Forums: Climbing Information: The Lab:
link cam broken when fallen on
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for The Lab

Premier Sponsor:

 


VertFlirt


Apr 16, 2012, 5:34 PM
Post #1 of 161 (8703 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 19, 2007
Posts: 27

link cam broken when fallen on
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

i hear there have been a few reports of link cams braking...

here is another one.
in skaha last week my buddy fell about 5-8 feet onto a link cam, it broke and he hit the deck.
-it was the yellow link cam
-one of the inner lobes broke at the pivot point closest to the head/stem of the cam.
-i cannot speak for how well the cam was placed, or what direction it was placed in, it was my first time climbing with him and he didnt remember much other then a yellow camalot would have also fit, therefore the link was not cammed on the smaller lobes..
i recommend that people dont use these cams.
cheers


shotwell


Apr 16, 2012, 5:59 PM
Post #2 of 161 (8677 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (12 ratings)  
Can't Post

VertFlirt wrote:
i hear there have been a few reports of link cams braking...

here is another one.
in skaha last week my buddy fell about 5-8 feet onto a link cam, it broke and he hit the deck.
-it was the yellow link cam
-one of the inner lobes broke at the pivot point closest to the head/stem of the cam.
-i cannot speak for how well the cam was placed, or what direction it was placed in, it was my first time climbing with him and he didnt remember much other then a yellow camalot would have also fit, therefore the link was not cammed on the smaller lobes..
i recommend that people dont use these cams.
cheers

Doing a simple search would show you that there are known failure modes for the Link Cam. If you're not aware of the potential failure modes for all of your climbing gear (which ALL gear has), you probably need to do some more research.

I understand that you weren't the person who fell on the cam, but it does seem like the neither you nor the owner were aware of the proper and improper usage of the device. If the piece was placed in a known failure mode (i.e. pivoting when loaded) this accident is equivalent to holding down the cam on a GriGri. User error. Regardless, Omega Pacific should be contacted to make sure that this breakage is consistent with the known failure modes and not a defect.

As far as your recommendation goes? I recommend you learn how to properly assess accident information or take up a different activity. Harsh as that statement is, you clearly don't understand how to properly assess what can and does go wrong in climbing. In this case, you have none of the information required to figure out how to protect yourself in the future. Your 'solution' is to not use a piece of gear you don't understand. Here's news for you though; climbing gear manufacturer's will continue to innovate. You'll still fail to learn how to use new equipment and experience equipment failure you could have been aware of.

The situation I describe is even mentioned on the main advertising page for the Link Cam: http://www.omegapac.com/...oducts_linkcams.html


healyje


Apr 16, 2012, 6:59 PM
Post #3 of 161 (8644 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

Link Cams aren't a 'regular' or 'normal' cam - if you attempt to use it the same way as one, or if you don't understand the limitations of the device, you either shouldn't be using it or you are going to be hurt sooner or later.


notapplicable


Apr 16, 2012, 8:07 PM
Post #4 of 161 (8594 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17763

Re: [shotwell] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

shotwell wrote:
VertFlirt wrote:
i hear there have been a few reports of link cams braking...

here is another one.
in skaha last week my buddy fell about 5-8 feet onto a link cam, it broke and he hit the deck.
-it was the yellow link cam
-one of the inner lobes broke at the pivot point closest to the head/stem of the cam.
-i cannot speak for how well the cam was placed, or what direction it was placed in, it was my first time climbing with him and he didnt remember much other then a yellow camalot would have also fit, therefore the link was not cammed on the smaller lobes..
i recommend that people dont use these cams.
cheers

Doing a simple search would show you that there are known failure modes for the Link Cam. If you're not aware of the potential failure modes for all of your climbing gear (which ALL gear has), you probably need to do some more research.

I understand that you weren't the person who fell on the cam, but it does seem like the neither you nor the owner were aware of the proper and improper usage of the device. If the piece was placed in a known failure mode (i.e. pivoting when loaded) this accident is equivalent to holding down the cam on a GriGri. User error. Regardless, Omega Pacific should be contacted to make sure that this breakage is consistent with the known failure modes and not a defect.

As far as your recommendation goes? I recommend you learn how to properly assess accident information or take up a different activity. Harsh as that statement is, you clearly don't understand how to properly assess what can and does go wrong in climbing. In this case, you have none of the information required to figure out how to protect yourself in the future. Your 'solution' is to not use a piece of gear you don't understand. Here's news for you though; climbing gear manufacturer's will continue to innovate. You'll still fail to learn how to use new equipment and experience equipment failure you could have been aware of.

The situation I describe is even mentioned on the main advertising page for the Link Cam: http://www.omegapac.com/...oducts_linkcams.html

Very well said.


bearbreeder


Apr 16, 2012, 9:20 PM
Post #5 of 161 (8561 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

ive fallen on all my 4 links ... ive fallen or had people fall on my purple link 20+ times above the gear .. every time ive placed the cam in the direction of the pull as much as possible .. its held every time so far

who knows ... i might die ... but i try not to rely exclusively on a single piece of pro ... and i try to put a draw on my links or any other cam that im worried about walking ...

Tongue


VertFlirt


Apr 16, 2012, 11:36 PM
Post #6 of 161 (8501 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 19, 2007
Posts: 27

Re: [shotwell] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

hello
i have lost faith in these cams. my opinion is they have too many moving parts, witch makes them weaker.

i would like every climber to be aware that these cams do brake under special conditions, thats y im posting.

please note i did mention i cant speak for how the cam was placed, or what DIRECTION it was placed in...

my recomendation is based on my opinion, perhaps a little rash, but not everyone has to follow my recomendations.

it was a vertical crack, i dont know if the cam was placed with a horizontal stem, that is very possible.

an honest question, how many ppl have heard of any other cams braking under these circumstances???

im really not interested in a pissing match about how much i/you know about gear and proper usage, i just feel these cams are weak, agian thats just my opinion


jt512


Apr 16, 2012, 11:50 PM
Post #7 of 161 (8493 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21890

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (7 ratings)  
Can't Post

VertFlirt wrote:
hello
i have lost faith in these cams. my opinion is they have too many moving parts, witch makes them weaker.

i would like every climber to be aware that these cams do brake under special conditions, thats y im posting.

please note i did mention i cant speak for how the cam was placed, or what DIRECTION it was placed in...

my recomendation is based on my opinion, perhaps a little rash, but not everyone has to follow my recomendations.

it was a vertical crack, i dont know if the cam was placed with a horizontal stem, that is very possible.

an honest question, how many ppl have heard of any other cams braking under these circumstances???

im really not interested in a pissing match about how much i/you know about gear and proper usage, i just feel these cams are weak, agian thats just my opinion

Learn to write like a grown-up.

*plonk*


healyje


Apr 17, 2012, 12:50 AM
Post #8 of 161 (8470 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

VertFlirt wrote:
...how many ppl have heard of any other cams br[e]aking under these circumstances

Which part of - 'these aren't like "any other cams"' didn't you understand?

Making a judgment to not use these cams is no better than a judgment to use them when either is made without bothering to understand the trade-offs involved with such an unusual design.


USnavy


Apr 17, 2012, 3:45 AM
Post #9 of 161 (8438 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2658

Re: [] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (6 ratings)  
Can't Post

I have to agree with VertFlirt to some extent. I have also had rather bad luck with the Link Cams. I have never had one break, but I have had them pull a number of times in seemingly solid placements, and I am aware of the risks involved in sideways loading and the like. Two of my partners, who are 5.12 trad climbers, complain about the same issues I complain about regarding them. They just dont feel that bomber. Whenever I place a Link Cam and yank on the stem, they always seem to slip a bit before they grab. I do not have that issue with any other brand of cams. The more experienced of the two climbers I referenced above took a big fall on the Zodiac of El Cap because the .5 Link Cam pulled on body weight in a no-brainier C1 placement. The only time I really use them anymore is on aid when I need to leap frog a cam up a C1 crack or to build an anchor. I dont really use them anymore for lead protection unless I am completely out of other options.


(This post was edited by USnavy on Apr 17, 2012, 3:52 AM)


healyje


Apr 17, 2012, 4:47 AM
Post #10 of 161 (8421 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [USnavy] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

In reply to:
I do not have that issue with any other brand of cams.

And again I repeat - they aren't like any other brand of cams.

And even among 5.12 climbers really sound judgment around placing gear is still something that runs way under 50% so that doesn't tell me much. If you have trouble placing them then you probably shouldn't be using them - stick with conventional cams.


guangzhou


Apr 17, 2012, 4:57 AM
Post #11 of 161 (8410 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 26, 2004
Posts: 3389

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

I only have two Link Cams, fallen on both several time and never had an issue. I have to agree, they are not like other cams.

I broke a Number 3 Camelot once, kicked the placement when I climbed passed, did a move so I could place a new piece and fell in the process.

When I kicked the Camelot, it pivoted horizontally, when I fell, it didn't pivot back, instead the cams collapsed. A nut a body length below caught me. I still use Camelots because I know it was the placement of the cam, after kicking it, not the cam.


Partner j_ung


Apr 17, 2012, 4:59 AM
Post #12 of 161 (8409 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18687

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

VertFlirt wrote:
i hear there have been a few reports of link cams braking...

here is another one.
in skaha last week my buddy fell about 5-8 feet onto a link cam, it broke and he hit the deck.
-it was the yellow link cam
-one of the inner lobes broke at the pivot point closest to the head/stem of the cam.
-i cannot speak for how well the cam was placed, or what direction it was placed in, it was my first time climbing with him and he didnt remember much other then a yellow camalot would have also fit, therefore the link was not cammed on the smaller lobes..
i recommend that people dont use these cams.
cheers

I think you're making a wise choice. As mentioned, Link Cams aren't a normal piece of gear, and shouldn't be treated as such. If you feel you don't want to accept the responsibility that comes with using them, then don't. Plain and simple.

I also recommend that people who don't understand them find another cam to rack.


patto


Apr 17, 2012, 5:36 AM
Post #13 of 161 (8390 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [j_ung] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I understand the limitations of link cams and consequently I have no desire to own them or climb with them.

They are a cam with exceptional range and if that is what you need or desire then nothing else comes close.

I, like others, do object to the total dismissal of them by others when they fail from misuse.


sungam


Apr 17, 2012, 5:38 AM
Post #14 of 161 (8388 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26571

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (6 ratings)  
Can't Post

What everyone is saying is correct. Link cams aren't normal gear, and can't be disposed of like normal gear. They are more like batteries - they have to be destroyed in a special way by a qualified individual.

Luckily, I am once such individual. So if you just mail all your links cams straight over to me, I'll make sure they get taken care of correctly.


dynosore


Apr 17, 2012, 7:00 AM
Post #15 of 161 (8339 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1760

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

VertFlirt wrote:
i hear there have been a few reports of link cams braking...

here is another one.
in skaha last week my buddy fell about 5-8 feet onto a link cam, it broke and he hit the deck.
-it was the yellow link cam
-one of the inner lobes broke at the pivot point closest to the head/stem of the cam.
-i cannot speak for how well the cam was placed, or what direction it was placed in, it was my first time climbing with him and he didnt remember much other then a yellow camalot would have also fit, therefore the link was not cammed on the smaller lobes..
i recommend that people dont use these cams.
cheers

Your post reminds me...I cannot recommend ATC style devices. My friend "no hands" Stan was belaying me and dropped me with one of these. That's never happened when he uses a grigri. Therefore, ATC = bad, grigri = good, and there cannot be any other factor involved that I'm missing......


marc801


Apr 17, 2012, 7:19 AM
Post #16 of 161 (8327 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2729

Re: [USnavy] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

USnavy wrote:
The more experienced of the two climbers I referenced above took a big fall on the Zodiac of El Cap because the .5 Link Cam pulled on body weight in a no-brainier C1 placement.
Hearsay, thus irrelevant.


bill413


Apr 17, 2012, 7:49 AM
Post #17 of 161 (8296 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 19, 2004
Posts: 5674

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

VertFlirt wrote:
hello
i have lost faith in these cams.

Sufficient reason for you not to use them. If you don't trust the gear you're on, you really shouldn't climb on it.


caughtinside


Apr 17, 2012, 8:48 AM
Post #18 of 161 (8243 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30369

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (10 ratings)  
Can't Post

I have to say, some of you guys are pretty harsh on this guy who is reporting a link cam breakage.

fact is, if you see one break it will destroy your confidence in these things. The limitations of the pieces are so dramatic as to make them nearly worthless.

You think you always place your cams so they never pivot? Yeah, you're wrong. I broke one when the cam arm hung up on a small crystal.

All those statements in the legalese attached to the Links when new weren't there initially. These cams were aggressively marketed as 'the cure for panic' and only after guys started hitting the ground and the cams frequently broke. THere have been more Link cam failures than alien failures.

Personally, it's hard to believe that links are still made and sold when they continue to be 'improperly used' as some of you guys like to put it.

Its too bad because Omega is a generally good company, but I think they are just too committed to the Link.

vertflirt, thanks for posting. I think it is important to get this info out there.


shotwell


Apr 17, 2012, 9:06 AM
Post #19 of 161 (8227 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [caughtinside] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
I have to say, some of you guys are pretty harsh on this guy who is reporting a link cam breakage.

fact is, if you see one break it will destroy your confidence in these things. The limitations of the pieces are so dramatic as to make them nearly worthless.

You think you always place your cams so they never pivot? Yeah, you're wrong. I broke one when the cam arm hung up on a small crystal.

All those statements in the legalese attached to the Links when new weren't there initially. These cams were aggressively marketed as 'the cure for panic' and only after guys started hitting the ground and the cams frequently broke. THere have been more Link cam failures than alien failures.

Personally, it's hard to believe that links are still made and sold when they continue to be 'improperly used' as some of you guys like to put it.

Its too bad because Omega is a generally good company, but I think they are just too committed to the Link.

vertflirt, thanks for posting. I think it is important to get this info out there.

Actually, I don't use Link Cams either. Mainly because I know that I'll place them in an orientation that ends in a meat bomb.

That being said, I disagree with the OP making a blanket recommendation that people shouldn't use these cams. If you're comfortable with the limitations of the device, you should. I ripped him because it seemed he and his partner were taken totally by surprise by these limitations.

As I said to the OP, all gear has these limitations. When 'cleaning up the mess' simply involves picking up the broken pieces and some bruises, no big deal. When it involves picking up a broken human, it matters. I was harsh because all climbers need to be fully aware of the proper and improper use of equipment. The consequences are too great, and in this case the information is readily available.

I remember the initial series of breakages, before Omega even knew about this failure mode. I made the decision at that time not to use the Link Cam based on a clear understanding of how and why they break. I didn't need to see one break to lose faith in it, I knew it wouldn't work for my climbing.

All this said, I also remember a tragic accident involving Cinch misuse. Because I didn't understand WHY this accident happened I went out and bought a Cinch. I practiced with it, learned its limitations, and figured out its failure modes. I don't use the Cinch anymore, as I found it didn't match well with my climbing or belaying style. However, at least I understand what can go wrong with it.

The same holds true for a GriGri, an ATC, any cam, a nut, a carabiner, etc. Everything can fail. Knowing when it might helps me make the choices I do about what gear to purchase and how I use it.

I don't think I'm immune to accidents despite making every effort to learn about my equipment. There may come a day that I discover a new failure mode for something I use. I might make a mistake. I hope that never happens, but I've accepted the consequences of my actions and decision making processes.

Also, this information is out there. I linked the main product page for the Link Cam up thread. It tells you specifically that you will break a Link Cam that pivots. Again, I don't use them because I don't think my real world climbing will avoid all situations where the cams might pivot. If you understand how and why they fail you can make your own decisions. That was my only point.


bearbreeder


Apr 17, 2012, 9:10 AM
Post #20 of 161 (8219 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [caughtinside] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

i see more reports of blown metollius 0 and 00 cams than links ...

who knows ... maybe they werent "placed" properly, maybe its the limitations of the gear ... at least one person however didnt even fall on it ...

http://www.mountainproject.com/...n-cam-stop/107129489
i personally blew out a purple TCU 0 cam in what i thought was a good placement ... the cam stops inverted and the cam was unusable

im not running around saying they are "unsafe" ... no gear is perfectly safe



i will say this ... my purple link cam is my most fallen on cam ... and i havent died yet ...

if you want to be a "safe" (whatever that is) trad climber, dont depend on a single piece of gear unless you have no choice ... as the gear can pull, the rock can break, etc ...


(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Apr 17, 2012, 9:12 AM)


caughtinside


Apr 17, 2012, 10:00 AM
Post #21 of 161 (8180 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30369

Re: [shotwell] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

shotwell wrote:
the OP making a blanket recommendation that people shouldn't use these cams.

I am comfortable with that recommendation.

You blew a lot of hot air up there about all sorts of nonsense but the cams just have too many limitations. You can't do this. You can't do that. If only trad climbing were so straightforward.


caughtinside


Apr 17, 2012, 10:06 AM
Post #22 of 161 (8173 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30369

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
i see more reports of blown metollius 0 and 00 cams than links ...

who knows ... maybe they werent "placed" properly, maybe its the limitations of the gear ... at least one person however didnt even fall on it ...

http://www.mountainproject.com/...n-cam-stop/107129489
i personally blew out a purple TCU 0 cam in what i thought was a good placement ... the cam stops inverted and the cam was unusable

im not running around saying they are "unsafe" ... no gear is perfectly safe



i will say this ... my purple link cam is my most fallen on cam ... and i havent died yet ...

if you want to be a "safe" (whatever that is) trad climber, dont depend on a single piece of gear unless you have no choice ... as the gear can pull, the rock can break, etc ...

That's nice. I think Metolius was foolish to put cam stops on those things anyway. If they aren't full strength what is the point? The old ones don't have cam stops... because they are worthless.

Glad to hear your Link is catching your falls. I hope it stays that way. This Link cam caught zero falls.



bearbreeder


Apr 17, 2012, 10:25 AM
Post #23 of 161 (8156 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [caughtinside] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

what i do find interesting is that REI is still selling them and MEC up here is carrying them now ...

maybe its all gumbies buying them ... maybe no one ever falls on em ...

but i find it most interesting that the 2 retailers in US and canada best known for their no questions asked warranty is willing to carry em ... and live with all the possible returns ...


jt512


Apr 17, 2012, 10:44 AM
Post #24 of 161 (8140 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21890

Re: [caughtinside] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
i see more reports of blown metollius 0 and 00 cams than links ...

who knows ... maybe they werent "placed" properly ...

i personally blew out a purple TCU 0 cam in what i thought was a good placement ... the cam stops inverted and the cam was unusable

Then you thought wrong. The cam was placed improperly.

Jay


bearbreeder


Apr 17, 2012, 10:51 AM
Post #25 of 161 (8131 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [jt512] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

blah blah blah .. im jt512 ... i can tell gear placement over the internet Tongue

theres someone on the MP post that supposedly never weight a purple mastercam ... and the cam stops broke ...

perhaps youd care to tell him he cant place gear properly ... he likely climbs more trad than both of us combined ...


(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Apr 17, 2012, 10:55 AM)


chadnsc


Apr 17, 2012, 11:09 AM
Post #26 of 161 (2861 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
... he likely climbs more trad than both of us combined ...

That's not too hard as JT is a sport climber and you're just a poser who likes to talk big on the internet.

Hell I bet I climb more trad than you do bearbutter. Crazy


bearbreeder


Apr 17, 2012, 11:19 AM
Post #27 of 161 (2853 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [chadnsc] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

thats a bet youd likely lose Wink

each of these were taken on a different day this past week in squamish and skaha ... all of my partners n my iphone

perhaps youd care to post up what you did the last week Tongue












chadnsc


Apr 17, 2012, 11:27 AM
Post #28 of 161 (2844 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

Sure . . . .

Dislocation Overhang
The Bulge
Corner Geometry
The Flake
Bionic Finger Cr.....


Oh you want pictures; sorry I was too busy climbing to take pictures to show off that I climb.


bearbreeder


Apr 17, 2012, 11:30 AM
Post #29 of 161 (2841 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [chadnsc] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

blah blah blah ....5 days out doing trad last week ... wow mucho impressive chadstah Wink

no pics ... well no problem ... i believe you Tongue

notice that i take pics of my partners, not myself generally ... its worth more to them than to me ... especially if they dont climb as frequently


what this has to do with broken cams i have no idea ... but it does have everything to do with RC flame wars Shocked


(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Apr 17, 2012, 11:31 AM)


chadnsc


Apr 17, 2012, 1:01 PM
Post #30 of 161 (2798 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

You're the one that brought it up bearbutter so feel free to flame away.


bearbreeder


Apr 17, 2012, 1:06 PM
Post #31 of 161 (2794 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [chadnsc] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

perhaps youd like to share yr experiences with falling on link cams Wink


bill413


Apr 17, 2012, 1:24 PM
Post #32 of 161 (2780 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 19, 2004
Posts: 5674

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
i personally blew out a purple TCU 0 cam in what i thought was a good placement ... the cam stops inverted and the cam was unusable

bearbreeder wrote:
blah blah blah .. im jt512 ... i can tell gear placement over the internet Tongue

theres someone on the MP post that supposedly never weight a purple mastercam ... and the cam stops broke ...

perhaps youd care to tell him he cant place gear properly ... he likely climbs more trad than both of us combined ...

If the cam blew out with inverted lobes it was not a good placement. A good placement does not fail.


bearbreeder


Apr 17, 2012, 2:40 PM
Post #33 of 161 (2754 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [bill413] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

sure it can ... you can exceed the rating of the gear ...

there is also the minor possibility of a defect

the rock can break ...

etc ...

notice how i used the word "thought" Wink


patto


Apr 17, 2012, 11:11 PM
Post #34 of 161 (2702 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
sure it can ... you can exceed the rating of the gear ...

In which case the GEAR would fail not the placement.

Cams fail by stem failure most commonly. They can also fail by the axle or lobes bending severely.

If a cam comes out with broken unrated cam stops then the PLACEMENT failed not the cam.


bearbreeder


Apr 17, 2012, 11:39 PM
Post #35 of 161 (2696 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

one cam stop was behind the other .. they werent actually broken ...



you can argue failure mode all you want .. but when yr placing a purple TCU at an 11- crux on what aint the best stance ... im not arrogant enough to say the placement didnt shift slightly or was absolutely perfect, the lobes however were cammed properly when it was placed ... as someone who falls on TCUs often, im sure you yourself know that even a mm or two here or there in a crack on a 0 or 00 TCU can be an issue ... im sure you can hike up that climb much better than me of course

perhaps all those other blown cams 0 and 00 on the referenced MP page are from "improper" placements ... interesting that you dont hear about this issue too much with other micro cams

regardless of the RC "experts" ... metollius now has the cam, and theyre the ones that can best judge what happened ... Wink

im not going off screaming about TCUs being unsafe naturally unlike some people and link cams here ...

let me ask a simple question ... how many people actually own and use link cams in this discussion, and how many of those have fallen on them a decent number of times Tongue


(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Apr 17, 2012, 11:42 PM)


guangzhou


Apr 18, 2012, 12:30 AM
Post #36 of 161 (2677 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 26, 2004
Posts: 3389

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I own a couple, falling on both several times. Neither has ever failed.

They are not my favorite cam, but sometimes, they are the size I need and I take them up. They were a gift, I would have preferred two Camelots to be honest.


patto


Apr 18, 2012, 12:56 AM
Post #37 of 161 (2672 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

Bearbreeder, what are you trying to say?

If you had even a little understand of how cams work you would know that pretty much the only way that the cam stops can fail are from the cam moving and then reaching its maximum.

This sounds awfully like PLACEMENT FAILURE!


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 2:15 AM
Post #38 of 161 (2662 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

im saying that im not going off about metollius 0 and 00 cams being "unsafe" despite quite a few camstop failures ... as referenced in the MP thread, some by climbers that seem pretty experienced ....

ive freely admitted that its possible my TCU placement failed, even though it was placed with the lobes well within the range

perhaps a quote from MP from someone who also posts here and blew a similar cam says it best ... apologies to mister williams for the cross post ...


Yea, I think there is really no way to tell exactly what happened, and there is no way for me to prove to the internet that I placed the cam well. I know I did, that's about all I need to say.


perhaps youd like to comment mr patto on yr experience with owning and falling on the 0 and 00 Metollius ...

it would be quite valuable if you could shed some insight into why cam stops are breaking on them without people supposedly weighting them such as ...

Not sure how this happened. This #0 rarely gets placed and has never been hung on or taken a single fall, but one of the cam stops has completely sheared off the lobe. The spring has also been displaced on the axle which has affected the lobe's retraction. Has anyone else experienced similar damage with their Mastercams? If so, how was Metolius in providing service/replacement?


or this post by mr herrington ...


I also climbed on a purple mastercam that had a snapped-off cam stop.

The cam stops on Master Cams are necessary for the cam to work in any mode. The spring curls around the cam stop and without it in place, there is no spring tension.

It was on a friend's rack we were using for the day, the piece was quite new, and he said he couldn't figure out how it had broken since he hadn't weighted the piece yet.

I didn't realize that cam was broken until I went to place it and noticed that half of the lobes didn't expand after I pulled the trigger.


and a few more ...

Notice in your photo how the groove in the cam face intersects the cam stop resulting in that much less metal at an already small protrusion. This only occurs on the purple cam and seems easily rectified. I've broken two both times simply wiggling them out of tight placements. Frustrating though gladly replaced by Metolius.

and ...

I recently had a cam stop failure on my purple master cam as well. It was bought when the master cams first came out. The good folks at rock and snow got on the horn with metolius they sent them some pics of the cam stop/heads and i got a new cam. The new lobes are the major difference. The lobes are now smooth. According to metolius the grooved lobes weakened the milled stop and was a design weakness effecting both the purple and grey.

which i assume are all "placement" failures ... im sure all the RC experts such as yourselves can can explain all this ...

or failing that back to the original point of the thread .... yr experiences on owning and falling on link cams Wink


(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Apr 18, 2012, 2:24 AM)


healyje


Apr 18, 2012, 2:23 AM
Post #39 of 161 (2653 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Last I checked the Metolius 0 and 00 were 5k aid rated pieces not necessarily guaranteed to hold a fall free climbing. Better than nothing when you get into that situation, but also better doubled up.


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 2:28 AM
Post #40 of 161 (2651 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

healyje ... i read all the current documentation and saw nothing to indicate that they were aid only ... nor is it listed as such in metollius page as far as i can see

i agree that they are better than nothing, and are only rated to 5 kn ... however some posters have indicated that the only reason cam stops break or other such is because of bad placements

yet we have several people on MP stating the cams were never weighted or fallen on ... yet the cam stops were broken ...

im looking to the RC experts to explain this ...


(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Apr 18, 2012, 2:30 AM)


patto


Apr 18, 2012, 2:28 AM
Post #41 of 161 (2649 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
perhaps youd like to comment mr patto on yr experience with owning and falling on the 0 and 00 Metollius ...

it would be quite valuable if you could shed some insight into why cam stops are breaking on them without people supposedly weighting them such as ...

I don't believe in magic. I believe in science, physics and engineering.

If camstops have broken then surely we can all agree that they WERE loaded. The camstops didn't just spontaneously combust. Thus unless we want to ignore logic and science we can conclude that any suggestion that there was no loading is FALSE.

ANY cam placement that loads the camstops inevitably means that the cam has reached the extent of its range. ie it is undercammed

Placing a cam undercammed in my opinion (and I believe most others) a poor placement.


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 2:32 AM
Post #42 of 161 (2648 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

so patto ... you are saying we have several liars on MP lying about their use of the cam ... or how they broke the cam stops cleaning them

most interesting ...


patto


Apr 18, 2012, 2:47 AM
Post #43 of 161 (2641 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
so patto ... you are saying we have several liars on MP lying about their use of the cam ... or how they broke the cam stops cleaning them

most interesting ...

No. I am not saying they are lying.

What I am saying is that either
1. the cam HAS been loaded or;
2. that magic or other supernatural power has caused the camstops to break


In my opinion the second possibility is not likely. Angelic


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 2:51 AM
Post #44 of 161 (2638 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

there is a third possiblity ...

recently had a cam stop failure on my purple master cam as well. It was bought when the master cams first came out. The good folks at rock and snow got on the horn with metolius they sent them some pics of the cam stop/heads and i got a new cam. The new lobes are the major difference. The lobes are now smooth. According to metolius the grooved lobes weakened the milled stop and was a design weakness effecting both the purple and grey.

now perhaps youd care to share yr experiences owning and falling on link cams Smile


(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Apr 18, 2012, 2:53 AM)


USnavy


Apr 18, 2012, 2:52 AM
Post #45 of 161 (2636 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2658

Re: [marc801] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

marc801 wrote:
USnavy wrote:
The more experienced of the two climbers I referenced above took a big fall on the Zodiac of El Cap because the .5 Link Cam pulled on body weight in a no-brainier C1 placement.
Hearsay, thus irrelevant.
It's not hearsay, I was belaying him and I saw the whole thing go down.


(This post was edited by USnavy on Apr 18, 2012, 2:52 AM)


patto


Apr 18, 2012, 2:54 AM
Post #46 of 161 (2631 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
there is a third possiblity ...

recently had a cam stop failure on my purple master cam as well. It was bought when the master cams first came out. The good folks at rock and snow got on the horn with metolius they sent them some pics of the cam stop/heads and i got a new cam. The new lobes are the major difference. The lobes are now smooth. According to metolius the grooved lobes weakened the milled stop and was a design weakness effecting both the purple and grey.

now perhaps youd care to share yr experiences owning and falling on link cams Smile

Yep. Sure. That all makes sense. But you still need to load the camstop for it to break! Wink

For reasons already explained if you are loading the camstops then you are not operating you cam correctly!


(This post was edited by patto on Apr 18, 2012, 2:58 AM)


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 2:57 AM
Post #47 of 161 (2626 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

welll i guess that quite a few people are on MP are fibbing about how they placed their cams and about not loading them ...

at least 3 that i can see ...

must be a group delusion thing over on MP ... glad we dont have that on RC ...

when something doesnt fit the RC experts view ... theyre liars ... or there are cam fairies

Tongue


patto


Apr 18, 2012, 3:04 AM
Post #48 of 161 (2617 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Surely you can see that things can't just break without having a force applied to them?


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 3:08 AM
Post #49 of 161 (2614 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

surely i can see that there are MPers posting up about issues with those cams in those sizes, some posters are quite well respected ...

and surely i can see some of the posters indicate that metollius admits there was an issue

but dont worry ... ill take yr word on it, since you are the RC expert ... cam fairies it is !!!

now back to link cams ... perhaps you can give us yr valuable experience about falling on em ...

Wink


healyje


Apr 18, 2012, 4:44 AM
Post #50 of 161 (2593 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
i read all the current documentation and saw nothing to indicate that they were aid only ... nor is it listed as such in metollius page as far as i can see

Don't know about what any of the current documentation says, but they used always have a notation to that effect and at 5kn you shouldn't need the documentation to spell it out for you.

bearbreeder wrote:
however some posters have indicated that the only reason cam stops break or other such is because of bad placements

yet we have several people on MP stating the cams were never weighted or fallen on ... yet the cam stops were broken.

Cam stops don't break on their own or unweighted. Someone is either mistaken or misrepresenting the facts. As to cam stops failing in a fall - it physically can't happen if pro is properly placed, the cam lobe geometries relative to the axle don't permit it. The only way it can happen is if they are misplaced or walk out to a width of crack relative to the cam lobes where it can - there is no other way.


patto


Apr 18, 2012, 5:37 AM
Post #51 of 161 (2838 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

Magic. It must be magic. Crazy Wink


kappydane


Apr 18, 2012, 7:02 AM
Post #52 of 161 (2813 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 22, 2004
Posts: 119

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Just my two cents from climbing in Red Rock for the last two years. Link cams are the number one piece of fixed gear I run into (my personal observation, not a scientific study). I stopped using mine soon after I got here after seeing all the fixed ones and the reports of all the broken ones. I do have friends that climb way harder than I do that swear by them and fall on them a lot. But, I am way more conservative than they are and like the warm fuzzy feeling of having a C4 below me than a Link Cam.


wonderwoman


Apr 18, 2012, 8:01 AM
Post #53 of 161 (2795 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4269

Re: [caughtinside] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
THere have been more Link cam failures than alien failures.

Geez Louise! Is this true? I picked up 2 link cams last year. I've fallen on one of them twice. So far, so good. But still.... YIKES!


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 9:04 AM
Post #54 of 161 (2774 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

healyje wrote:
Cam stops don't break on their own or unweighted. Someone is either mistaken or misrepresenting the facts. As to cam stops failing in a fall - it physically can't happen if pro is properly placed, the cam lobe geometries relative to the axle don't permit it. The only way it can happen is if they are misplaced or walk out to a width of crack relative to the cam lobes where it can - there is no other way.


then basically RCers are saying we have several liars at MP ... different people all lying about the same thing at different times, all with the same brand of cam ...

as to "aid" most other companies list it items a "aid" only when it is only meant for such ... besides thats fairly irrelevant here since according to RCers, its a placement issue on cams that were "said" to be never weighted or fallen on by several MPers

just curious ... how many here have owned and fallen on the 0 and 00 ULTCU/ULPC/Mastercams ...

must be a lying binge over at MP ... darn glad im here ...

again ... most interesting ...Wink


granite_grrl


Apr 18, 2012, 9:28 AM
Post #55 of 161 (2763 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14702

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
healyje wrote:
Cam stops don't break on their own or unweighted. Someone is either mistaken or misrepresenting the facts. As to cam stops failing in a fall - it physically can't happen if pro is properly placed, the cam lobe geometries relative to the axle don't permit it. The only way it can happen is if they are misplaced or walk out to a width of crack relative to the cam lobes where it can - there is no other way.


then basically RCers are saying we have several liars at MP ... different people all lying about the same thing at different times, all with the same brand of cam ...

as to "aid" most other companies list it items a "aid" only when it is only meant for such ... besides thats fairly irrelevant here since according to RCers, its a placement issue on cams that were "said" to be never weighted or fallen on by several MPers

just curious ... how many here have owned and fallen on the 0 and 00 ULTCU/ULPC/Mastercams ...

must be a lying binge over at MP ... darn glad im here ...

again ... most interesting ...Wink

If the people on MP are saying that the cam stops randomly sheared off with no load applied to them then fuck yeah, they're lying....or too stupid to understand that things don't randomly break without applying some sort of force to them.

How do you think their cam stops sheared? How do you think you broke the cam stops off your cam? Or are you in the lying/stupid camp too?

My husband ripped the cam stops off my purple TCU. He ripped it while aiding and invertied the lobes (bad placement obviously). The cam stops make the cam feel a little nicer when placing it, but you don't need them for an operatonal cam. On these small units the cam stops take very little force before shearing.


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 9:37 AM
Post #56 of 161 (2753 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [granite_grrl] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

granite_grrl wrote:
My husband ripped the cam stops off my purple TCU. He ripped it while aiding and invertied the lobes (bad placement obviously). The cam stops make the cam feel a little nicer when placing it, but you don't need them for an operatonal cam. On these small units the cam stops take very little force before shearing.

perhaps you should read up ... the cam stops are required on these cams

as mr herrington said on MP

"
The cam stops on Master Cams are necessary for the cam to work in any mode. The spring curls around the cam stop and without it in place, there is no spring tension.
"

RC is full of experts and MP full of liars Tongue


csproul


Apr 18, 2012, 9:42 AM
Post #57 of 161 (2745 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1767

Re: [granite_grrl] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

granite_grrl wrote:
bearbreeder wrote:
healyje wrote:
Cam stops don't break on their own or unweighted. Someone is either mistaken or misrepresenting the facts. As to cam stops failing in a fall - it physically can't happen if pro is properly placed, the cam lobe geometries relative to the axle don't permit it. The only way it can happen is if they are misplaced or walk out to a width of crack relative to the cam lobes where it can - there is no other way.


then basically RCers are saying we have several liars at MP ... different people all lying about the same thing at different times, all with the same brand of cam ...

as to "aid" most other companies list it items a "aid" only when it is only meant for such ... besides thats fairly irrelevant here since according to RCers, its a placement issue on cams that were "said" to be never weighted or fallen on by several MPers

just curious ... how many here have owned and fallen on the 0 and 00 ULTCU/ULPC/Mastercams ...

must be a lying binge over at MP ... darn glad im here ...

again ... most interesting ...Wink

If the people on MP are saying that the cam stops randomly sheared off with no load applied to them then fuck yeah, they're lying....or too stupid to understand that things don't randomly break without applying some sort of force to them.

How do you think their cam stops sheared? How do you think you broke the cam stops off your cam? Or are you in the lying/stupid camp too?

My husband ripped the cam stops off my purple TCU. He ripped it while aiding and invertied the lobes (bad placement obviously). The cam stops make the cam feel a little nicer when placing it, but you don't need them for an operatonal cam. On these small units the cam stops take very little force before shearing.
I think this is not entirely true with the Mastercams. The cam-springs are attached at the cam stops, so if the stops on a Master are broken, you cannot retract the lobes. I don't have them in front of me, but I don't think this is the case with the TCU.


mojomonkey


Apr 18, 2012, 9:59 AM
Post #58 of 161 (2735 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 13, 2006
Posts: 841

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
My husband ripped the cam stops off my purple TCU. He ripped it while aiding and invertied the lobes (bad placement obviously). The cam stops make the cam feel a little nicer when placing it, but you don't need them for an operatonal cam. On these small units the cam stops take very little force before shearing.

perhaps you should read up ... the cam stops are required on these cams

as mr herrington said on MP

"
The cam stops on Master Cams are necessary for the cam to work in any mode. The spring curls around the cam stop and without it in place, there is no spring tension.
"

RC is full of experts and MP full of liars Tongue

Or maybe people misreading? Master Cam and TCU are not the same. Whether they have the same cam stop spring design may be true, but would need to be established before your quote is relevant. I didn't see enough info on the Metolius site to determine the spring and cam stop design on either.


granite_grrl


Apr 18, 2012, 9:59 AM
Post #59 of 161 (2732 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14702

Re: [csproul] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

csproul wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
bearbreeder wrote:
healyje wrote:
Cam stops don't break on their own or unweighted. Someone is either mistaken or misrepresenting the facts. As to cam stops failing in a fall - it physically can't happen if pro is properly placed, the cam lobe geometries relative to the axle don't permit it. The only way it can happen is if they are misplaced or walk out to a width of crack relative to the cam lobes where it can - there is no other way.


then basically RCers are saying we have several liars at MP ... different people all lying about the same thing at different times, all with the same brand of cam ...

as to "aid" most other companies list it items a "aid" only when it is only meant for such ... besides thats fairly irrelevant here since according to RCers, its a placement issue on cams that were "said" to be never weighted or fallen on by several MPers

just curious ... how many here have owned and fallen on the 0 and 00 ULTCU/ULPC/Mastercams ...

must be a lying binge over at MP ... darn glad im here ...

again ... most interesting ...Wink

If the people on MP are saying that the cam stops randomly sheared off with no load applied to them then fuck yeah, they're lying....or too stupid to understand that things don't randomly break without applying some sort of force to them.

How do you think their cam stops sheared? How do you think you broke the cam stops off your cam? Or are you in the lying/stupid camp too?

My husband ripped the cam stops off my purple TCU. He ripped it while aiding and invertied the lobes (bad placement obviously). The cam stops make the cam feel a little nicer when placing it, but you don't need them for an operatonal cam. On these small units the cam stops take very little force before shearing.
I think this is not entirely true with the Mastercams. The cam-springs are attached at the cam stops, so if the stops on a Master are broken, you cannot retract the lobes. I don't have them in front of me, but I don't think this is the case with the TCU.

I will have to double check with the one I have at home. Oddly I haven't noticed an issue with the spring tension, but I will admit I don't really use this cam anymore either (the hubby ran out and bought me a replacement pretty quick).

It was an older cam (from right around when the ultralights were coming out) so maybe it wasn't an issue then?


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 10:04 AM
Post #60 of 161 (2724 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [mojomonkey] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mojomonkey wrote:

Or maybe people misreading? Master Cam and TCU are not the same. Whether they have the same cam stop spring design may be true, but would need to be established before your quote is relevant. I didn't see enough info on the Metolius site to determine the spring and cam stop design on either.

mr williams an adminsitrator and respected poster there posted this ...

I had this happen on a purple TCUs (same lobes as MCam), but mine broke in a fall. Without the cam-stop, the cam is useless. I see this as a design flaw on the grey and purple. I didn't bother to email Metolius about it since I got the thing for like $30 and I was on a road trip. They may very well replace the lobe if you send it in, but I've always thought that was a bit of a hassle if you use your gear often. I got a couple of C3's on sale to compliment my Aliens, but still like the TCU's blue to Orange.

now my broken one had one cam stop behind the other, so it was unsuable no matter what ... but my understanding is that the current 0 and 00 TCUs require the cam stops like the mastercams

who knows ... i could be wrong ... or mr williams could be lying or stooopid like all MPers Wink

but not all the affected cams dont require cam stops to operate ...


(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Apr 18, 2012, 10:05 AM)


jt512


Apr 18, 2012, 10:09 AM
Post #61 of 161 (2712 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21890

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

healyje wrote:
bearbreeder wrote:
i read all the current documentation and saw nothing to indicate that they were aid only ... nor is it listed as such in metollius page as far as i can see

Don't know about what any of the current documentation says, but they used always have a notation to that effect and at 5kn you shouldn't need the documentation to spell it out for you.

I don't recall the 0 and 00 TCUs' documentation ever stating that they were aid-only pieces, although many climbers certainly treated them as such. In fact, Metolius used to give them the same strength rating as their larger cams, 2000 lbf, IIRC. I remember when they downgraded them to 1000 lbf (now 5 kN) and why. Metolius stated that in an optimal placement the 0 and 00 TCUs would meet the old 2000 lbf rating; however, the rating was reduced to reflect the fact that the placement tolerances are small for small cams, and that therefore many placements in actual use are suboptimal.

I carried 0 and 00 TCUs when I trad climbed, but I was aware of their limitations. I never fell on one that I recall, but I did take a small fall on a comparably sized Alien, which held (and wasn't even damaged). The small Aliens had much higher strength ratings than the comparably sized TCUs, but I assumed that that was because the Alien ratings did not take into account the difficulty of getting an optimal placement.

Jay


healyje


Apr 18, 2012, 10:16 AM
Post #62 of 161 (2707 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
healyje wrote:
Cam stops don't break on their own or unweighted. Someone is either mistaken or misrepresenting the facts. As to cam stops failing in a fall - it physically can't happen if pro is properly placed, the cam lobe geometries relative to the axle don't permit it. The only way it can happen is if they are misplaced or walk out to a width of crack relative to the cam lobes where it can - there is no other way.

then basically RCers are saying we have several liars at MP ... different people all lying about the same thing at different times, all with the same brand of cam ...

as to "aid" most other companies list it items a "aid" only when it is only meant for such ... besides thats fairly irrelevant here since according to RCers, its a placement issue on cams that were "said" to be never weighted or fallen on by several MPers

just curious ... how many here have owned and fallen on the 0 and 00 ULTCU/ULPC/Mastercams ...

must be a lying binge over at MP ... darn glad im here ...

again ... most interesting ...Wink

I've owned and fallen on every cam Metolius has made and own six combined sets of ULTCU/ULPC/HTCU/TCU/PC I don't climb on any more and four sets of MC and HMC I currently climb on.

There are and have never no circumstances where the cam stops just come off without being weighted. Period. Again, any statement to the contrary anywhere on the internet is from someone mistaken or misrepresenting the facts of what occurred.


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 10:20 AM
Post #63 of 161 (2701 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

well thanks for sharing that experience ... thus we at RC have basically established that there are a bunch of lying bastards over at MP ... completely different people lying about how they use the cams, how their stops broke, at different dates ...

either that or soo "stupid" they dont even know what they are doing ...

again .... most interesting Wink

now back to links ...


Partner rgold


Apr 18, 2012, 10:22 AM
Post #64 of 161 (2698 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1800

Re: [wonderwoman] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

wonderwoman wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
THere have been more Link cam failures than alien failures.

Geez Louise! Is this true? I picked up 2 link cams last year. I've fallen on one of them twice. So far, so good. But still.... YIKES!

Well, I don't know about relative failure rates, but I know that you climb in the Gunks, and link cams are poorly adapted to Gunks placements. In particular, I would consider link cams inappropriate for horizontal cracks.


healyje


Apr 18, 2012, 10:34 AM
Post #65 of 161 (2690 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [jt512] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
healyje wrote:
bearbreeder wrote:
i read all the current documentation and saw nothing to indicate that they were aid only ... nor is it listed as such in metollius page as far as i can see

Don't know about what any of the current documentation says, but they used always have a notation to that effect and at 5kn you shouldn't need the documentation to spell it out for you.

I don't recall the 0 and 00 TCUs' documentation ever stating that they were aid-only pieces, although many climbers certainly treated them as such. In fact, Metolius used to give them the same strength rating as their larger cams, 2000 lbf, IIRC. I remember when they downgraded them to 1000 lbf (now 5 kN) and why. Metolius stated that in an optimal placement the 0 and 00 TCUs would meet the old 2000 lbf rating; however, the rating was reduced to reflect the fact that the placement tolerances are small for small cams, and that therefore many placements in actual use are suboptimal.

I carried 0 and 00 TCUs when I trad climbed, but I was aware of their limitations. I never fell on one that I recall, but I did take a small fall on a comparably sized Alien, which held (and wasn't even damaged). The small Aliens had much higher strength ratings than the comparably sized TCUs, but I assumed that that was because the Alien ratings did not take into account the difficulty of getting an optimal placement.

Jay

They definitely did make the distinction at one time with an annotation even if they don't now. But again, the 5kn rating should speak for itself (along with one look at them), though that is probably a bad assumption in today's climbing world.


(This post was edited by healyje on Apr 18, 2012, 10:40 AM)


granite_grrl


Apr 18, 2012, 10:35 AM
Post #66 of 161 (2687 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14702

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
well thanks for sharing that experience ... thus we at RC have basically established that there are a bunch of lying bastards over at MP ... completely different people lying about how they use the cams, how their stops broke, at different dates ...

either that or soo "stupid" they dont even know what they are doing ...

again .... most interesting Wink

now back to links ...

That about sums it up....though there's always the possibility that you're misrepresenting what they actually said on MP. I rather doubt you could tell MP users that these cam stops randomly broke without having them question this claim too.


wonderwoman


Apr 18, 2012, 10:37 AM
Post #67 of 161 (2685 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4269

Re: [rgold] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

rgold wrote:
wonderwoman wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
THere have been more Link cam failures than alien failures.

Geez Louise! Is this true? I picked up 2 link cams last year. I've fallen on one of them twice. So far, so good. But still.... YIKES!

Well, I don't know about relative failure rates, but I know that you climb in the Gunks, and link cams are poorly adapted to Gunks placements. In particular, I would consider link cams inappropriate for horizontal cracks.

Yeah - I remember you warning me about that before. It was the only thing I could fit into the odd shaped horizontal right before the crux on retribution. I've climbed it twice and fell in the same spot twice. What else do people put in there?


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 10:41 AM
Post #68 of 161 (2676 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [granite_grrl] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

granite_grrl wrote:
That about sums it up....though there's always the possibility that you're misrepresenting what they actually said on MP. I rather doubt you could tell MP users that these cam stops randomly broke without having them question this claim too.

http://www.mountainproject.com/...n-cam-stop/107129489

judge for yourself ... several of the posters indicated explicitely that they did not weigh the cams, others that it likely broke during "cleaning"

but hey ... i freely admit to falling on my cam Wink

of course metollius did admit about hacving and issue to at least one poster ... that could be all a lie of course as well ...

i sure am glad im on RC ... those darn lying MPers Tongue

again ... lets get back to links ... perhaps you can share yr experience owning and fallling on em ...


csproul


Apr 18, 2012, 10:49 AM
Post #69 of 161 (2666 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1767

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
That about sums it up....though there's always the possibility that you're misrepresenting what they actually said on MP. I rather doubt you could tell MP users that these cam stops randomly broke without having them question this claim too.

http://www.mountainproject.com/...n-cam-stop/107129489

judge for yourself ... several of the posters indicated explicitely that they did not weigh the cams, others that it likely broke during "cleaning"

but hey ... i freely admit to falling on my cam Wink

of course metollius did admit about hacving and issue to at least one poster ... that could be all a lie of course as well ...

i sure am glad im on RC ... those darn lying MPers Tongue

again ... lets get back to links ... perhaps you can share yr experience owning and fallling on em ...
Just a thought...people might take you a little more seriously if you stopped writing like a 13 year old girl.
But, then again, I'm guessing that you know how much it irritates some people and that you enjoy it.


(This post was edited by csproul on Apr 18, 2012, 10:51 AM)


wonderwoman


Apr 18, 2012, 10:54 AM
Post #70 of 161 (2657 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4269

Re: [csproul] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

csproul wrote:
bearbreeder wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
That about sums it up....though there's always the possibility that you're misrepresenting what they actually said on MP. I rather doubt you could tell MP users that these cam stops randomly broke without having them question this claim too.

http://www.mountainproject.com/...n-cam-stop/107129489

judge for yourself ... several of the posters indicated explicitely that they did not weigh the cams, others that it likely broke during "cleaning"

but hey ... i freely admit to falling on my cam Wink

of course metollius did admit about hacving and issue to at least one poster ... that could be all a lie of course as well ...

i sure am glad im on RC ... those darn lying MPers Tongue

again ... lets get back to links ... perhaps you can share yr experience owning and fallling on em ...
Just a thought...people might take you a little more seriously if you stopped writing like a 13 year old girl.
But, then again, I'm guessing that you know how much it irritates some people and that you enjoy it.

Yeah - stop writing like a girl! bearbreeder probably throws like a girl and climbs like a girl, too. sheesh.


caughtinside


Apr 18, 2012, 10:56 AM
Post #71 of 161 (2644 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30369

Re: [wonderwoman] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

wonderwoman wrote:
rgold wrote:
wonderwoman wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
THere have been more Link cam failures than alien failures.

Geez Louise! Is this true? I picked up 2 link cams last year. I've fallen on one of them twice. So far, so good. But still.... YIKES!

Well, I don't know about relative failure rates, but I know that you climb in the Gunks, and link cams are poorly adapted to Gunks placements. In particular, I would consider link cams inappropriate for horizontal cracks.

Yeah - I remember you warning me about that before. It was the only thing I could fit into the odd shaped horizontal right before the crux on retribution. I've climbed it twice and fell in the same spot twice. What else do people put in there?

Links fit in lots of weird places, and a lot of those weird places I wouldn't trust them.

They were initially billed as being awesome in flares, but considering that a cam in a flare reduces your options for aligning the stem with the anticipated load direction, and according to OP you have to line that up perfectly, I'd reckon they are nearly worthless in flares, particularly if it bottoms out (which will likely torque the lobes.)

After mine broke, I kept the two bigger ones for a while, thinking they'd at least be good at Indian Creek. Then, at the Creek, I'd find myself at the tops of climbs with nothing left but link cams, and a funky placement (contrary to widely held belief, such placements are in abundance at the creek). I'm only glad donny couldn't see my tears of rage and fear as I stuffed them in and proceeded with zero confidence. I unloaded them after that trip.


wonderwoman


Apr 18, 2012, 10:57 AM
Post #72 of 161 (2642 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4269

Re: [wonderwoman] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

wonderwoman wrote:
csproul wrote:
bearbreeder wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
That about sums it up....though there's always the possibility that you're misrepresenting what they actually said on MP. I rather doubt you could tell MP users that these cam stops randomly broke without having them question this claim too.

http://www.mountainproject.com/...n-cam-stop/107129489

judge for yourself ... several of the posters indicated explicitely that they did not weigh the cams, others that it likely broke during "cleaning"

but hey ... i freely admit to falling on my cam Wink

of course metollius did admit about hacving and issue to at least one poster ... that could be all a lie of course as well ...

i sure am glad im on RC ... those darn lying MPers Tongue

again ... lets get back to links ... perhaps you can share yr experience owning and fallling on em ...
Just a thought...people might take you a little more seriously if you stopped writing like a 13 year old girl.
But, then again, I'm guessing that you know how much it irritates some people and that you enjoy it.

Yeah - stop writing like a girl! bearbreeder probably throws like a girl and climbs like a girl, too. sheesh.

Or even placing link cams like a girl. Oh wait. Mine held when I fell on it.


granite_grrl


Apr 18, 2012, 10:59 AM
Post #73 of 161 (2639 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14702

Re: [wonderwoman] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

wonderwoman wrote:
csproul wrote:
bearbreeder wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
That about sums it up....though there's always the possibility that you're misrepresenting what they actually said on MP. I rather doubt you could tell MP users that these cam stops randomly broke without having them question this claim too.

http://www.mountainproject.com/...n-cam-stop/107129489

judge for yourself ... several of the posters indicated explicitely that they did not weigh the cams, others that it likely broke during "cleaning"

but hey ... i freely admit to falling on my cam Wink

of course metollius did admit about hacving and issue to at least one poster ... that could be all a lie of course as well ...

i sure am glad im on RC ... those darn lying MPers Tongue

again ... lets get back to links ... perhaps you can share yr experience owning and fallling on em ...
Just a thought...people might take you a little more seriously if you stopped writing like a 13 year old girl.
But, then again, I'm guessing that you know how much it irritates some people and that you enjoy it.

Yeah - stop writing like a girl! bearbreeder probably throws like a girl and climbs like a girl, too. sheesh.

There are many 13 year old girls that throw and climb far better than you or I ever will....but kids these days seem to have a unique writing style.


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 11:00 AM
Post #74 of 161 (2635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [wonderwoman] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

wonderwoman wrote:
csproul wrote:
Just a thought...people might take you a little more seriously if you stopped writing like a 13 year old girl.
But, then again, I'm guessing that you know how much it irritates some people and that you enjoy it.

Yeah - stop writing like a girl! bearbreeder probably throws like a girl and climbs like a girl, too. sheesh.

im only replying to this post since a mod posted it ...

id love to climb gracefully with flawless footwork like some gurls i know ... IMO there is no shame in climbing like a gurl Tongue

"highly moderated" indeed !!!




(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Apr 18, 2012, 11:01 AM)


wonderwoman


Apr 18, 2012, 11:06 AM
Post #75 of 161 (2623 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4269

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
wonderwoman wrote:
csproul wrote:
Just a thought...people might take you a little more seriously if you stopped writing like a 13 year old girl.
But, then again, I'm guessing that you know how much it irritates some people and that you enjoy it.

Yeah - stop writing like a girl! bearbreeder probably throws like a girl and climbs like a girl, too. sheesh.

im only replying to this post since a mod posted it ...

id love to climb gracefully with flawless footwork like some gurls i know ... IMO there is no shame in climbing like a gurl Tongue

"highly moderated" indeed !!!

[image]http://i43.tinypic.com/jl3sib.png
[/image]

What can I say? I moderate like a girl.


olderic


Apr 18, 2012, 11:07 AM
Post #76 of 161 (3321 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1534

Re: [wonderwoman] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

wonderwoman wrote:
Yeah - I remember you warning me about that before. It was the only thing I could fit into the odd shaped horizontal right before the crux on retribution. I've climbed it twice and fell in the same spot twice. What else do people put in there?

One of the medium tri-cams (blue or brown) or I think it's a green C4 (.75) - none inspired the confidence that the old pin that used to be there did - even though they probably were marginally better. I haven't given any of them the acid test though.


healyje


Apr 18, 2012, 11:10 AM
Post #77 of 161 (3319 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
That about sums it up....though there's always the possibility that you're misrepresenting what they actually said on MP. I rather doubt you could tell MP users that these cam stops randomly broke without having them question this claim too.

http://www.mountainproject.com/...n-cam-stop/107129489

judge for yourself ... several of the posters indicated explicitely that they did not weigh the cams, others that it likely broke during "cleaning"

but hey ... i freely admit to falling on my cam Wink

of course metollius did admit about hacving and issue to at least one poster ... that could be all a lie of course as well ...

i sure am glad im on RC ... those darn lying MPers Tongue

again ... lets get back to links ... perhaps you can share yr experience owning and fallling on em ...

Typical as threads go. The cam was definitely fallen or hung on and anyone claiming to have broken one cleaning them was doing some extraordinary yarding on them, probably with a sling and leg action involved. Yet again, aluminum - from anyone - doesn't shear unless subjected to fairly strong forces. It ain't magic or alchemy.

Now you can keep whining on and on as you seem want to do in thread after thread, but it's not productive or useful in any way.


chadnsc


Apr 18, 2012, 11:10 AM
Post #78 of 161 (3317 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449

Re: [wonderwoman] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

wonderwoman wrote:
bearbreeder wrote:
wonderwoman wrote:
csproul wrote:
Just a thought...people might take you a little more seriously if you stopped writing like a 13 year old girl.
But, then again, I'm guessing that you know how much it irritates some people and that you enjoy it.

Yeah - stop writing like a girl! bearbreeder probably throws like a girl and climbs like a girl, too. sheesh.

im only replying to this post since a mod posted it ...

id love to climb gracefully with flawless footwork like some gurls i know ... IMO there is no shame in climbing like a gurl Tongue

"highly moderated" indeed !!!

[image]http://i43.tinypic.com/jl3sib.png
[/image]

What can I say? I moderate like a girl.

But you are a girl! Tongue


bearbreeder


Apr 18, 2012, 11:12 AM
Post #79 of 161 (3315 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [wonderwoman] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

welll ill add one more piece of 13 year olds gurls experience ...

ive fallen on my links or had partners fall on em in horizontals a decent number of times ... they work just fine IMO ... so far anyways

providing that

- the flexible part of the stem is what is loaded
- the crack is fairly even
- the extended cams lobes are not loaded over the edge

one thing to watch out for is for the plastic piece rubbing over the edge on a fall ... itll eventually wear out

Wink


wonderwoman


Apr 18, 2012, 11:13 AM
Post #80 of 161 (3311 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4269

Re: [caughtinside] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
wonderwoman wrote:
rgold wrote:
wonderwoman wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
THere have been more Link cam failures than alien failures.

Geez Louise! Is this true? I picked up 2 link cams last year. I've fallen on one of them twice. So far, so good. But still.... YIKES!

Well, I don't know about relative failure rates, but I know that you climb in the Gunks, and link cams are poorly adapted to Gunks placements. In particular, I would consider link cams inappropriate for horizontal cracks.

Yeah - I remember you warning me about that before. It was the only thing I could fit into the odd shaped horizontal right before the crux on retribution. I've climbed it twice and fell in the same spot twice. What else do people put in there?

Links fit in lots of weird places, and a lot of those weird places I wouldn't trust them.

They were initially billed as being awesome in flares, but considering that a cam in a flare reduces your options for aligning the stem with the anticipated load direction, and according to OP you have to line that up perfectly, I'd reckon they are nearly worthless in flares, particularly if it bottoms out (which will likely torque the lobes.)

After mine broke, I kept the two bigger ones for a while, thinking they'd at least be good at Indian Creek. Then, at the Creek, I'd find myself at the tops of climbs with nothing left but link cams, and a funky placement (contrary to widely held belief, such placements are in abundance at the creek). I'm only glad donny couldn't see my tears of rage and fear as I stuffed them in and proceeded with zero confidence. I unloaded them after that trip.

I was on a borrowed rack the first time I fell on that climb. All of the gear was completely different than mine and it convinced me to go out and buy some link cams because it fit in so well. Then I got on the climb and fell again. And THEN I heard about the link cam breakage.

I do understand why they aren't ideal in horizontals. I will try to find a better fit if I get on that climb again. And to be honest, my aliens still make me nervous.

Along with my link cams, I bought a bunch of master cams to replace my aliens. Maybe my rack will someday spontaneously combust, like the drummer from spinal tap.


USnavy


Apr 18, 2012, 11:15 AM
Post #81 of 161 (3305 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2658

Re: [bearbreeder] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
healyje wrote:
Cam stops don't break on their own or unweighted. Someone is either mistaken or misrepresenting the facts. As to cam stops failing in a fall - it physically can't happen if pro is properly placed, the cam lobe geometries relative to the axle don't permit it. The only way it can happen is if they are misplaced or walk out to a width of crack relative to the cam lobes where it can - there is no other way.



just curious ... how many here have owned and fallen on the 0 and 00 ULTCU/ULPC/Mastercams ...
I have taken two falls on my 0 Master Cam. The first time it ripped from rock failure, the second time it held. But both falls were short, the piece was just below my foot. I have used the 00/0 and 0/1 offset Master Cams a fair amount on aid, although I have never fallen on them on aid. My partner fell on a 0 Master Cam last season and umbrellaed the cam in its placement, shearing off the cam stops.


(This post was edited by USnavy on Apr 18, 2012, 11:16 AM)


wonderwoman


Apr 18, 2012, 11:17 AM
Post #82 of 161 (3302 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4269

Re: [olderic] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

olderic wrote:
wonderwoman wrote:
Yeah - I remember you warning me about that before. It was the only thing I could fit into the odd shaped horizontal right before the crux on retribution. I've climbed it twice and fell in the same spot twice. What else do people put in there?

One of the medium tri-cams (blue or brown) or I think it's a green C4 (.75) - none inspired the confidence that the old pin that used to be there did - even though they probably were marginally better. I haven't given any of them the acid test though.

I only have the pink tricam. Now I need more gear!


Partner rgold


Apr 18, 2012, 11:19 AM
Post #83 of 161 (3291 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1800

Re: [wonderwoman] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

WW, I'm perplexed why a Link Cam could be placed but not some other cam. As far as I know, link cams do not come in sizes any different than other cams and their head width isn't in any way advantageous. The only advantage link cams have is range in a single unit, but that range does not include anything you can't get with a regular cam.

I haven't done Retribution in a few years (having done it first about fifty years ago!), but I never had a problem getting good gear in that horizontal, although part of the problem is leaving room for your fingers...

I don't remember it as a good place for a cam, and indeed most of times I climbed it were before cams were my rack. It may be that I used a small hex there, which of course folks don't carry any more. Small hexes do slot sideways into shallow placements better than stoppers.

Even so, I'd guess you can get a good stopper in there, and almost certainly a good Tricam. I think it is a keyhole-type placement. To get a stopper in, you might have to choose a placement that is the secondary wedging position (wedged against the narrower sides), because that orientation allows you to use a stopper with less height, and the shallowness of the feature requires that.

The hinges on Link Cams have proven vulnerable to loads with any kind of lateral component, so the most dangerous placements are one in which the unit is trapped but the stem is not pointing in the direction of the load. In horizontal cracks, either because of the original placement or cam movement, it is possible that one of the hinges might be loaded over an edge, with results I wouln't want to predict.


USnavy


Apr 18, 2012, 11:23 AM
Post #84 of 161 (3284 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2658

Re: [jt512] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
healyje wrote:
bearbreeder wrote:
i read all the current documentation and saw nothing to indicate that they were aid only ... nor is it listed as such in metollius page as far as i can see

Don't know about what any of the current documentation says, but they used always have a notation to that effect and at 5kn you shouldn't need the documentation to spell it out for you.

I don't recall the 0 and 00 TCUs' documentation ever stating that they were aid-only pieces,

Jay
It's kind of an unofficial official statement. Metolius has openly said in e-mails that the pieces are designed for aid only, however they do not state that on their website. I remember reading a thread awhile back where someone complained that they decked when a 0 or 00 ripped. He contacted Metolius and they told him that the 0 and 00 cams were for aid only.

granite_grrl wrote:
csproul wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
bearbreeder wrote:
healyje wrote:
Cam stops don't break on their own or unweighted. Someone is either mistaken or misrepresenting the facts. As to cam stops failing in a fall - it physically can't happen if pro is properly placed, the cam lobe geometries relative to the axle don't permit it. The only way it can happen is if they are misplaced or walk out to a width of crack relative to the cam lobes where it can - there is no other way.


then basically RCers are saying we have several liars at MP ... different people all lying about the same thing at different times, all with the same brand of cam ...

as to "aid" most other companies list it items a "aid" only when it is only meant for such ... besides thats fairly irrelevant here since according to RCers, its a placement issue on cams that were "said" to be never weighted or fallen on by several MPers

just curious ... how many here have owned and fallen on the 0 and 00 ULTCU/ULPC/Mastercams ...

must be a lying binge over at MP ... darn glad im here ...

again ... most interesting ...Wink

If the people on MP are saying that the cam stops randomly sheared off with no load applied to them then fuck yeah, they're lying....or too stupid to understand that things don't randomly break without applying some sort of force to them.

How do you think their cam stops sheared? How do you think you broke the cam stops off your cam? Or are you in the lying/stupid camp too?

My husband ripped the cam stops off my purple TCU. He ripped it while aiding and invertied the lobes (bad placement obviously). The cam stops make the cam feel a little nicer when placing it, but you don't need them for an operatonal cam. On these small units the cam stops take very little force before shearing.
I think this is not entirely true with the Mastercams. The cam-springs are attached at the cam stops, so if the stops on a Master are broken, you cannot retract the lobes. I don't have them in front of me, but I don't think this is the case with the TCU.

I will have to double check with the one I have at home. Oddly I haven't noticed an issue with the spring tension, but I will admit I don't really use this cam anymore either (the hubby ran out and bought me a replacement pretty quick).

It was an older cam (from right around when the ultralights were coming out) so maybe it wasn't an issue then?
I have a 0 TCU and Master Cam sitting in front of me right now. Both of them have the springs attached to the cam stops. If you rip the stops off, the cam wont function.


(This post was edited by USnavy on Apr 18, 2012, 11:24 AM)


healyje


Apr 18, 2012, 11:26 AM
Post #85 of 161 (3276 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [USnavy] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

USnavy wrote:
It's kind of an unofficial official statement. Metolius has openly said in e-mails that the pieces are designed for aid only, however they do not state that on their website. I remember reading a thread awhile back where someone complained that they decked when a 0 or 00 ripped. He contacted Metolius and they told him that the 0 and 00 cams were for aid only.

I just checked with their catalog crew and they did at one time annotate those pieces as aid-only. It was probably not the wisest decision to stop pointing out the obvious in their documentation from my perspective.

USnavy wrote:
My partner fell on a 0 Master Cam last season and umbrellaed the cam in its placement, shearing off the cam stops.

As I said, it's physically impossible for a cam - anyone's cam; of any size - to invert and sheer the stops in a good placement - physically impossible.

The only way it can happen is to fall on a piece that isn't placed securely, or is placed securely in less than idea rock, and said cam drags to a wider section of the crack where the cam then inverts. That's why you need to pay exceptional attention to detail when placing all forms of small pro.


(This post was edited by healyje on Apr 18, 2012, 11:31 AM)


USnavy


Apr 18, 2012, 11:35 AM
Post #86 of 161 (3254 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2658

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

healyje wrote:
USnavy wrote:
It's kind of an unofficial official statement. Metolius has openly said in e-mails that the pieces are designed for aid only, however they do not state that on their website. I remember reading a thread awhile back where someone complained that they decked when a 0 or 00 ripped. He contacted Metolius and they told him that the 0 and 00 cams were for aid only.


I just checked with their catalog crew and they did at one time annotate those pieces as aid-only. It was probably not the wisest decision to stop pointing out the obvious in their documentation from my perspective.

USnavy wrote:
My partner fell on a 0 Master Cam last season and umbrellaed the cam in its placement, shearing off the cam stops.

As I said, it's physically impossible for a cam - anyone's cam; of any size - to invert and sheer the stops in a good placement - physically impossible.
No it's not impossible, not even close. The guy that fell on the cam took a factor one fall on it. What likely happened is the cam ran out of range and it umbrellaed. That's is not only very possible, it is very likely. It seems so few people seem to realize the serious expansion range limitations of small cams. As I mentioned before, a 00 Master Cam that is placed with the lobes 50% retracted has as much remaining expansion range as a #4 Camalot that is only 4% retracted! So when you are dealing with a cam that has a full expansion range of around 1/4", it's not hard to run out of expansion range on a fall. Here is how it happens: You load the cam until the expansion range runs out, than the piece gets pulled downwards in the crack (even if only a fraction of an inch), and when the rock constricts, the lobes catch and the cam is loaded in its passive mode which immediately rips the stops off.

So normally when the stops rip off, it is because one or more of the lobes were not expanded enough or the rock was crap. However it is very easy to make that mistake. On cams that small, every lobe really needs to be contracted to 80-95%. The problem is that when you are dealing with a piece that small, the crack is going to be very narrow and it is going to be rather hard to properly inspect the back two lobes. Furthermore, a variation of 1/8" in the width of the crack will not be viable to the naked eye, but it could drop the retraction range of one or more lobes by a good 30-70% depending on the cam size, which can made the difference between the piece pulling and it holding. It is for that exact reason why I have always said that small cams are unreliable and should be replaced with RPs when possible. When I am aid climbing I always try to use RPs in any placement smaller than a green Alien. I do my absolute best to avoid using micro cams. Damn near every fall I have ever taken while aid climbing (although admittedly, I haven't taken that many falls) was the result of a really small cam ripping on me.


(This post was edited by USnavy on Apr 18, 2012, 11:47 AM)


healyje


Apr 18, 2012, 12:13 PM
Post #87 of 161 (3225 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [USnavy] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

USnavy wrote:
No it's not impossible, not even close. The guy that fell on the cam took a factor one fall on it. What likely happened is the cam ran out of range and it umbrellaed. That's is not only very possible, it is very likely.

Hey, did you even bother to read what I wrote?

healyje wrote:
The only way it can happen is to fall on a piece that isn't placed securely, or is placed securely in less than idea rock, and said cam drags to a wider section of the crack where the cam then inverts. That's why you need to pay exceptional attention to detail when placing all forms of small pro.

Cams don't "ran out of range", unless they were placed badly, dug out weak rock in a placement, or were drug to a wider spot in the crack.


csproul


Apr 18, 2012, 12:22 PM
Post #88 of 161 (3219 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1767

Re: [USnavy] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

USnavy wrote:
healyje wrote:
USnavy wrote:
It's kind of an unofficial official statement. Metolius has openly said in e-mails that the pieces are designed for aid only, however they do not state that on their website. I remember reading a thread awhile back where someone complained that they decked when a 0 or 00 ripped. He contacted Metolius and they told him that the 0 and 00 cams were for aid only.


I just checked with their catalog crew and they did at one time annotate those pieces as aid-only. It was probably not the wisest decision to stop pointing out the obvious in their documentation from my perspective.

USnavy wrote:
My partner fell on a 0 Master Cam last season and umbrellaed the cam in its placement, shearing off the cam stops.

As I said, it's physically impossible for a cam - anyone's cam; of any size - to invert and sheer the stops in a good placement - physically impossible.
No it's not impossible, not even close. The guy that fell on the cam took a factor one fall on it. What likely happened is the cam ran out of range and it umbrellaed. That's is not only very possible, it is very likely....
A good placement doesn't umbrella. If it does, then it was not a good placement.


Partner cracklover


Apr 18, 2012, 12:40 PM
Post #89 of 161 (3205 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 9973

Re: [csproul] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

csproul wrote:
USnavy wrote:
healyje wrote:
USnavy wrote:
It's kind of an unofficial official statement. Metolius has openly said in e-mails that the pieces are designed for aid only, however they do not state that on their website. I remember reading a thread awhile back where someone complained that they decked when a 0 or 00 ripped. He contacted Metolius and they told him that the 0 and 00 cams were for aid only.


I just checked with their catalog crew and they did at one time annotate those pieces as aid-only. It was probably not the wisest decision to stop pointing out the obvious in their documentation from my perspective.

USnavy wrote:
My partner fell on a 0 Master Cam last season and umbrellaed the cam in its placement, shearing off the cam stops.

As I said, it's physically impossible for a cam - anyone's cam; of any size - to invert and sheer the stops in a good placement - physically impossible.
No it's not impossible, not even close. The guy that fell on the cam took a factor one fall on it. What likely happened is the cam ran out of range and it umbrellaed. That's is not only very possible, it is very likely....
A good placement doesn't umbrella. If it does, then it was not a good placement.

Actually, you and Healy are technically wrong, although your basic premise is right.

One of the most common failure modes of a cam - particularly small cams, is that the axle bends, allowing the cams to invert. This will happen in a good placement, so long as the force on the cam is high enough.

Taking a fall factor 1 on any little micro cam will likely exceed the capability of the cam. How the cam fails will vary, but if it inverts, that should not surprise you.

GO


Partner cracklover


Apr 18, 2012, 12:53 PM
Post #90 of 161 (3192 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 9973

Re: [rgold] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

WW or rgold - regarding Retribution...

There was a cam fixed at the crux for a while. Am I right that the placement you're referring to is that same one? Because that one was fixed by Alison O when she fell at the roof. Alison O is coming out on Friday, so WW - if you're coming, you can ask her what she placed there.

I've only done the climb once, and I didn't fall, and don't recall that placement. The one thing I remember clearly is that it was my first 5.10 lead in the Gunks, so it holds a special place for me!

As for me - I don't really love Link Cams, but I do use them when my partner brings the rack. For semi-blind placements where the rock is kind of undulating, they're certainly nice.

GO


patto


Apr 18, 2012, 1:00 PM
Post #91 of 161 (3188 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [cracklover] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Rubbish that micro cams like TCU 0 and 00 are for aid only. Same goes for micro nuts (RPs) which are event lower rated that TCU 00.

RPs were invented for ONE reason and that was to protect climbs. Numerous climbs around here need such gear to be able to be protected. And numerous falls have been arrested by RPs.

Of course you need good quality rock otherwise you'll get rock failure.



(Yes I have placed the RP 0 before Angelic)


(This post was edited by patto on Apr 18, 2012, 1:05 PM)


healyje


Apr 18, 2012, 1:13 PM
Post #92 of 161 (3174 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [cracklover] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Axle (and stem) failures are another deal and you correctly identify them as the primary failure modes in good placements.


healyje


Apr 18, 2012, 1:22 PM
Post #93 of 161 (3163 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

patto wrote:
Rubbish that micro cams like TCU 0 and 00 are for aid only. Same goes for micro nuts (RPs) which are event lower rated that TCU 00.

They are rated and sold by their manufacturers as aid gear - how we choose to use them is another deal altogether. I probably use aid gear for free climbing protection more than most folks and my standard free climbing rack includes, #2-5 HB Offsets, #1-3 Loweballs, and #2-5 Crack N Ups.

You really have to shrink your perspective way, way down to the millimeter level to successfully use small gear as effective free climbing pro year in year out and even then it's a matter of calculating and accepting the odds.


Partner cracklover


Apr 18, 2012, 1:55 PM
Post #94 of 161 (3145 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 9973

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

In reply to:
As I said, it's physically impossible for a cam - anyone's cam; of any size - to invert and sheer the stops in a good placement - physically impossible.

healyje wrote:
Axle (and stem) failures are another deal and you correctly identify them as the primary failure modes in good placements.

Since the above is just a bunch of equivocating, I'll say it one more time: For small cams, the most common failure mode is plastic deformation of the axle, along with some flattening of the lobes, allowing the cams to umbrella and eventually invert.

None of this is relevant, though, for the link cam issue. What happens there is that in bottoming placements (like old podded out pin scars) the cam is not free to rotate, and breaks itself.

GO


caughtinside


Apr 18, 2012, 2:25 PM
Post #95 of 161 (3125 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30369

Re: [cracklover] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:
For semi-blind placements where the rock is kind of undulating, they're certainly nice.

GO

I used to think that too.


healyje


Apr 18, 2012, 2:26 PM
Post #96 of 161 (3124 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [cracklover] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

No equivocating about it. Deformation axle failures are still typically a matter of one side of the piece skating and blowing off cam lobe material and usually due to the device rotating to the load. The inward collapse of the axle with both sets of cams are well-placed and in-line with the load in solid rock is rare and I've had more stems and axles simply part company in those instances.

P.S. It's why I tend to use Loweballs in place of small cams or backing them up.


(This post was edited by healyje on Apr 18, 2012, 2:42 PM)


Partner cracklover


Apr 18, 2012, 2:36 PM
Post #97 of 161 (3115 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 9973

Re: [caughtinside] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
cracklover wrote:
For semi-blind placements where the rock is kind of undulating, they're certainly nice.

GO

I used to think that too.

Yeah, this pretty much says it all:
In reply to:
You think you always place your cams so they never pivot? Yeah, you're wrong. I broke one when the cam arm hung up on a small crystal.

Especially at the Gunks, where regular cracks with no big divots or crystals are almost unheard of.

GO


VertFlirt


Apr 19, 2012, 11:34 PM
Post #98 of 161 (3010 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 19, 2007
Posts: 27

Re: [shotwell] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

it is very possible, if not probable that this is a case of user error. it seems to me that user error resulting in broken cams, is far more common with link cams then any other brand. ive had these cams for a few years, and until now, loved em. my new opinion is that there "limitations" are not acceptable. i think most, if not all cam manufacturers recommend that cams be placed in the direction of a fall.

i found a tread very similar to this one on supertopo.com with pictures of a few broken link cams, check it out.. http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=1507599&msg=1511384#msg1511384

i copied and pasted this next paragraph cuz i couldn't a said it better.....

"Anyone who does a lot of traditional climbing places gear in all sorts of inventive and unusual ways. Sometimes I’ll place a cam and look at it and think “that’s bomber but it is going to get really f*cked up and bent out of shape if I fall on it.” And yeah if I do fall on it maybe it does get all torqued out of shape, I have to move it to the aid drawer or the “retired gear that saved my bacon” bin. But it held and did not break.
A piece of gear which must be placed in an exact alignment with the direction of pull or it will likely break is inconcieveable to me. I completely reject the philosophy of this design."
that is the reason for my blanket recommendation, but u dont know me from a hole in the ground,and i know that, therefore i know all you apparent engineers on this site will do your own extensive reserch and make ur own highly educaded decisions and continue writing these essays here.
jt512, i should learn to write like a grown up, but i perfer to be outside rather than at a desk, i hope all ur 25000 posts r this usefull.

climb safe,


healyje


Apr 20, 2012, 3:01 AM
Post #99 of 161 (2985 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

VertFlirt wrote:
... is far more common with link cams then any other brand.

Dude, again, could be because THEY AREN'T LIKE ANY OTHER CAM.

Look, if you or anyone else can't tell that after a 1/4 second glance at them then you shouldn't be using them. They are what they are and if the fact they have springs and a trigger somehow fooled you into thinking they're just another cam then it's the same story - you shouldn't be using them.

One of my posts is the one after the Ksolem post you quote. He's another old guy who simply rejects the design tradeoff premise as unacceptable. That's cool and you can bet he either rejected it out of hand or after checking them out, but what he didn't do was leave the ground with any illusion they're just another cam.

The inescapable bottom line remains the same - when you clip a chunk of metal on your rack or harness, you aren't leaving the ground with some idealized or generic device. No, you're leaving the ground with a device with very specific advantages and disadvantages inherent in its design and manufacture. You either recognize and work within those constraints or you are just asking to be hurt or killed.


shotwell


Apr 20, 2012, 6:38 AM
Post #100 of 161 (2962 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

healyje wrote:
VertFlirt wrote:
... is far more common with link cams then any other brand.

Dude, again, could be because THEY AREN'T LIKE ANY OTHER CAM.

Look, if you or anyone else can't tell that after a 1/4 second glance at them then you shouldn't be using them. They are what they are and if the fact they have springs and a trigger somehow fooled you into thinking they're just another cam then it's the same story - you shouldn't be using them.

One of my posts is the one after the Ksolem post you quote. He's another old guy who simply rejects the design tradeoff premise as unacceptable. That's cool and you can bet he either rejected it out of hand or after checking them out, but what he didn't do was leave the ground with any illusion they're just another cam.

The inescapable bottom line remains the same - when you clip a chunk of metal on your rack or harness, you aren't leaving the ground with some idealized or generic device. No, you're leaving the ground with a device with very specific advantages and disadvantages inherent in its design and manufacture. You either recognize and work within those constraints or you are just asking to be hurt or killed.

This is the position I have been less eloquently supporting. Just like any other device you use, it can get you killed. You have to be willing to accept and understand the idiosyncrasies of every piece of equipment you use.

I rejected the Link Cam design in the store, not after breaking one and decking. I knew that I couldn't consistently place that piece in a safe way and never even considered it for my rack.

Based on the design limitations, I only recommend that people that accept and understand those limitations use the device. My point, of course, was that the OP and his buddy had every opportunity to know about this long before anyone hit the ground. Why that position is met with vitriol has a lot to do with the way I said it, but I still think it is both fair and reasonable.

However, the OPs latest post is the most moderate, and I probably never would have replied to the thread if all of that info had been in the OP.


VertFlirt


Apr 20, 2012, 11:40 AM
Post #101 of 161 (2582 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 19, 2007
Posts: 27

Re: [shotwell] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

healyje- dude i get it, they certinly ant any other cam, they have pros and cons... i get it. thats why i created this post, so everyone knows they have huge limitations, and will probilby break unless the placment is perfect.

shotwell- i think what ur looking for is me to admit that i didnt know shit about links before i started using them, this is not COMPLETLY true, i always knew they were weaker, and the've broken before. i also knew that, just like ANY OTHER CAM, they had to be placed in the direction of the fall, and i admit i underestimated the importance of that statment. i havent verified this but im sure EVERY OTHER SLCD manufacturer says the same thing about there product, tortional loading is bad, place in direction of fall.bla blabla. I feel OP didnt do a goodenoff job leting climbers know that, unlike ANY OTHER CAM, these ones will probily blow up if subjected to any tortional loading. like me, not all climbers will extensivly search the www to find this out before putting a UIAA approved product to use.


healyje


Apr 20, 2012, 12:47 PM
Post #102 of 161 (2569 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

VertFlirt wrote:
...like me, not all climbers will extensivly search the www to find this out before putting a UIAA approved product to use.

Part of the point I and others are trying to get across here is that climbing is a serious, as in dead serious, business. Trad climbing is doubly so. You simply can't afford to "underestimate" ANYTHING about the pro you leave the ground with.

Saying you "knew they were weaker" is a start and hopefully you got that at first glance. But then you have to take that awareness a couple of steps further first taking the time to figure out 'weak' in what ways? And on sorting that out you then have to translate that to what it means in using them in placements - how will different placements either mitigate or exacerbate those weaknesses.

If you have to depend on websites, the UIAA, CE, manufacturer or any source outside of your own common sense and logic to figure that out then it's the same deal - you shouldn't be using them. The UIAA, CE, manufacturer, and sorted internet avatars aren't going to be leaving the ground with you when you tie in on lead - you are alone and you have to be capable on your own of perceiving, analyzing, and understanding the limitations of the gear you leave the ground with otherwise you're at high risk of injury and death.


shockabuku


Apr 20, 2012, 1:01 PM
Post #103 of 161 (2561 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4856

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

healyje wrote:
If you have to depend on websites, the UIAA, CE, manufacturer or any source outside of your own common sense and logic to figure that out then it's the same deal - you shouldn't be using them.

Which, as I read it, says "you have to know what you don't know."


tradmanclimbs


Apr 23, 2012, 5:53 AM
Post #104 of 161 (2487 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [shockabuku] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I do not carry anything on my rack that does not have multiple uses and can not stand up to abuse. trad climbing is not a delicate sport and delicate gear has no place on my rack. Aid on the other hand is delicate. still not carrying link cams. i will take may chances with a talon hook or a bird beak ;) Link cams IMOP are too frajile and too limited in their placement orientation for me to bother carrying them. as much as I feel tricams are over rated i will take a tricam any day over a link cam.


tradmanclimbs


Apr 23, 2012, 6:20 AM
Post #105 of 161 (2475 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

All micro gear is sussecptable to faliure much more so than large gear. We Should all know that a 00 TCU is marginal pro in it's best placement. Most of us also feel pretty darn warm and fuzzy when we place a 2" piece in a good crack. Heck if I place a 2" piece in a good c rack I expect it to be completly effin bombproof to the tune of you can hang a keg off that sucker. This brings up the biggest danger with the Link cams INMOP. They are generaly big pieces that most would expect to be bombproof yet they are in fact just as delicate if not more delicate as your micro cams.


shotwell


Apr 23, 2012, 7:07 AM
Post #106 of 161 (2461 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
All micro gear is sussecptable to faliure much more so than large gear. We Should all know that a 00 TCU is marginal pro in it's best placement. Most of us also feel pretty darn warm and fuzzy when we place a 2" piece in a good crack. Heck if I place a 2" piece in a good c rack I expect it to be completly effin bombproof to the tune of you can hang a keg off that sucker. This brings up the biggest danger with the Link cams INMOP. They are generaly big pieces that most would expect to be bombproof yet they are in fact just as delicate if not more delicate as your micro cams.

A full keg weighs 160.5 pounds. How is that even remotely bombproof?

If you can't handle the delicacy of the Link Cam, don't use them. I don't.

My argument is still the same as healy's. Make your own decisions. Figure out how to keep yourself and your partner safe.


tradmanclimbs


Apr 23, 2012, 9:54 AM
Post #107 of 161 (2427 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [shotwell] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

 It's a saying that has been arround since I started climbing 30 years ago. "that is so bomber you could hang a keg off it" If you do not apperciate the humor in that saying then you are most likly too uptight to share a rope with... YMMV

Link cams are big pieces that should be bomber, they are not bomber. That is some shifty shit in my book and will not earn a place on my rack.


healyje


Apr 23, 2012, 10:29 AM
Post #108 of 161 (2409 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
Link cams are big pieces that should be bomber...

Hey, that's completely inane - which part of this link tab looks 'big' to you, or do you just not bother looking too close?




tradmanclimbs


Apr 23, 2012, 10:39 AM
Post #109 of 161 (2400 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Thank you joe. You just made my point perfectly. A big piece should take advantage of it's size and be bombproof yet any anchor is only as strong as it's weakest LINK. In this case that link is mighty darn small.


healyje


Apr 23, 2012, 10:55 AM
Post #110 of 161 (2389 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

"Size" is an utterly meaningless, pointless, and entirely counterproductive use of a word with regard to protection - there is nothing about the "size" of a piece or protection that does or should determine that piece's fitness for the task at hand.

That you would somehow equate "size" to fitness irrespective of the details of design and manufacture is borders on frightening.


redlude97


Apr 23, 2012, 10:55 AM
Post #111 of 161 (2385 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 988

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
It's a saying that has been arround since I started climbing 30 years ago. "that is so bomber you could hang a keg off it" If you do not apperciate the humor in that saying then you are most likly too uptight to share a rope with... YMMV

Link cams are big pieces that should be bomber, they are not bomber. That is some shifty shit in my book and will not earn a place on my rack.
Larger tricams and big bros are also big pieces, should they automatically be bomber as well? Or if you are going to use them should you just be aware of the limitations?


tradmanclimbs


Apr 23, 2012, 11:24 AM
Post #112 of 161 (2374 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [redlude97] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

joe, thats effin stupid. regardless of what some girl told you to make you feel better size does matter. A #3 camalot makes a better belay anchor than a #00 TCU. A #7 stopper is bombproof, a #3 micro is a #3 micro. Bigger is better when it comes to saveing my ass. Link cams are big but have tiny little fcking parts in them that makes them potentualy as weak as a new born kitten. Total fcking BS INMOP


marc801


Apr 23, 2012, 11:25 AM
Post #113 of 161 (2374 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2729

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
It's a saying that has been arround since I started climbing 30 years ago. "that is so bomber you could hang a keg off it"...
I've been climbing for 40 years and have climbed in most of the major US climbing areas. I've never heard that saying until today.

"You could hang a truck off it...", sure, but keg?


tradmanclimbs


Apr 23, 2012, 11:30 AM
Post #114 of 161 (2372 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [marc801] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

Mark, How about a Beer Truck? You get your truck and a keg thrown inCool


healyje


Apr 23, 2012, 12:40 PM
Post #115 of 161 (2344 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
joe, thats effin stupid. regardless of what some girl told you to make you feel better size does matter. A #3 camalot makes a better belay anchor than a #00 TCU. A #7 stopper is bombproof, a #3 micro is a #3 micro. Bigger is better when it comes to saveing my ass. Link cams are big but have tiny little fcking parts in them that makes them potentualy as weak as a new born kitten. Total fcking BS INMOP

Your entire tract on size matters is moronic - design matter, materials matter, manufacturing matters. There is NOTHING about size that somehow does or should override the details of what a piece 'is' when you leave the ground with it.


(This post was edited by healyje on Apr 23, 2012, 12:41 PM)


johnwesely


Apr 23, 2012, 2:06 PM
Post #116 of 161 (2312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 5343

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

healyje wrote:
tradmanclimbs wrote:
joe, thats effin stupid. regardless of what some girl told you to make you feel better size does matter. A #3 camalot makes a better belay anchor than a #00 TCU. A #7 stopper is bombproof, a #3 micro is a #3 micro. Bigger is better when it comes to saveing my ass. Link cams are big but have tiny little fcking parts in them that makes them potentualy as weak as a new born kitten. Total fcking BS INMOP

Your entire tract on size matters is moronic - design matter, materials matter, manufacturing matters. There is NOTHING about size that somehow does or should override the details of what a piece 'is' when you leave the ground with it.

I think he is just trying to say that the limitations exceed the usefulness of the piece, especially when compared to other pieces in the same size range.


tradmanclimbs


Apr 23, 2012, 2:23 PM
Post #117 of 161 (2302 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

Joe, Are you smoking crack?

Hanging belay. the moves off of that hanging belay are the crux of the climb and no gear is available untill after hard moves have been done directly above the belay risking an FF2 fall.

Your choice of belay anchors.
Option #1; Two 1/4in button heads with leeper hangers or two 1/2in glue ins.

#2: Two 3# BD micro stoppers or 2 BD #7 stoppers.

#3: Two #00 metelious TCU's or 2 BD Gold #2 Camalots.

In 30 years of climbing I have zippered some gear. Mostly pushing new routs. only once was it a large piece. A horribly placed green camalot in a wet slimy flare. All my other gear failures have been micro wires, micro stoppers, tied off knife blades, bird beaks, talon hooks, etc. When it comes to protection bigger is better up to a point.

My point with the link cam is it is a big piece with tiny delicate parts in it. Useless as tits on a boar hogg INMOP


(This post was edited by tradmanclimbs on Apr 23, 2012, 2:30 PM)


tradmanclimbs


Apr 23, 2012, 2:27 PM
Post #118 of 161 (2297 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I think he is just trying to say that the limitations exceed the usefulness of the piece, especially when compared to other pieces in the same size range.



Bingo.


6pacfershur


Apr 23, 2012, 2:45 PM
Post #119 of 161 (2287 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 22, 2010
Posts: 214

Re: [VertFlirt] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

this thread is awsome! the only ones missing are rescueman and majid....


healyje


Apr 24, 2012, 12:02 AM
Post #120 of 161 (2237 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
I think he is just trying to say that the limitations exceed the usefulness of the piece, especially when compared to other pieces in the same size range.

Bingo.

As I've said again and again, I have no problem with that personal conclusion and decision not to use them; what I have a problem with is the moronic assertion that big pieces should be bomb.

P.S. There isn't a cam size I haven't broken or seen broken.



marc801


Apr 24, 2012, 11:47 AM
Post #121 of 161 (2176 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2729

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
Mark, How about a Beer Truck? You get your truck and a keg thrown inCool
A beer truck sounds just great!!!


tradmanclimbs


Apr 24, 2012, 1:35 PM
Post #122 of 161 (2150 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [marc801] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

Who is the moron here joe? The guy who gets all warm and fuzzy when he sinks a perfect # 3 camalot or perhaps a #11 hex in a perfect bottle neck or the company that markets link cams to noobs on the premis that they are bomber pro that does everything?


healyje


Apr 24, 2012, 1:43 PM
Post #123 of 161 (2143 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

I would say anyone who takes a 1/4 second glance at them and thinks they're just another cam or anyone asserting size is anything but meaningless without consideration of design and manufacture.


shotwell


Apr 24, 2012, 1:46 PM
Post #124 of 161 (2138 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
Who is the moron here joe? The guy who gets all warm and fuzzy when he sinks a perfect # 3 camalot or perhaps a #11 hex in a perfect bottle neck or the company that markets link cams to noobs on the premis that they are bomber pro that does everything?

Have you even tried to keep up with this thread? On the main marketing page for the Link Cams Omega Pacific specifically warns about their inherent weaknesses.

In reply to:
Be sure to anticipate direction of load, should you fall or weight the cam. This is particularly important with Link Cams, due to their unique construction. Since they are built using trisected cam lobes, Link Cams can become damaged—and the placement may fail—if a load is placed that makes the cam “shift” when a climber falls onto it. We are constantly researching ways to improve the strength and durability of Link Cams, but it is critical that Link Cams be placed with direction of load in mind. You should always place any removable protection with this principle in mind, of course, but Link Cams in particular should be placed so that the stem is aimed directly toward the ground and, when loaded, the position of the axle does not rotate during a fall or when bounce-testing. Although Link Cams’ flexible stems can help “correct” a less-than-ideal placement, it is still important that the initial placement be made in proper alignment with anticipated load.

Doesn't sound like they're saying you can use them however you choose to me. If you're incapable of deciphering marketing copy it is no surprise that you would use size as an indicator of strength. It is no one's fault but your own that you think Link Cams should work the way you expect. They are what they are.


healyje


Apr 24, 2012, 2:00 PM
Post #125 of 161 (2126 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [shotwell] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

In reply to:
unique construction

In reply to:
trisected cam lobes

Ultra-hush-hush, secret code words for 'not like other cams'.

The advantages the design offers comes with some obvious materials limitations in the execution - at least they should be patently obvious or, if they aren't, then you shouldn't be trad climbing.


tradmanclimbs


Apr 24, 2012, 2:16 PM
Post #126 of 161 (2621 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

Have not read a glossy mag in years . When I did read the link cam adds years ago when they first came out they were very clearly marketed as a do anything and everything cam. After useing them and hearing about many failures I feel that when used by the average climber they are a time bomb. They should have a large disclaimer on them. UNLESS YOU ARE A TOTAL GEEK WHO CAN AND WILL CALCULATE EVERY POSSIBLE MICRO ANGLE OF PULL FOR EACH AND EVERY PLACEMENT DO NOT USE THESE CAMS!

YMMV


patto


Apr 24, 2012, 3:36 PM
Post #127 of 161 (2600 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
UNLESS YOU ARE A TOTAL GEEK WHO CAN AND WILL CALCULATE EVERY POSSIBLE MICRO ANGLE OF PULL FOR EACH AND EVERY PLACEMENT DO NOT USE THESE CAMS!

To one degree or another most trad climbers are "geeks".

It takes a certain amount of trust in ones own abilities to read, understand and control the risks to trad climb. "Geeks" that understand the mechanics and forces involved in trad climbing can trust themselves to control them.

I have seen many good climbers step away from trad climbing because they are smart enough to realise that they don't have the appropriate skills to trad climb.

I have encountered only very few decent trad climbers who don't have a degree of geekiness. Even then their ability to assess new gear, gear placements and scenarios may be inferior if they shun the geeky analysis.


tradmanclimbs


Apr 24, 2012, 6:45 PM
Post #128 of 161 (2567 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

As a confirmed geek tradclimber I am raiseing the bar on the link cam to only be used by TOTAL geeks. Us reguler geeks prefer gear that will not self destruct that easily. YMMV


climbingaggie03


Apr 24, 2012, 9:38 PM
Post #129 of 161 (2531 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: 1172

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Just to weigh in, I placed my #2 link this past week while climbing in Moab. I've had my link cam for a long time. I got it not long after they came out, and definitely before the first failure (which I think was on left ski track in Josh)

I bought mine on the marketing that it was a great piece for panic situations, or flares. I'd say that experience has shown that this is not necessarily the case. I still like my Link cam though. I'll admit that I've never fallen on it, however I have weighted it in TR anchors, and in aiding.

The extended range is the major benefit of the link cams, even if the drawbacks are that you have to be very careful with your placements. I love mine if I need an extra mid range piece, but don't want to cary the green, red and yellow camalots. I love it for crack jumaring. I love it for an anchor piece. I placed it this week because I was pumped in a crux and I needed to get the right piece in fast. I love it if I'm heading up to set up a TR anchor and I'm not exactly sure what size gear I'll need.

Do they have limitations? absolutely. I didn't know the limitations (neither did OP I believe) when I first bought it, but in my opinion, it's still a useful piece, even if I have to be more careful when I place it.


djayr


Apr 24, 2012, 9:52 PM
Post #130 of 161 (2525 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2003
Posts: 8

Re: [climbingaggie03] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I love the "these are not normal cams" discussion in this group. I have used links and haven't had issues but I never fell on one and don't; intend too--i think of them as ice screws. i agree with the posts that makes fun of the fact that climbers are/are not geeks. When i climb i'm also not thinking about angles and ALL the possible fall angles. Plus the Omega site says this:

"Be sure to anticipate direction of load, should you fall or weight the cam. This is particularly important with Link Cams, due to their unique construction. Since they are built using trisected cam lobes, Link Cams can become damaged—and the placement may fail—if a load is placed that makes the cam “shift” when a climber falls onto it.... Although Link Cams’ flexible stems can help “correct” a less-than-ideal placement, it is still important that the initial placement be made in proper alignment with anticipated load."

Its basically saying that unless you place them "perfectly" they could fail. Erroneous! why use something so dubious in unpredictable environment? I've fallen on many cams and mangled they held. I won't be trusting a link "cam" Its a great piece of shitty gear for false sense of security and i use it for that when i need a good dose of encouragement. But i know i'm getting bullshit.


tradmanclimbs


Apr 25, 2012, 3:12 AM
Post #132 of 161 (2497 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [jt512] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

The real idiot is the guy who uses Link cams as TR anchors. Gear can shift when you tr on it and most often you can not see it untill you get to the top and inspect the anchor. BTW when Top roping on gear you should inspect the anchor every lap. Can not imagin being so lazy that I would use a link cam for a TR anchor simply because I did not feel like carrying the extra weight of a selection of more robust and actually bomber gear.


patto


Apr 25, 2012, 3:47 AM
Post #133 of 161 (2492 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
BTW when Top roping on gear you should inspect the anchor every lap.

You have got to be kidding me. Crazy How much of a trad man are you?


A well set up top rope can be used all day without needing inspection. Trad or bolts it makes no difference to me.


csproul


Apr 25, 2012, 7:37 AM
Post #134 of 161 (2463 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1767

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

patto wrote:
tradmanclimbs wrote:
BTW when Top roping on gear you should inspect the anchor every lap.

You have got to be kidding me. Crazy How much of a trad man are you?


A well set up top rope can be used all day without needing inspection. Trad or bolts it makes no difference to me.
I see...so you don't bother to check your TR rig every once in a while? A well set up TR should not need to be messed with during the course of a day, but that doesn't mean that I'm not going to periodically take a look at it when I get to the top. Maybe not every lap, but at least periodically, and I certainly wouldn't deride anyone else who wanted to do so. This is especially true at some of our more crowded destinations where it is not unheard of to have clueless people up top messing around with things.


patto


Apr 25, 2012, 8:13 AM
Post #135 of 161 (2441 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [csproul] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

csproul wrote:
Maybe not every lap, but at least periodically, and I certainly wouldn't deride anyone else who wanted to do so.
Sure.

But I wasn't deriding anybody who wanted to check their top rope every lap. I was deriding somebody who was other SHOULD check their top rope every lap.


I set up 8 top ropes for a large group last weekend. I checked them all before we started. They were used for 5 hours before they were taken down. Why would one need to check a top rope set up more than daily?


billcoe_


Apr 25, 2012, 9:36 AM
Post #136 of 161 (2417 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4668

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

To the OP, thanks for the report. As you say, not everyone knows this. I just came back from a climbing trip where I wound up explaining why I left my Link Cams at home for the trip to a younger and newer climber. He had a very hard time grasping this issue as he was lusting after them so badly. To reiterate the finer points, just go re-real all Healyjh's posts above as that was my discourse to the lad in a nutshell. You need to understand the limitations of the things. Once ya do, there's not a point in accepting those significant and serious limitations unless the route specifically will gain you something by having them, and those routes, which are out there it's true, are few and far between. So I'll leave the Links at home most of the time. I'd recommend others do likewise.

The Link Cams are a specialty piece that so underperforms Metolius, Totem cams and others, that for me, the risk is just not worth bothering racking the things at all unless I have that specific need. Like US Navy says above about crack jugging. I'm glad I own some, and they are an otherwise fine and amazing piece for those specific uses. Otherwise, I do NOT carry them at all. Anyone who climbs with me knows to do the same.


climbingaggie03


Apr 25, 2012, 9:55 AM
Post #137 of 161 (2409 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: 1172

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
The real idiot is the guy who uses Link cams as TR anchors. Gear can shift when you tr on it and most often you can not see it untill you get to the top and inspect the anchor. BTW when Top roping on gear you should inspect the anchor every lap. Can not imagin being so lazy that I would use a link cam for a TR anchor simply because I did not feel like carrying the extra weight of a selection of more robust and actually bomber gear.


I do keep an eye on it every now and then, and I'd say it's not about lazyness, but more about safety. I haven't spent much time in VT but frequently where I climb, the scramble around for a TR anchor is not a class 1 hike, and the less I have to carry, the safer I feel.

My TR anchors are ALWAYS atleast 3 pieces(if I'm using gear), and I'm always concious of the direction of pull on the anchor.

You can't keep an eye on a cam when you're leading, after you clip it and keep climbing so I'd say that using it in a TR set up when there are 2 back ups is safer than it being the only thing between you and the ground/ledge.


healyje


Apr 25, 2012, 11:50 AM
Post #138 of 161 (2380 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [billcoe_] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

billcoe_ wrote:
You need to understand the limitations of the things. Once ya do, there's not a point in accepting those significant and serious limitations unless the route specifically will gain you something by having them, and those routes, which are out there it's true, are few and far between.

Exactly, well said.


tradmanclimbs


Apr 25, 2012, 3:56 PM
Post #139 of 161 (2330 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

patto. you didn't check em all day?

that is why they call it camp kill a kidCool


patto


Apr 25, 2012, 4:02 PM
Post #140 of 161 (2327 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
patto. you didn't check em all day?

that is why they call it camp kill a kidCool

No kids involved.

You still haven't explained why it is necessary to constantly check trad gear. Furthermore the bigger risk factor in repeatedly used TR is not over trad gear it is concerning rubbing and wear. This naturally can occur whether it is trad or bolted.

I am happy to leave a redundant top rope set up running all day when built using 10mm+ rope with multiple redundancy and no rub points.


tradmanclimbs


Apr 25, 2012, 5:00 PM
Post #141 of 161 (2309 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

Shit happens, things can shift. eyes on after every lap is a good way to grow old. I do the same with bolts but there are fewer chances of a screwup with bolts or slung trees than with trad gear. either way eyes on is a no brainer. Granted I don't get to the top of the cliff to check when putting up and working a new route solo. Does not mean that I don't sweat bullets on that last jug to the top @ the end of the day. It ain't paranoia if they really are out to get youWink When I do my free solo workout laps I eyeball the other folks anchors on my way accross the top of the cliff. It's a habbit.. I have caught a few screw ups over the years that way.. Rope jumped out of one biner, gate unscrewed and wedged against the other biner with both gates open. that sort of thing..

Running a group all day without checking the top anchors. bad juju... Crazy


patto


Apr 25, 2012, 5:25 PM
Post #142 of 161 (2296 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
Shit happens, things can shift. eyes on after every lap is a good way to grow old. I do the same with bolts but there are fewer chances of a screwup with bolts or slung trees than with trad gear. either way eyes on is a no brainer. Granted I don't get to the top of the cliff to check when putting up and working a new route solo. Does not mean that I don't sweat bullets on that last jug to the top @ the end of the day. It ain't paranoia if they really are out to get youWink When I do my free solo workout laps I eyeball the other folks anchors on my way accross the top of the cliff. It's a habbit.. I have caught a few screw ups over the years that way.. Rope jumped out of one biner, gate unscrewed and wedged against the other biner with both gates open. that sort of thing..

Running a group all day without checking the top anchors. bad juju... Crazy

You haven't said anything there. Bad juju is not an explanation. Ropes don't just jump out of biners. Biners don't just magically become unscrewed.

Set things up properly and things will stay good. Set them up badly and things may turn bad before you check it again.


tradmanclimbs


Apr 25, 2012, 6:06 PM
Post #143 of 161 (2288 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [patto] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Whatever. you do your thing. I do not guide large groups. Don't believe in that kind of climbing. the only time I ever TR is when I am workring a new route decideing if it is worth bolting. Used to only put routs up GU but getting a bit wiser in my old age... When I do guide I take that responsibility seriously and if it is a TR situation I get eyes on that anchor periodicly. YMMV


USnavy


Apr 26, 2012, 10:48 PM
Post #144 of 161 (2206 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2658

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

healyje wrote:
USnavy wrote:
No it's not impossible, not even close. The guy that fell on the cam took a factor one fall on it. What likely happened is the cam ran out of range and it umbrellaed. That's is not only very possible, it is very likely.

Hey, did you even bother to read what I wrote?

healyje wrote:
The only way it can happen is to fall on a piece that isn't placed securely, or is placed securely in less than idea rock, and said cam drags to a wider section of the crack where the cam then inverts. That's why you need to pay exceptional attention to detail when placing all forms of small pro.

Cams don't "ran out of range", unless they were placed badly
Except that's my entire point, in the case of small cams, a "bad placement" is pretty common. Its hard to inspect micro cams and determine how much expansion range is remaining on the back lobes. You can get away with placing a #2 Camalot at 30% cammed, but try that on a 0 TCU and forget about it, it's probably not going to hold any legit lead fall.

Watch this video at the 1:00 mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xparZFsBS40

Note that those cams are being pulled in a 1" thick steel jig, probably made out of T3 steel or something similar. As you might have noticed, the jig does not move or compress at all. So the cam movement you saw in that video is a function of the cam bending and compressing. The same thing happens when you fall on a cam in the real world, just to a lesser extent because you are not loading it to 10 kN like in the video.

However, that issue is the less important of the two. The other issue is the compression of the rock. If the rock compresses even just 1/8", that could be sufficient to cause a microcam to rip. When you are talking about softer material like sandstone, forget about it, it is very easy to get material like that to compress when the force on the rock under the lobes is easily in the many thousands of PSI.

The entire point I am trying to make is that the difference between a fully retracted cam and a cam that is nearly tipped out is very subtle when talking about microcams. Its very easy, even for experienced trad climbers, to place a microcam with the outside lobes 75% camed, but fail to realize there is a very shallow flair to the crack and the inside lobes are only 25% camed. Microcams have no expansion range below 50%. If you dont get them in a position where all the lobes are fully retracted, you basically have a piece of passive pro at that point. The remaining expansion range could easily be in the 1/32" to 1/16" range which is nothing, just the compression and torsion of the cam on a fall can expend that range.


(This post was edited by USnavy on Apr 27, 2012, 3:55 AM)


healyje


Apr 27, 2012, 12:03 AM
Post #145 of 161 (2199 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [USnavy] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

USnavy wrote:
Note that those cams are being pulled in a 1" thick steel jig, probably made out of T3 steel or something similar. As you might have noticed, the jig does not move or compress at all. So the cam movement you saw in that video is a function of the cam material compressing and bending. The same thing happens when you fall on a cam in the real world, just to a lesser extent because you are not loading it to 10 kN like in the video.

Good video, but look closely and you'll see that is not cam lobe material compression, but rather axle deformation of the kind cracklover was speaking of. Despite the axle deformation the cams are working as they were designed right up until the stem breaks.

But we certainly agree micro cams - and all small pro - can easily be placed badly if you aren't paying attention to very minute details when placing them. And once badly placed it's worthless and not worth having stopped to place it.

You have to get way down to the millimeter level on inspection and placement with small pro - as USNavy is hinting at, rock quality can change quite drastically over the course of inches or less in some stone.


tradmanclimbs


Apr 27, 2012, 2:29 AM
Post #146 of 161 (2187 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Margin for error. all micro gear regardless of type or brand has pretty much zero margin for error. placed perfectly in good quality rock and it can have amazeing results. Mess it up just a little bit and it's what Joe said... a waste of time..


USnavy


Apr 27, 2012, 3:54 AM
Post #147 of 161 (2179 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2658

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

healyje wrote:
USnavy wrote:
Note that those cams are being pulled in a 1" thick steel jig, probably made out of T3 steel or something similar. As you might have noticed, the jig does not move or compress at all. So the cam movement you saw in that video is a function of the cam material compressing and bending. The same thing happens when you fall on a cam in the real world, just to a lesser extent because you are not loading it to 10 kN like in the video.

Good video, but look closely and you'll see that is not cam lobe material compression, but rather axle deformation of the kind cracklover was speaking of. Despite the axle deformation the cams are working as they were designed right up until the stem breaks.

But we certainly agree micro cams - and all small pro - can easily be placed badly if you aren't paying attention to very minute details when placing them. And once badly placed it's worthless and not worth having stopped to place it.

You have to get way down to the millimeter level on inspection and placement with small pro - as USNavy is hinting at, rock quality can change quite drastically over the course of inches or less in some stone.
You're correct, I meant to say axle deformation, although I imagine the lobes probably compressed to some small extent. I know for fact that the lobes on an Alien will compress if you take a legit fall on them. I flattened out the lobes on one of my blue Aliens awhile back taking a small factor .75 fall on it. Interestingly enough it held, but the cam was at my foot, I dident go very far and the cam was in steel hard rock with nearly 90% lobe retraction.


jt512


Apr 27, 2012, 9:36 AM
Post #148 of 161 (2118 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21890

Re: [USnavy] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

USnavy wrote:
healyje wrote:
USnavy wrote:
Note that those cams are being pulled in a 1" thick steel jig, probably made out of T3 steel or something similar. As you might have noticed, the jig does not move or compress at all. So the cam movement you saw in that video is a function of the cam material compressing and bending. The same thing happens when you fall on a cam in the real world, just to a lesser extent because you are not loading it to 10 kN like in the video.

Good video, but look closely and you'll see that is not cam lobe material compression, but rather axle deformation of the kind cracklover was speaking of. Despite the axle deformation the cams are working as they were designed right up until the stem breaks.

But we certainly agree micro cams - and all small pro - can easily be placed badly if you aren't paying attention to very minute details when placing them. And once badly placed it's worthless and not worth having stopped to place it.

You have to get way down to the millimeter level on inspection and placement with small pro - as USNavy is hinting at, rock quality can change quite drastically over the course of inches or less in some stone.
You're correct, I meant to say axle deformation, although I imagine the lobes probably compressed to some small extent. I know for fact that the lobes on an Alien will compress if you take a legit fall on them. I flattened out the lobes on one of my blue Aliens awhile back taking a small factor .75 fall on it. Interestingly enough it held, but the cam was at my foot, I dident go very far and the cam was in steel hard rock with nearly 90% lobe retraction.

You think a .75-factor fall is "small"? On a blue Alien? I'm starting to understand why you've already experienced four cam failures in such a short climbing career.

Jay


healyje


Apr 27, 2012, 10:29 AM
Post #149 of 161 (2100 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [USnavy] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Aliens were / are made of 6061 aluminum and mush out fast accordingly. Metolius are 7075 and harder which gives them marginally less bite, but deform less as I believe are BD and WC cams. So yes, the Aliens definitely do tend to "flatten" more than other cams.


USnavy


Apr 27, 2012, 5:25 PM
Post #150 of 161 (2046 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2658

Re: [jt512] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
USnavy wrote:
healyje wrote:
USnavy wrote:
Note that those cams are being pulled in a 1" thick steel jig, probably made out of T3 steel or something similar. As you might have noticed, the jig does not move or compress at all. So the cam movement you saw in that video is a function of the cam material compressing and bending. The same thing happens when you fall on a cam in the real world, just to a lesser extent because you are not loading it to 10 kN like in the video.

Good video, but look closely and you'll see that is not cam lobe material compression, but rather axle deformation of the kind cracklover was speaking of. Despite the axle deformation the cams are working as they were designed right up until the stem breaks.

But we certainly agree micro cams - and all small pro - can easily be placed badly if you aren't paying attention to very minute details when placing them. And once badly placed it's worthless and not worth having stopped to place it.

You have to get way down to the millimeter level on inspection and placement with small pro - as USNavy is hinting at, rock quality can change quite drastically over the course of inches or less in some stone.
You're correct, I meant to say axle deformation, although I imagine the lobes probably compressed to some small extent. I know for fact that the lobes on an Alien will compress if you take a legit fall on them. I flattened out the lobes on one of my blue Aliens awhile back taking a small factor .75 fall on it. Interestingly enough it held, but the cam was at my foot, I dident go very far and the cam was in steel hard rock with nearly 90% lobe retraction.

You think a .75-factor fall is "small"? On a blue Alien? I'm starting to understand why you've already experienced four cam failures in such a short climbing career.

Jay
The fall distance was small; we are talking about a total fall distance of maybe five feet. Anyway, that is the only time I have taken a hard[er] fall on a cam, the other cams incidents I referenced were all below factor .25. And I haven’t experienced four cam failures, I have experienced more than that, just four involved the cam sliding down the rock in seemingly good placements. However, I have had only one cam pull on the mainland and I climb a lot more trad in the continental USA than I do in Hawaii. As I said before, climbing trad here is tricky. The majority of the cracks are small and require small gear, the cracks are parallel so they require cams and they do not easily accept nuts, and the rock is made out of lava which is not exactly the most optimal stuff to climb trad on. The problem with our basalt, aside from being too smooth in parts, is that the outside layer of the rock cooled faster than the inside when it formed which results in two separate layers. The outer layer is basically just a bunch of cornflakes glued together for 1/4". When you fall on a cam that is placed on this outer layer, the cornflakes break off and cam can pull.

At first, some ask why we have bolted cracks:





Well, aside from the fact that the FA made that decision, some cracks are bolted because our rock can be less than optimal for trad and here is why. That second picture looked like it would take gear perfectly, right? Let’s take a bit closer look:





As you can see the entire surface of the rock is just one big flake wrapped around the inner rock. The tan rock is the outer layer and the grey rock is the much more solid inner layer. Place a cam on the tan and you might be in trouble, place it on the grey and you’re okay. Granted I have taken falls on gear in the crack in the above photos and had it hold, but I think those last two photos make it a bit easier to understand why bomber looking placements can sometimes pull. Granted, in those photos the separated flake an inch from the crack should warn you off, but there are places where the inner layer does not show itself and there are no obvious visual warnings that the rock is separated.

However, that issue I described is less important. Although that rock had a flakey outer layer, it seems to be more reliable than this rock:



This is what many of our cracks look like. At first it looks like a standard crack that would provide good gear. But unfortunately that is not the case. This is the cornflake phenomena I referenced above. This layer of rock is basically just a lot of flakes glued together. Often times when someone places a cam in rock with this type of texture in Hawaii, the cam lobes crush the flakes on a fall and dislodge them from the main body. At that point the cam is basically sitting in a field of marbles.

Lastly, the exact crack I placed the blue Alien in:



I placed it about 2/3rds up the pictured crack. It held because although the rock does have the same type of outer mantle shown in the other photos, there is no space between the outer layer and the inner layer, and the outer layer is well fused to the inner layer which creates a much more solid piece of rock. But as you can see, the differences are rather subtle and can be easy to miss. All of the cracks in this post "look" like they would offer a textbook cam placement, parallel rock, seemingly high density rock. But as I have pointed out, looks good and is good are not necessarily one and the same which is why I always try to have more than one piece between me and the ground regardless of where I am climbing.


(This post was edited by USnavy on Apr 27, 2012, 5:36 PM)


climbingaggie03


Apr 27, 2012, 7:32 PM
Post #151 of 161 (1677 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: 1172

Re: [USnavy] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

You know, maybe I'm not trying hard enough, but in over 15 years of climbing, the only time I've ever had a cam pop was on the S Face of Wash column. I was bounce testing a red Camalot in a kind of flaring placement.

I've taken 30-40 foot falls on my gear and never had it pull.


rightarmbad


Apr 27, 2012, 11:10 PM
Post #152 of 161 (1658 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 21, 2005
Posts: 217

Re: [USnavy] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Don't know about only takes cams, there looks to be plenty of nut placements there.......


healyje


Apr 28, 2012, 12:34 AM
Post #153 of 161 (1650 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [USnavy] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

I'm a long-time sandstone and basalt climber there's nothing about any of that I wouldn't hesitate to lead on gear. And I'm guessing these aren't big climbs either so if it came down to doubling up some of your pro I don't see the big deal (which you should be doing regardless in some of that rock).

And of those four cams that failed, how many did you clip directly into the cam biner and how many were slung?


USnavy


Apr 28, 2012, 3:58 AM
Post #154 of 161 (1643 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2658

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

healyje wrote:
I'm a long-time sandstone and basalt climber there's nothing about any of that I wouldn't hesitate to lead on gear. And I'm guessing these aren't big climbs either so if it came down to doubling up some of your pro I don't see the big deal (which you should be doing regardless in some of that rock).

And of those four cams that failed, how many did you clip directly into the cam biner and how many were slung?
I never said its not leadable on gear, I simply said its tricky and placements can pull. I have had placements pull here that have held time and time again everywhere else. In Yosemite, I cant tell you how many standard C1 placements I just threw in, clipped the aider to, and jumped right onto the piece. If its a splitter crack there is generally no reason to test the piece. I have done that hundreds of times in Yosemite without issue. However, if I try that here, I am screwed. I have had a number of placements pull on a bounce test in Hawaii basalt that would hold a truck if placed the same way in Yosemite granite. The failure mode is always one of two things. The cam just slides down the placement, as the lobes skid on the rock, or the rock flakes apart and the cam marble balls out.

I should post some pics of some of the placements I have ripped on a bounce test; placements that look pretty textbook. I'll try to see if I can get that done tomorrow.


tradmanclimbs


Apr 28, 2012, 4:25 AM
Post #155 of 161 (1639 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599

Re: [USnavy] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Its always easy to monday moring QB someone on the internet. no matter what a photo looks like it is not the same as being there in person.


healyje


Apr 28, 2012, 4:30 AM
Post #156 of 161 (1634 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [tradmanclimbs] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

tradmanclimbs wrote:
Its always easy to monday moring QB someone on the internet. no matter what a photo looks like it is not the same as being there in person.

Lived there, know the rock, and climb basalt every day I go out here. I know what I'm looking at in the pictures.


USnavy


Apr 28, 2012, 5:16 AM
Post #157 of 161 (1625 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2658

Re: [healyje] link cam broken when fallen on [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

healyje wrote:
tradmanclimbs wrote:
Its always easy to monday moring QB someone on the internet. no matter what a photo looks like it is not the same as being there in person.

Lived there, know the rock, and climb basalt every day I go out here. I know what I'm looking at in the pictures.
Just eight hours ago you said "Wait, let me stop you right there - having lived in hawaii I can testify there are no rocks there of any kind. You shouldn't be trying to use cams or bolts, you should be hammering in snargs and warthogs." Anyway, basalt crags are extremely serial in nature, no two basalt crags are ever the same. Just within 100 feet of each other I can find basalt that is so soft I can crush it in my hand and I can find basalt that is stronger than the strongest concrete known to man. It all depends on the crag. I will try to post some pics of the actual placements. That will remove all of the guess work and confirm what I have been trying to say all along; a solid looking placement is not guaranteed to actually hold a fall, it can pull if the rock is too smooth or if it is flaky. But that has already been proved by Metolius.


(This post was edited by USnavy on Apr 28, 2012, 5:38 AM)