Shout Box

Who's Online
0 registered (), 11 Guests and 2 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Topic Options
#23468 - 08/29/06 03:26 PM Re: Your choice for small cams [Re: crackers]
irisharehere Offline
Site Supporter

Registered: 12/06/01
Posts: 1658
Loc: Danbury CT
Quote:

Strat, Irish's mileage varies because he hasn't been seen climbing since the Daks Fest 0f 2000.

I think he wants to live vicariously by pull testing other people's gear to failure so that they can't climb either...




Sad, but nearly true..............

As the governator said though, "I'll be back!"
_________________________
I didn't spend nine years in Evil Graduate School to be called "Mr Irish", thank you!

Top
#23469 - 08/29/06 03:39 PM Re: Your choice for small cams [Re: strat]
Smike Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/01/01
Posts: 3143
Loc: in your backyard
Quote:

Thanks for the lesson in statistics but I'm not disputing statistics. Sounds like someone has been trying to take some turd-like data and polish it up all pretty lately! Anyway, the dispute is your tolerance to the results of experimental test data in this situation vs mine. You may feel the need to have a high n of cams tested to make a decision about your actions based on the design, manufacturing, and QC of CCH aliens. I, on the other, only need to have n=1 to make a decision. Too much at stake. Your mileage obviously varies.




True, if only if that one cam “fails” it’s enough to assume their might be other failures, as you only need 1 failure yourself to have a complete deal breaker. The flip side is if a cam tested passes, can one assume that all others will not fail? This is where a larger number tested will add value to that rating. So I, like you I can rule them out with one test that fails, but I can not rule them in or safe with one test that passes.

Its kind of like trying to determining that a pool of water has a cotton ball floating in it by only scoping out 1 cup of water to see if its in there. You have thousands of chances for a negative result, but only one chance for a positive.

Top
#23470 - 08/29/06 04:12 PM Re: Your choice for small cams [Re: strat]
irisharehere Offline
Site Supporter

Registered: 12/06/01
Posts: 1658
Loc: Danbury CT
I think the repeated problems CCH are having ARE grounds for no longer trusting the cams. I guess I was just wondering what the real chance of an alien failing under a given load is. Is there a manufacturing issue that has reduced the strength of ALL new aliens out there, and we're now seeing failure of the ones "tested" to beyond the strength limit, or is it a sporadic batch-to-batch variation?

All my aliens were bought back before all these problems began, so I'm still fairly happy to use them.

If i ever go climbing.....
_________________________
I didn't spend nine years in Evil Graduate School to be called "Mr Irish", thank you!

Top
#23471 - 08/29/06 05:04 PM Re: Your choice for small cams [Re: socialist1]
quanto_the_mad Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/14/02
Posts: 2628
Loc: brooklyn
Quote:

What I wonder is what mountain gear found from all their testing. I believe they tested their entire alien stock during the dimple fiasco, so they might be the only ones with a statistically significant sample of failure rates of the non-dimpled cams. Maybe they have posted it?
Ross




In the original post by Paul, they said they tested cams they had in stock, the earliest batch was '05. The alleged cam failure is one from '04, non dimpled.

Maybe it is a single defective cam out of the thousands produced in that run. Maybe the guy brazing the cam just hiccupped and made one bad braze. Maybe that guy is also responsible for the misdrilled orange alien. Maybe he's also responsible for the grey alien that got yellow plastic and yellow sling.

Maybe all these things are one-time mistakes. Yes, they're all statistically insignificant. But I'd rather be alive than statistically insignficantly dead.
_________________________


Top
#23472 - 08/29/06 05:43 PM Re: Your choice for small cams [Re: irisharehere]
MarcC Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 07/10/00
Posts: 3532
Quote:

All my aliens were bought back before all these problems began, so I'm still fairly happy to use them.



Why? What makes you think their QC and manufacturing processes were any better before the dimpled failure? As we've now seen, there has been a pre-dimpled cam failure. If one assumes that QC and processes gradually improve as a company matures, wouldn't that cast even more doubt on cams manufactured earlier in the company's history?
_________________________
- Marc

Top
#23473 - 08/29/06 06:43 PM Re: Your choice for small cams [Re: MarcC]
irisharehere Offline
Site Supporter

Registered: 12/06/01
Posts: 1658
Loc: Danbury CT
Well, before the "dimple" incidents, I don't recall seeing many (if any) reports of alien cam failures or manufacturing flaws, which would lead me to believe that their manufacturing/QC actually got worse, not better.

Of course, I could be totally in error - it could be that their processes were sloppy all along, and it just wasn't recognised until recently, but I'd be surprised if that were that case, given all the use aliens get in the Gunks, Yosemite, and just about everywhere inbetween...... The rash of recent failures would seem to indicate that either (a) the newer cams were not up to their rated strengths, or (b) people recently started taking harder falls on their aliens.

To all those foreswearing aliens - what are you going to do with them? Sell a potentially defctive item on eBay? I'll happily accept any and all aliens (and other cams for the matter), and test them to destruction, in the interests of nothing more than my own curiosity......
_________________________
I didn't spend nine years in Evil Graduate School to be called "Mr Irish", thank you!

Top
#23474 - 08/29/06 06:49 PM Re: Your choice for small cams [Re: MarcC]
dalguard Offline
veteran

Registered: 03/22/00
Posts: 1515
Loc: CT
Don't we need more than one anonymous guy posting and saying it was so before we believe it? The dimple problem was documented and eventually admitted, but this incident is hearsay so far. When the rope broke over the biner in that gym fall, did we all stop buying and using that brand of rope? I realize that CCH's failure to immediately take the lead in the previous case makes them more suspect than some manufacturers but I for one am not ready to stop trusting a bunch of cams I've always trusted because some guy says so. Wait and see what happens. Maybe Karr didn't murder Jon Benet either.

Top
#23475 - 08/29/06 08:19 PM Re: Your choice for small cams [Re: dalguard]
quanto_the_mad Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/14/02
Posts: 2628
Loc: brooklyn
We didn't stop using the rope because we didn't believe a rope would break without external influences. BD handled the incident seriously and professionally, and it was discovered that there was no manufacturing issues, but as everyone suspected, an outside influence, namely sulfuric acid, which damaged the rope. There's no reason to suspect other ropes suffer the same issue.

On the other hand, there have been three completely separate issues with Aliens. One, the miscolored alien, probably wouldn't lead to injury. The misdrilled cam lobes could since the geometry is off. The bad braze definitely could cause injury. The latest is only an allegation. Apparently there is an injured climber, CCH has been in contact with the local sherrif. If it were a hoax, you would expect that CCH would have posted a statement by now.
_________________________


Top
#23476 - 08/29/06 09:37 PM Re: Your choice for small cams [Re: quanto_the_mad]
Smike Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/01/01
Posts: 3143
Loc: in your backyard
Maybe Karr didn't murder Jon Benet either

Apparently he didn't and all changes have been dropped: http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/29/karr.da/index.html

Top
#23477 - 08/29/06 11:02 PM Re: Your choice for small cams [Re: quanto_the_mad]
dalguard Offline
veteran

Registered: 03/22/00
Posts: 1515
Loc: CT
I don't think it's a hoax. I think there's a possibility that the cam didn't fail as described or that the failure can be attributed to some previous harm, as was the case with the rope and the acid. Any cam that has been on my rack since 2004 has felt body weight before and if this guy said take with one piece between him and a ledge fall then he wasn't shy about hanging. It seems unlikely the cam had never seen previous action. But my main point would be that I'm going to wait and see. Even if it's true, I'm not going to arbitrarily get rid of gear that's on my rack, that I'm comfortable with, and that I've hung on before. It's a bit like throwing out your laptop even though your battery isn't part of the recall. I'm pretty happy with my Aliens but if someone with knowledge and good reason tells me they're unsafe, then I'll listen. Until then, I'll wait.

And I knew that about Karr. That was the point.

Top
Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >


Moderator:  daryl512 
Sponsored