|
patto
Apr 18, 2012, 12:37 PM
Post #51 of 161
(10700 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
Magic. It must be magic.  
|
|
|
|
|
kappydane
Apr 18, 2012, 2:02 PM
Post #52 of 161
(10675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2004
Posts: 119
|
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, 3:01 PM
Post #53 of 161
(10657 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4275
|
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!
|
|
|
|
|
granite_grrl
Apr 18, 2012, 4:28 PM
Post #55 of 161
(10625 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 15084
|
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 ...
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.
|
|
|
|
|
csproul
Apr 18, 2012, 4:42 PM
Post #57 of 161
(10607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769
|
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 ... 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.
|
|
|
|
|
mojomonkey
Apr 18, 2012, 4:59 PM
Post #58 of 161
(10597 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2006
Posts: 869
|
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 
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, 4:59 PM
Post #59 of 161
(10594 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 15084
|
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 ... 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, 5:04 PM
Post #60 of 161
(10586 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
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
but not all the affected cams dont require cam stops to operate ...
(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Apr 18, 2012, 5:05 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 18, 2012, 5:09 PM
Post #61 of 161
(10574 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
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, 5:16 PM
Post #62 of 161
(10569 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
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 ...
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, 5:20 PM
Post #63 of 161
(10563 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
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
now back to links ...
|
|
|
|
|
rgold
Apr 18, 2012, 5:22 PM
Post #64 of 161
(10560 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1804
|
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, 5:34 PM
Post #65 of 161
(10552 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
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, 5:40 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
granite_grrl
Apr 18, 2012, 5:35 PM
Post #66 of 161
(10549 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 15084
|
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 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, 5:37 PM
Post #67 of 161
(10547 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4275
|
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?
|
|
|
|
|
csproul
Apr 18, 2012, 5:49 PM
Post #69 of 161
(10528 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769
|
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. 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 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 again ... lets get back to links ... perhaps you can share yr experience owning and fallling on em ...
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, 5:51 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
wonderwoman
Apr 18, 2012, 5:54 PM
Post #70 of 161
(10519 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4275
|
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. 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 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 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, 5:56 PM
Post #71 of 161
(10506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
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, 5:57 PM
Post #72 of 161
(10504 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4275
|
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. 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 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 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, 5:59 PM
Post #73 of 161
(10501 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 15084
|
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. 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 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 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, 6:00 PM
Post #74 of 161
(10497 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
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
"highly moderated" indeed !!!
(This post was edited by bearbreeder on Apr 18, 2012, 6:01 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
wonderwoman
Apr 18, 2012, 6:06 PM
Post #75 of 161
(10485 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4275
|
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 "highly moderated" indeed !!! [image]http://i43.tinypic.com/jl3sib.png [/image]
What can I say? I moderate like a girl.
|
|
|
|
|
|
