|
rgold
May 12, 2003, 11:03 PM
Post #26 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1804
|
I'm not a tricam evangelist but I do carry a few instead of the corresponding size stoppers. In passive mode, I find them better than stoppers---the rails allow them to be placed around pebbles and other irregularities, and I place them passively perhaps 90% of the time. I view their camming properties as a rarely-needed but occasionally useful extra benefit.
|
|
|
|
|
drkodos
May 12, 2003, 11:11 PM
Post #27 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2002
Posts: 2935
|
At a certain point of my gunks climbing I was addicted to the things. I never went anywhere without the pink and the red. Sometimes, two of each, for mental protection.
Therapy and trips to other areas have left them gathering dust in the garage.
I do, however, like the idea of using the rails around pebbly features. (Myopea and old age prevent me from freely thinking.) I will try it this weekend (weather permitting), on my two week trip back east to the home-land (like the swallows returning to Capistrano). This rail/pebble idea got me thinking of another area besides the Gunks where they may be quite useful, where I've never thought of using them....crack climbing at the Cathedral Spires in Needles South Dakota......
Thanks for the inspiration.....
I still don't think I need three of each color.... :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
May 12, 2003, 11:24 PM
Post #28 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
no, you don't need three of each color.
they are wonderful in the needles. i've used them for at least pyschological pro in between crystals and chickenheads. they are also great in the crystally cracks.
|
|
|
|
|
phugganut
May 13, 2003, 12:24 AM
Post #29 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2003
Posts: 648
|
Tricams absolutely rock! The smallest 5 are always on my rack and often get placed, especially the smallest 3. Also, I agree with what somebody else previously posted about cleaning them: they're not hard to clean IF you know how.
As for the Viamont, I've no personal experience with them. I am a bit leery of them, primarily b/c of the wire instead of the sling, so I've not bid on them despite seeing them on Ebay all the time.
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
May 13, 2003, 12:50 AM
Post #30 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: I still don't think I need three of each color.... :wink:
I had been mostly carrying the smallest 4, but a recent climb made me decide to again start carrying the next two. IIRC it was an easy, thin crack in Yosemite.
Few pieces polarize climbers as much as those do. And your opinion is interesting, as you been on both sides.
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
May 13, 2003, 1:57 AM
Post #31 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
There isn't a tri-cam placement in the world that an Alien or small TCU won't also work.
Tri-cams were great back in the day before micro-camming units. Now there are just museum pieces.
??? Even the 1/2 Tricam isn't in the micro cam range. Width isn't what is unique to a Tricam. It is in a relatively wide but shallow crack that they sometimes work where a cam, no cam will.
Mark Heyman
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
May 13, 2003, 2:03 AM
Post #32 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: In reply to: I still don't think I need three of each color.... :wink: If you decide they still suck, or just want to get rid of a few, I'll gladly pay shipping for sizes 3.5-6. Dunno how much I'd use 'em--I've never used those sizes before. I had been mostly carrying the smallest 4, but a recent climb made me decide to again start carrying the next two. IIRC it was an easy, thin crack in Yosemite. Few pieces polarize climbers as much as those do. And your opinion is interesting, as you been on both sides.
Honestly, having anything bigger then a #4 seems counter productive. Like you I'd get em if they were free just to try them out but I have up to a #4 which I carry sometimes. The bigger they get the more unstable and the less advantage they have over a cam. I'd love to rack that big yellow (#7 I think) just for laughs.
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
May 13, 2003, 2:27 PM
Post #33 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
Allright, I'll keep this thread going a little longer. I've been using TriCams for 20 years (or something like that) and am very comfortable with them in lots of situations. I carry the .5, 1, 1.5 all the time.
I also carry the #5 (gasp)
This size is killer. It covers the range of a 2.5 - 3.5 Friend and weighs less than a #1 Friend. I don't use it in place of cams in parallel side cracks (That would be stupid) but I find it incredibly useful in weird block stacks, huecoes, and fractured rock. It's amazing in weird alpine or desert terrain. When Mark Twight and Jeff Lowe were descenting off the N. Face of Nuptse, Twight dropped his rappel rig and ended up doing 37 rappels using the #5 as his rappel device. That's a funny story but don't run out and buy a #5 for a rap rig. If you have one sitting at the bottom of your gear pile, throw it on your rack some day and see how many weird places you can get it to fit.
Mal
|
|
|
|
|
sheldonjr
May 14, 2003, 9:51 PM
Post #34 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 31, 2003
Posts: 191
|
I actually saw a guy racked up with that HUGE one.. I was totally blown away. He said he loved it. :? :?:
|
|
|
|
|
cadaverchris
May 14, 2003, 10:32 PM
Post #35 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 12, 2003
Posts: 323
|
Back to the Viamont tri-cams....
i saw a stuck one in a horizontal placement at Annapolis Rocks MD.
the sucker was in there good, and has probably been there for a while. I tried to weasel it out, and then i noticed that the rails were bent and broken by other would be pirates of booty gear!
now if hammering a nut tool to try to remove it provided enough force to break of a piece of the rail, i don't think I'd trust it to keep my butt off the ground!!!
just a very subjective opinion on the viamonts
-chris
[edited for spelling]
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
May 15, 2003, 3:41 AM
Post #36 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: now if hammering a nut tool to try to remove it provided enough force to break of a piece of the rail, i don't think I'd trust it to keep my butt off the ground!!! just a very subjective opinion on the viamonts -chris [edited for spelling]
Just to play devils advocate...pounding on any piece of gear with a nut tool is a bad idea. Once I heard my wife trying to get a green alien out all of a sudden I hear tap tap tap. I'm like whats going on. she goes I can't get this alien out. I SCREAMED YOU AREN"T HITTING IT WILL A NUT TOOL ARE YOU. Anyway, I stopped her, down climbed and removed the piece in one quick motion. The point is I'm not a big fan of pounding on my gear to get it out. Think about a regular tricam, those suckers are strong and simple but if you pounded on that pin with a nut tool you'd seriously weaken the tricam. IMO pounding a piece is the absolute last resort.
|
|
|
|
|
brutusofwyde
May 18, 2003, 9:50 PM
Post #37 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 3, 2002
Posts: 1473
|
In reply to: There isn't a tri-cam placement in the world that an Alien or small TCU won't also work.
Yes, there is. In fact, there are many:
I don't know of any aliens or small TCUs that will work where a #7 tricam will.
Also,
Around the far right side of the base of Chouinard Falls at Lee Vining, on the side of the rock everyone ducks behind to pee, is a flared slanting crack that will take a pink tricam but no other piece. We found it this last winter after an extensive search.
Hope this helps!
Brutus
|
|
|
|
|
brutusofwyde
May 18, 2003, 10:07 PM
Post #38 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 3, 2002
Posts: 1473
|
In reply to: Back to the original thread, I'm curious as to the stability of these wired tricams. Since tricams don't have springs and normally can't be set with a yank ( like a nut ), I depend on the "loose" sling not moving it that much.
Huh?
Most placements, I yank those suckers tight enough that my second needs a hammer to get them out.
Brutus
|
|
|
|
|
savedbymynuts
May 19, 2003, 7:01 AM
Post #39 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2003
Posts: 101
|
It seems the wire would act as a spring to force the cam to pivot on the wider side. Hence making it more of a active caming device then the original tricam.
Relating to the stuck piece. I prefer stuck pieces then pieces that do not hold.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
May 19, 2003, 7:53 PM
Post #40 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
Just wanted to add some first hand *second hand* information. I was climbing in the Gunks this weekend and at the top of Madam G's a climber had some gear attached to the rappel anchors. I noticed some Viamont Tricams. He was not american (from his accent probably Germatic) although he only spoke english to his party.
Anyway, I asked about the Viamonts and he said he loved them. Most of his gear was older Rock Empire and other eastern European gear, BTW. Anyway, I asked all the questions you guys have been asking and he said that
1) The stability of the wire bail vs. the webbing?? As per the climber you do need to extend them with a long sling to keep them steady. However, he said he always extended lowe tricams as well so this was no different.
2) Are they unstable in horizontals??? He said he normally places them in horizontals placed actively with a long sling and the spring tension tends to keep them in place better then a webbed lowe tricam even with rope drag.
3) Have you used lowe tricams and how do they compare??? He said they compared quite well and in certain situations were better then lowe tricams because of the tension. He also noted they were cheaper and more durable but he was unsure of the US pricing of either. He said he did not use these passively and not often in horizontal cracks either.
I hope some of this might help. I think these Viamonts are pretty much like a Lowe, either you love em or you don't.
|
|
|
|
|
kpj240789
May 10, 2005, 2:16 AM
Post #41 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2005
Posts: 232
|
I bought a set on ebay today, just for sh**s and giggles. They should be here in a few days. I hope they're somewhat useful.
|
|
|
|
|
gunksgoer
May 10, 2005, 2:51 AM
Post #42 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 1290
|
i saw them recently and was kinda curious. even if they turn out to be shit it seems they could be nice for rap stations and leaver pieces at that price.
|
|
|
|
|
scrapedape
May 10, 2005, 2:59 AM
Post #43 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 2392
|
In reply to: I just bid on these to see if they're any good. I suspect they'll suck but will post my opinions after I've tried them. Mal
Two years on, any opinions Mal?
|
|
|
|
|
harrisha
Jun 18, 2005, 5:15 AM
Post #44 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2003
Posts: 314
|
In reply to: They may have a similar range, but they aren't as strong. The smallest of the Viamont tricams can take only five kN. The smallest Camp can take ten. Here are the Camp strength ratings. C.A.M.P Tricams .5 Pink 10kN 1 Red 10kN 1.5 Brown 15kN 2 Purple 15kN 2.5 Blue 18kN 3 Black 18kN 3.5 White 22kN The strongest Viamont tricam is only 15kN. I think I will stick with my Camps.
kN ratings mean little in reagards to whether or not a piece will hold your fall. Sure that 2kN micro nut might weld into place and then have the cable strip away, but under normal circumstances the Viamonts seem plenty strong. You have to keep in mind that those kN ratings are the point of failure in which the gear physicaly breaks and not the point at which placements fail. Whether a placement fails or not depends on many variables, and you will be hard pressed to find a situation where the kN rating is one of those variables.
|
|
|
|
|
harrisha
Jun 18, 2005, 5:22 AM
Post #45 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2003
Posts: 314
|
Here is the web address http://www.viamontgear.com. I didn't check the specs as it is 1:20 AM and I've been up packing for a trip to Boundary Waters and now want to go to bed, but they look heavier than those made by CAMP (they seem to use more material for the piece itself).
|
|
|
|
|
madrock
Aug 20, 2005, 4:43 AM
Post #46 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 11, 2002
Posts: 255
|
These look pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
jbolts
Sep 7, 2005, 6:31 PM
Post #47 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 31, 2005
Posts: 24
|
Well these are stil for sale on Ebay....what's the verdict nay or yay? :?:
bolts
|
|
|
|
|
lajhanata
Sep 20, 2005, 5:19 PM
Post #48 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2005
Posts: 81
|
So I bought a set of these wired tricams off of e-bay in late May and have climbed on them all summer. To tell you the truth, they aren't that different than a Camp tri-cam, which I also climb on a lot. Both have basically the same camming action and both are a little tricky to place in comparison to a nut or an SLCD. The difference is mostly in the wire, which has the benefit of providing a better substitute for a wired nut than a normal CAMP tricam, but also makes the Viamont number more prone to walking and harder to place actively in the small sizes.
My nimrod partner placed one of my brand new nuts in a slot that was too small for it (#8 black diamond Nut), and then pounded it until it looked like a copperhead before giving up and leaving it at the top of Haystack at Lovers. Since then I've been sporting the #3 viamont tricam in its place with a great deal of satisfaction. It places especially well with the wired angle of the triangle deep in the crack (when weighted the wire causes the whole piece to dig deeper into hourglass cracks), but also places active with a little finger manipulation. Their easiest placements are pretty similar to ideal Tricam placements, but they are a little more of a right triangle shape, less of a scalene like the Camps (that's why they have a better range in the big sizes).
Other miscellaneous stuff: the #6 has a little extra junk in the trunk (weighs a lot and gets tangled on the rack easily); the wires definitely take a lot of use to break in effectively but are handy for setting; they require a little placement practice; the swaging wears off after hard use; the holes in the bigger ones make them easy to dislodge with a nut tool (even if you've got to pound them for some reason, you're just damaging the inside of the hole); the #1 (way smaller than a .5 tricam) is tricky to place with one hand and hard to remove; and lots of people are persnickety about their tricams and are afraid to rack these wired ones.
Overall, I like them as part of my nut rack especially in the alpine when I'm running a thin rack (more placement options than a normal nut). When I'm just at the crag I usually have the Viamonts on my nut rack (minus the #6) and a few Camps hanging out on the back. I prefer the Camps for anchors, but place the Viamonts more on the move. The whole thing is sort of splitting hairs because they take each others' place nicely. I will say that the Viamonts are a steal price wise, and they ship pretty fast (Czech Republic to Tahoe in 6 days). I'm happy.
Lajhanata
PS- Viamont doesn't make as big a range as CAMP. I love the big CAMP pieces for replacing my 3, 3.5, and 4 Camalots on alpine routes with long approaches. My partner saved his party on the Mathes Crest with a #6 Camp tricam. CAMP definitely has the best design for these big ones. Imagine the Weight of a solid #7 Camp tricam, then imagine it wired and walking out of an anchor. Stick to the small sizes Viamont.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Sep 20, 2005, 5:32 PM
Post #49 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
They work on the same idea, but with less versatility. The principal drawback to the design is the stiff wire which makes them great to place (in both verticals and horizontals), but can make them exceedingly difficult to remove due to the "spring" action the wire is constantly exerting on the piece - in essense there is no "trigger bar" you can squeeze to relieve the spring tension while getting them out.
What Malcolm said...
|
|
|
|
|
lajhanata
Sep 20, 2005, 5:50 PM
Post #50 of 51
(13321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2005
Posts: 81
|
The spring tension seems over rated to me. It's sort of a pain for the #1, but thats because of the space tolerances (I have the same problems with my .5 CAMP, though not as bad as the smaller Viamont). Other than that the tension on the wire is pretty minimal. It's definitely not going to hold the piece there in a fall, so a simple yank almost always removes the piece if it isn't placed well. Besides, the tension wears out after good use. I'd also like to say that the wire tension isn't particularly helpful in placement either. In fact, it's more of a problem there than anywhere else because the springiness of the wire tends to falsely set the cam on any little crystal it can reach. Thus, I don't place these pieces very deep if I can help it. Still, a Nut tool pulls these pieces easier than a CAMP in most cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
