|
napoleon_in_rags
Jan 16, 2005, 9:43 PM
Post #1 of 12
(1985 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2004
Posts: 586
|
I have a set of the old camalots. What is the smallest size that is rated when Umbrella'ed? I know only the double axled Camalots can do this but if I remember right, some of the smallest double axled can't. I believe it's the .5 size. but I am not sure.
|
|
|
|
|
slavetogravity
Jan 16, 2005, 9:56 PM
Post #2 of 12
(1985 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 9, 2003
Posts: 1114
|
The smallest double axle cam, by Camelot, is the blue 0.3
I’ve fallen on mine when it was fully umbrellad. It caught my fall but I wouldn’t recommend it.
|
|
|
|
|
jstp
Jan 16, 2005, 10:02 PM
Post #3 of 12
(1985 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2004
Posts: 97
|
The .3 was never made when there was the old style U-stem camalots. And the new camalots, down to the .3 are full strenth rated when umbrellaed. not so with the .1 and .2. they are significantly weaker than full rated strength totally open and placed pasively. As for which has the umbrella problem of the old Camalot Jrs i cant say. sorry. i would like to know, there must be someone who does.
|
|
|
|
|
geezergecko
Jan 16, 2005, 10:53 PM
Post #4 of 12
(1985 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 26, 2002
Posts: 729
|
Well now we have a problem; which is the *old* style Camalot; the original U stem ones, or the single stem ones before the *new* single stem with a loop Camalots aka C4? From now on, let's call the U stem ones Ancient Camalots to avoid confusion.
Anyways, the Camalots down to .4 are rated at 8kn umbrella strength and 16kn when used properly (12kn for the big uns #4.5 and up). The .1 and .2 are single axle and rated to 3kn. The .3, although double axle, is also rated to 3kn. The double axles just are too wimpy on the .3. Note that there is no .3 New Camalot aka C4 and .4 is the smallest size currently available as C4. The BD website will still sell you .1, .2, and .3 but these are the pre-C4 types. There is rumour of a C3 model coming out some time in the future to replace these little guys.
|
|
|
|
|
harihari
Jan 17, 2005, 4:55 AM
Post #5 of 12
(1985 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 7, 2004
Posts: 182
|
if I recall correctly, on the instruction manual for the .3 (baby blue) camalot, it says something like "not recommended for passive use". It doesnt say this on the manuals for the other camalots.
I've used mine lots and taken a few biggies on it. The issue seems to be that the edges (tips) fo the cams get worn cos they are so small. Great piece of gear, tho.
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Jan 17, 2005, 7:56 AM
Post #6 of 12
(1985 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
They were two U-Shape camelots. I know because I have both on my rack. Which are the acient? What do we call the others?
|
|
|
|
|
buckyllama
Jan 17, 2005, 3:12 PM
Post #7 of 12
(1985 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 314
|
I can't help with the "passive strength" question but here's a brief rundown of what I know of the history of camalots. (I'm sure others have more info to add)
The really old camalots were U stem. The cable ran through the aluminum block that carries the axles and was swaged on top of it. It then ran down through a piece of rigid gray plastic tubing which ended at a seperate seperator piece to keep the stems spread correctly. Unlike metolius where the sperator bar is metal and swaged to the cable, this one was plastic and just pressfit into the plastic tube. The clip in loop was bare cable and did not come with an integral sling. The trigger was a piece of teh same knurled plastic that was used for the seperator bar and rode inbound of the two vertical stem pieces. So it was basically a 1-finger trigger.
The first revision (that I know of) basically just changed the 3 seperate plastic pieces into a single molded piece.
Both of the above suffered from the problem that the axle carriers would crack along their length starting at the cable swage. I've heard people say this doesn't affect their strength since the axles hold everything together. But I still retired mine and they are now hanging in my basement. I should also note the lobes were much thinner on these old models.
The next generation was the camalots most of us know well. Originally they came in 5 sizes. .5 .75 1 2 and 3. And the other sizes have been added over time. The .5 and .75 were originally U stem designs but with a molded plastic clip in loop and a 3 finger trigger.
More recently they changed the .5 and .75 to a single stem design and added the smaller sizes, including the single axle models.
And just this past year they changed again to add a thumb loop and reduce the weight. (which I think is great)
I can take some pics of the old ones if anyone is interested.
|
|
|
|
|
napoleon_in_rags
Jan 17, 2005, 3:41 PM
Post #8 of 12
(1985 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2004
Posts: 586
|
So the consensus is that the older single stem camalots, only the blue .3 is not rated when umbrellad. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
harihari
Jan 18, 2005, 12:45 AM
Post #9 of 12
(1985 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 7, 2004
Posts: 182
|
In reply to: So the consensus is that the older single stem camalots, only the blue .3 is not rated when umbrellad. Thanks.
Wait-- I'm not sure about this (since I don't have the "manual" anymore) but I recall the .3 *having* a passive ("umbrellad") rating but that this rating was lower than the rating for the bigger oens (.4 and up). We would have to ask BD about this to be sure.
|
|
|
|
|
napoleon_in_rags
Jan 18, 2005, 1:12 AM
Post #10 of 12
(1985 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2004
Posts: 586
|
I was more concerned about the .5 which is the smallest Camalot I have...
|
|
|
|
|
napoleon_in_rags
Jan 18, 2005, 1:12 AM
Post #11 of 12
(1985 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2004
Posts: 586
|
I was more concerned about the .5 which is the smallest Camalot I have...
|
|
|
|
|
geezergecko
Jan 18, 2005, 3:03 PM
Post #12 of 12
(1985 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 26, 2002
Posts: 729
|
The .5 Camalot is rated at 8kN passive (12kN active).
The .3 Camalot is rated at 3kN passive (10kN active).
|
|
|
|
|
|
