Post #498 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
Thanks cracklover,: there has been some good writing on the last 2 pages, some of which seems to repeat many earlier statements dead on, nice summation.
I wonder if it's time to pull our personalities out of the discussion and let this simmer until some more facts show up?
:deadhorse:
:deadhorse:
:deadhorse:
Not to beat a dead horse further, but danieladaniela, those are emoticons of a dead horse right there.
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Feb 3, 2006, 11:42 AM
Post #499 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
In reply to: There were actually at least one other known head pull in 2005 but it wasn't to my knowledge reported either to CCH or online.
If you are referring to the incident where to poor guy (quietmonk) got flamed to death for even mentioning that an alien could fail. The one where Philbox told him to quit whining about it online, was in fact brought to our attention in this post on
Feb 01, 2005:
In reply to: CCH aliens are dangerous! I was climbing in South Platte last weekend, and I took a short twelve foot fall near the top of the pitch. To my suprise, my new silver alien ripped apart. The cable that is connected to the top part of the cam totally ripped out of place, and the small cables going the cams pulled apart. Needless to say, the placement failed and I fell to my next piece (thankfully, it was only a few feet below!).
original post may be found here:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/....php?p=991628#991628
I admit his choice of thread title may have had much to do with the response. That along with the fact that he never did provide any photos, or if he had in fact ever contacted CCH directly.
Do you know if CCH was contacted or given a chance to examine this cam?
You know.. if we were to totally boycott every car manufacturer that ever had a potentially life threatening defect, i.e.: Pinto's with the exploding gas tank = total Ford boycott.. we'd all be riding bicycles right now. Although that may not necessarily be a bad thing. But somehow we forgive and forget, and move on in spite of the inevitable and subsequent defects.
I'll admit, the original response from CCH had many of us (even the die-hard alien fans) reeling.
But if you look at how long it takes most industries from the time a defect is discovered until the problem is solved and the recall completed.. 6 months to a year is not out of the question.
It has been exactly one month since the "Orange Alien CCH " was brought to light.
|
|
|
|
|
billl7
Feb 3, 2006, 2:38 PM
Post #500 of 522
(65496 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1890
|
In reply to: In reply to: Joseph, Was there a discussion or posting somewhere about the pull-testing of mis-aligned cams? If so then point me to it! Else, thanks for the info. No, that work and discussion has been a backchannel effort by both myself and a couple of folks from the industry and has not been published. It has been presented to CCH but again we don't want that issue distracting them from the tasks they have at hand with the Brazing recall. That is still the consensus at this time among the parties involved.
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 3, 2006, 8:40 PM
Post #501 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Skinner,
My apologies for misspeaking. I meant other than that original contentious post. No, this other one was an Orange Alien used to leash a dog at a crag and after some strenuous goes at it the dog managed to do the same thing and take off...
|
|
|
|
|
landgolier
Feb 3, 2006, 8:52 PM
Post #502 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2005
Posts: 714
|
In reply to: Skinner, My apologies for misspeaking. I meant other than that original contentious post. No, this other one was an Orange Alien used to leash a dog at a crag and after some strenuous goes at it the dog managed to do the same thing and take off...
OK, the fact that that story hasn't been told publicly here before is the real crime, that's f'n hilarious :lol: :lol: :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 3, 2006, 9:17 PM
Post #503 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: OK, the fact that that story hasn't been told publicly here before is the real crime, that's f'n hilarious :lol: :lol: :lol:
That's because we've been trying to corraborate it and to-date haven't and we've been attempting to stick with the facts as much as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
sonyhome
Feb 7, 2006, 9:23 AM
Post #504 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 5, 2005
Posts: 337
|
Grumble Grumble Grumble...
All my new Aliens are stamped 805 and were shipped at the same time from CCH, and looking closely, my ORANGE is dimpled... So is my GREEN one, though the mark is fainter.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=69025
Dimpled Orange and Green Aliens photo
Comparing the brazing of a regular cam to the orange, the orange one is not as fluid. If you've ever soldered, you know what I mean: the solder has not liquefied and melted nicely like the others. However the green one looks clean and fluid.
Here's how they look (in red, the recalled Orange Alien, and Green the normal Alien).
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=69023
The orange dimpled alien
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...p.cgi?Detailed=69024
A normal Alien
I feel like trying a drop test of my set of Alien cams :twisted:. From the failure modes posted, it seems the load doesn't need to be much...
If I understand correctly from the 2 or 3 threads on this problem, the recap would be:
- The recall is now officialy posted on CCH website
- The recall was started by a fall that broke an Orange Alien as shown at the beginning of this thread.
- Recall most likely impacts larger cam models that were contracted out 1.5, 2, 2.5, though smaller cams may fall in the category.
- The dimple is a test mark done by the contractor done to check for metal properties.
- The failure happens at low loads
- All cams bought since Oct-2004 should be checked for the dimple
- There is a non related issue with some Aliens shipepd with mis-drilled axle holes on the lobes, but those are rare and CCH has tested them to be still safe as is, and not recalled
If I'm missing something, correct me... It's because there's been a lot of :deadhorse:, which I skipped :boring: for the more important stuff :wtf:.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 7, 2006, 9:58 AM
Post #505 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: ...the recap would be: - Recall most likely impacts larger cam models that were contracted out 1.5, 2, 2.5, though smaller cams may fall in the category.
In reply to: - The dimple is a test mark done by the contractor done to check for metal properties.
In reply to: - The failure happens at low loads
In reply to: - All cams bought since Oct-2004 should be checked for the dimple
In reply to: - There is a non-related issue with some Aliens shipped with mis-drilled axle holes on the lobes, but those are rare and CCH has tested them to be still safe as is, and not recalled
In reply to: If I'm missing something, correct me...
In reply to: It's because there's been a lot said which I skipped for the more important stuff
First glad to see you're enjoying trad climbing inspite of this sort of glitch and thanks for that pic of the flying Frenchman - I remember that one, and I believe it was another example well-illustrating the wisdom of doubling up on key pieces of pro when sending.
We very appreciate your photos and comments. Please do consider, in an instance like this where you are going to be making a substantial post / contribution, that it may be worth reading through the threads, however painful, before doing so in order to minimize any potential misunderstandings or confusion on the part of others also just arriving.
Thanks again.
Joseph Healy
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 7, 2006, 10:45 AM
Post #506 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: ...the recap would be: - Recall most likely impacts larger cam models that were contracted out 1.5, 2, 2.5, though smaller cams may fall in the category.
In reply to: - The dimple is a test mark done by the contractor done to check for metal properties.
In reply to: - The failure happens at low loads
In reply to: - All cams bought since Oct-2004 should be checked for the dimple
In reply to: - There is a non-related issue with some Aliens shipped with mis-drilled axle holes on the lobes, but those are rare and CCH has tested them to be still safe as is, and not recalled
In reply to: If I'm missing something, correct me...
In reply to: It's because there's been a lot said which I skipped for the more important stuff
First, glad to see you're enjoying trad climbing inspite of this sort of glitch. And second, thanks for that pic of the flying Frenchman - I remember that one, and I believe it was another example well-illustrating the wisdom of doubling up on key pieces of pro when sending.
http://www.rockclimbing.com/...to_show.php?id=57561
We very much appreciate your photos and comments. Please do consider, in an instance like this where you are going to be making a substantial post / contribution, that it may be worth reading through all the threads, however painful, before doing so in order to minimize any potential misunderstandings or confusion on the part of others also just arriving.
Thanks again.
Joseph Healy
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Feb 7, 2006, 3:34 PM
Post #507 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
Thank You for posting the photo's.
They are a great example of how faint the dimple can be. Also the fact that it may not be in the same location as mine were, right on the line where the shaft meets the ball (axle housing).
Was this dimple not originally explained to be some sort of hardness test?
I'm not sure how you would test hardness in this manner but I am also not a metallurgist.
I'm just glad that for whatever reason they chose to identify the sub contractors work.
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Feb 7, 2006, 4:03 PM
Post #508 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
A Rockwell hardness test leaves a dimple but if it's done correctly the area around where the test is done is machined flat. Sometimes a quickie test is done but it's not the right thing to do.
Mal
|
|
|
|
|
altelis
Feb 7, 2006, 5:03 PM
Post #509 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 2168
|
don't mean to clutter up this thread-
but cracklover, your last post was well thought out and if i could rate posts today would definitely get a trophy
|
|
|
|
|
sonyhome
Feb 10, 2006, 7:24 PM
Post #510 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 5, 2005
Posts: 337
|
Thanks for the precisions.
I posted for another reason, beyond showing my dimples:
Looking at the brazing of the orange alien, I see how it could be insufficient. The metal "solder" does not seem to be well absorbed, and has a lumpy look to it.
All the other aliens's "solder" look like it's been absored, and fluxes onto each strand of the wire.
The last note is that the dimpled green alien's brazing does look good. So i wonder if the subcontractor did those following the right process (maybe the size of the stem is smaller so it got enough heat?
I'm sorry for the lack of vocabulary for my descriptions. A brazing dictionary would be welcome, since it's different from actual soldering.
Lastly, some useless ranting:
- I think CCH wil have to demontrate that otherwise their product is safe to bring back the trust, now that a shadow of doubt has been cast by all these negative opinions. For example, a full demo and explanation of how good and bad cams are/should look like and how they behave (showing drop tests). In times of crisis, good honest communication is key. Other companies have gone though that and learned. i recall seeing a TV show about that.
- They have to learn that if the have a customer support email/phone, they have to respond. They have to learn that when people order, they can't just decide to ship whenever, dragging the order with no ETA.
- Besides that I'm surprised that people won't trust the other Aliens. They've been used by tons of climbers, have protected *many* falls, are it for fingers and below, etc. People forget fast... After all not all climbing gear brands have the highest test standards and it still gets bought & used. I recall the three-sigmas being the higer quality control standard, but not all gear is like that, not everything is drop-tested individually... and even then you can still get a defective part OR a poor placement OR the rock can break.
- Why do stores like REI still do not carry CCH anymore now that the recall is clearly understood?
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 10, 2006, 7:53 PM
Post #511 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Thanks for the precisions. I posted for another reason, beyond showing my dimples: Looking at the brazing of the orange alien, I see how it could be insufficient. The metal "solder" does not seem to be well absorbed, and has a lumpy look to it. All the other aliens's "solder" look like it's been absored, and fluxes onto each strand of the wire. The last note is that the dimpled green alien's brazing does look good. So i wonder if the subcontractor did those following the right process (maybe the size of the stem is smaller so it got enough heat? I'm sorry for the lack of vocabulary for my descriptions. A brazing dictionary would be welcome, since it's different from actual soldering.
No problem Sonyhome. The general issue with the brazing is that there is no way to visually tell what cams are affected by looking at the brazing visible on the cam. Appearance, in this case, has very little to do with the actuall holding power of the braze.
In reply to: - Why do stores like REI still do not carry CCH anymore now that the recall is clearly understood?
Some retailers have chosen to pull them while this business gets sorted out. I'm sure sales will resume once it is resolved to everyone's satisfaction.
|
|
|
|
|
philbox
Moderator
Feb 12, 2006, 3:02 AM
Post #512 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2002
Posts: 13105
|
A huge thank you to healyje for keeping the discussion focused on the issues. The climbing community owes you a deep debt of gratitude mate.
|
|
|
|
|
the_mitt
Feb 12, 2006, 4:30 AM
Post #513 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Posts: 279
|
(This post was edited by the_mitt on Nov 19, 2006, 6:34 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
csgambill
Feb 12, 2006, 4:47 AM
Post #514 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2004
Posts: 607
|
In reply to: I don't think anyone has been absolutely unreasonable during the many discussions about CCH. I believe the majority of the community has been constructive and not just defamatory. I think that RC'ers should pat themselves on the back for identifying a problem and encouraging a manufacturer to solve the problem (Joseph taking a leading role). Hopefully CCH will see that there are many people out there rooting for them and change their ways to become the success story that they were several years ago. I look at these discussions as being positive for climbing as a whole. Mitt
I definitely agree. My initial reaction may have been slightly different than CCH's but remember that this is a blog site where 99% of everything said isn't worth it's weight in feces. I'm somewhat suprised that CCH made any response on this site. Although CCH really should change the paragraph on their website stating they don't use outside contractors:
CCH Website:
In reply to: Quality control. All machined parts are manufactured in our shop with modern computer numeric controlled equipment. This allows us to control the manufacturing processes from start to finish, eliminating possible errors from outside contractors.
:roll:
Other than that minor issue, I have no qualms.
Cheers kids!
|
|
|
|
|
wings
Feb 14, 2006, 5:42 PM
Post #515 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 283
|
For what it's worth ...
I bounce tested the aliens I have (haven't received my replacement butterscotch yet) and none of them broke apart.
I feel a little better about them ...
- Seyil
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Feb 14, 2006, 6:01 PM
Post #516 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
Just an interesting side note:
While returning 2 more dimpled aliens at MEC, I was talking to one of the staff who told me that he took a 40' whipper on a dimpled alien which held.
There is a picture of it on page 67 of "Alpinist 12"
captioned:
J.C. Dubeau coming of off pitch 5 (5.10b)
I guess that would be considered a successful test :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 14, 2006, 6:05 PM
Post #517 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Just an interesting side note: While returning 2 more dimpled aliens at MEC, I was talking to one of the staff who told me that he took a 40' whipper on a dimpled alien which held. There is a picture of it on page 67 of "Alpinist 12" captioned: J.C. Dubeau coming of off pitch 5 (5.10b) I guess that would be considered a successful test :wink:
Yikes - that's just plain too nasty for words...! Really lucky we didn't lose him. :angel:
|
|
|
|
|
clayman
Apr 19, 2006, 5:15 PM
Post #518 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2004
Posts: 296
|
Just wondering if Dave has published the outside metallurgical test report that he said would back in Jan/Feb.
|
|
|
|
|
insainio
Apr 19, 2006, 5:33 PM
Post #519 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 46
|
In reply to: Just wondering if Dave has published the outside metallurgical test report that he said would back in Jan/Feb.
No, he hasn't. But as of yesterday, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a notice. It can be viewed on their website and on the CCH website.
Here is a link.
http://www.cpsc.gov/.../prhtml06/06141.html
Nothing we already didn't know.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Apr 19, 2006, 8:05 PM
Post #520 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
In reply to: In reply to: Just wondering if Dave has published the outside metallurgical test report that he said would back in Jan/Feb. No, he hasn't. But as of yesterday, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a notice. It can be viewed on their website and on the CCH website. ....
Wow, 4 months. That's certainly moving at the speed of E-government.
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Apr 19, 2006, 8:12 PM
Post #521 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
In reply to: In reply to: No, he hasn't. But as of yesterday, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission issued a notice. It can be viewed on their website and on the CCH website. .... Wow, 4 months. That's certainly moving at the speed of E-government.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Apr 20, 2006, 9:54 AM
Post #522 of 522
(67537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
I suspect the slow velocity of the official recall was as much a matter of CCH coming up to speed on the process as it was the Feds being slow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
