so if i were to replace all the small cams on my rack with one of the crappy designs that's made by a company that i can actually trust to do reasonable quality control, what should i buy? i dont like the over engineering and plasticky stiffness of the new BD small cams and i used to have metolius 4cus that i sold because they were crappy and too wide. perhaps the metolius c3s?

Sure, why not?
I really like the new ultralight ones. I'm trying to get rid of my set of old ones so I can justify replacing them with ultralight versions. But it's like anything. Someone else is going to pipe up that they hate them...

wild country zeros

The zero has many of the design features that people love so much about their POS aliens, flexibility all the way to the cams, yadayadayada. Having said that, the yellow zero (which is the equivalent of the blue alien) is rated to 6kN whereas the same size alien was rated to 8kN (although it only holds 900 pounds in reality).

sam, care to share what happened with your 6kN zero?

I've always liked the Metolius TCUs.

I think having three cams instead of four makes them a lot more useful in the often oddly-shaped placements I encounter.

I have shared that story in the past, several times.

I'll share what I remember of it: p i e c e s.

Ie, it broke. 6kn + ~100kg climber = dead cam

It didn't break.

It was not the right cam for the application. Entirely pilot error. Thirteen other pieces of gear could have gone there.

Heavy climber, fat rope, low amount of rope out, PERFECT cam placement, it pulled out.

Actually it was RAF's yellow zero.

I thought you trashed one...

EDIT: I was reminded of who broke it. It wasn't Strat.

crack, when you gonna have some turks making us some cams, huh?

Although invented more than 50 years ago the Beckey TFU (Two Finger Unit) has been tensile tested to more than 35kn with no known failures in a variety of rock types. The only known drawback is that there are only a few sets in existence, all of which are in the possession of one Fred Beckey. Beckey has been known to share the units when well run out and climbing with your girlfriend. The units are fairly maintenance free only occasionally requiring a squirt of Old English 800 or maybe Mad Dog in a pinch.

NEVER.

Those Beckey units have been whispered of for many years but I always thought they were an urban myth. Why produce them, though, when that might interfere with the dirtbag life he loves so much?

There's a parallel discussion to this one going on over at SuperTopo,

http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.html?topic_id=381017

started by none other than John Bachar. Of course, the perspective there is a little different (granite aid climbing, pin scar placements), but I don't see any major consensus. This is significant because there seems to me to be a tendency in some of the other threads for C3 detractors to sound off, in a number of cases with little or even no practical experience, without much response from those who like them. This may be little more than an artifact of the newness of C3's and the resulting lack of communal experience with them.

My suspicion is that people get used to their gear and then, because of their familiarity with it, find other gear worse than it really is, sometimes for no other real reason than that it is different.

I have used the Black Diamond C3's and the Zeros. I replaced all my Aliens with Zeros when I was climbing predominately in Yosemite and really liked them. I am now using both zeros and C3's and really like them. The C3 can be placed in deep placements (such as the start of one of my current favorite climbs called Mutiny on the Bounty (5.12a)), yet in shallow placements the trigger has enough rigidity to place them with precision, but still allows for torsion and flex.

Myself, I've never liked the metolius cams, but its just me. Its a well made product.

And after a friend belayed someone who had an Alien broke, smashing his head into a ledge (another friend who is a nurse and helped stablize him said the bleeding probably saved him by limiting the pressure buildup in his brain, who would figure that bleeding would be good) I don't trust the QC at CCH.

As for the Yellow Alien, I have whipped on it many times with no problem , but then again, I'm 150lbs and the ropes I climb on are between 9.2mm and 9.7mm.

perhaps thats the key! lets all start climbing on super skinny ropes!

Skinny ropes (either half or supper skinny singles) are actually nice when you are climbing on small gear. The only problem is that you trash them out faster.

You calling 9.2 skinny? I think the number needs to on the south end of 8.2 to even be invited into the skinny club

Single ropes Smike... not double/half ropes...

9.2 is pretty skinny for a single!

If I remember you and I have been forced to run around on 8.1's being used as doubles these past couple of weeks. 8.1's clipped to single pieces has no less pucker factor then a single 9.2 (maybe more IMHO)

Not for soaking-wet-125 Smike!

Hey no one was complaining about those doubles as we took the express ride straight to the ground.

Zero's on sale for $39.99 at Ramseyoutdoor.com

I witnessed said incident... I'm not buying any zeroes

That's a good deal but that price is for the old shorter model. BTW- they have TCU for $40.00 too. At least they did when I bought a yellow last week.

I have the 4 & 5 Zeros, but I usually place the Aliens first since the zeros just look frail. I like them, if they were just a bit meatier I would use them a lot more.

doubles while not intended for single use are actually better then I used to think. I had a friend take clean 130fter onto one of two strands of an 8.1mm (he's 145lbs) because of the way the gear was placed. I don't recommed it (either the 130fter or only such a long fall onto one of two) but it does say a lot about the ropes (but given the fall, the fall factor wasn't tremendous though).

And see, everyone is different. I trust Zeros WAY before I trust Aliens.

A clean 130fter? And the fall factor wasn't "tremendous"? Because there were how many feet of rope out? Even with the whole 200 feet you're talking more than .5

I'm a fan of half ropes, but subjective feelings about soft catches notwithstanding, when actual tests are performed there doesn't seem to be much evidence that the impact forces are lower. That said, they might be lower in practice for (at least) two reasons: (1) lower rope friction achieved by having straighter rope paths means more of the rope is involved in arresting the fall, i.e. the "effective" fall factor is closer to the theoretical fall factor. (2) Thinner ropes are harder to hang on to and are subject to less friction in belay devices, so more slippage might occur.

As for big falls on single strands, the 55 kg test data for half ropes can be viewed as roughly equivalent to 80 kg data for factor-1 falls. And a few tests suggest that a half rope will hold a near factor-2 fall or two with an 80 kg weight, just not the five (I think) required for UIAA certification as a single rope.

I caught a short, low FF fall this winter on a single strand of 8.6 mm. I saw the fall and locked off well, and thought I made a textbook catch. I was surprised to see glazed tracks across the plastic palm of my glove afterwards, indicating there was rope slippage of some significance. Device = ATC-XP with Petzl William locker.

It was Dow (on RC.com his handle is DOWWW) and his fall was written up in Climbing. I would call his FF moderate. On Calavaras Dome in California I couldn't get any gear in until I was 15ft above my belayer on a fourth pitch, too bad I pitched off the pitch at 10ft, going right past my belayer. Now thats a bad FF.

I caught a fairly long fall on a single strand of a pair of 8.5 mil doubles (Blue Water Excellence) down in Oz last November. Total distance fallen was probably 7-8 meters with rope stretch, onto a nice, shiny bolt. Hard to estimate fall factor in light of the circumstances, but my experience with rope running through the belay device seems to back up Mike's.

My partner's foot slipped while climbing a blunt, granite slab arete when he was 3-4 meters above the last bolt on the route. He fell off the arete and down the steep opposite side from where I was belaying, thus avoiding a cheesegrater ride down the arete itself, but taking a harder fall.

From my perspective, he slipped, started to fall, and then just vanished from sight. As soon as I saw him go, I started running backward to try to take slack out of the system and was probably two or three good-sized paces back from my starting position when he hit the end of the rope. He weighs 70-ish kilos and I weigh around 60.

The impact stopped my backward progress, yanked me all the way back to the wall forming one side of the arete, up which the rope ran to the initial piece of gear (purple C4), and lifted me about a meter off the ground. Even with that, however, there was additional slippage of the rope through my belay device (ATC-XP, high-friction side, and Omega Pacific Jake screwgate), although fortunately not enough to burn my hand or cause me to loose control, depite not wearing gloves.

The second strand of our doubles, clipped to the next preceding bolt to the one that caught the fall, never bore weight in making the catch.

My partner had heavy bruising on his hip from swinging into the wall at the end of his fall and pinched a nerve in his neck. He ended with a day off climbing but then was back at it, although I got most of the harder pitches for the rest of that trip.

The magnitude of the impact on me was way more than I was expecting, even though the fall factor was probably no greater than .5 or so. I imagine the amount of rope slip through the device would have been far greater if some of the force hadn't been absorbed by my being yanked back to and then up the wall.

I've recently started wearing gloves, although the habit isn't yet thoroughly built in.

Returning to the original topic, I love my aliens (black through red, but no grey), which are old enough that I feel somewhat safe regarding the recent QC problems. Most of them have held falls, although no real whippers, and obviously there's no way to judge how close to their limit those falls may have pushed them. I also have and sometimes use a set of old TCU's as well. Not that I need any more gear, but now I'm thinking there may be C3s in my future.

So I finally got a day out and got to use my new C3’s. That’s obviously not enough to have wear and teat issues. , but I can definitely say they are the best three cam units I have used. For a three cam unit I liked the design as soon as I understood it which is the reason I choose them. I fact, I will go as far as to say that C3’s are the only protection I own that that obviously takes full advantage of modern design and manufacturing processes. C4s probably do too, but I don’t own any – yet.

- They place extremely easily in naturally formed rock.
- I like the stiff springs.
- I think cam stops are really necessity in modern gear. Even though I would consider an umbrellad Alien to have been a placement issue, having the stops provides a higher margin of safety, especially in small gear. I didn’t bother to inspect my Aliens, but I don’t remember any obvious reason cam stops could not be provided on them except cost. I know I would choose to pay more, say as much as C-3s to purchase Aliens I trusted with cam stops.

The C3’s one disadvantage is having only 3 cams. My theory is that in irregularly shaped Gunks conglomerate, the ability to catch different nubbins at different places and slightly different angles make four cams superior in general. Also at least at the Gunks three cams become more of a disadvantage. The many 4 cam tracks in placements are so worn that that placing three cam units in them often does not work well. I used my old Aliens, and to a lesser extent Zeros in some of those placements, but finding less used placement s for C3s was sometimes as easy as trying a Zero.

I also want to note that past discussions have made me a believer in higher friction belay devices, and I will soon begin using a glove. The real problem is how to get my partners to do the same.

The way you worded it, you're gonna have the noobs thinking those old pin grooves and scars are the result of SLCDs!

You beat me to it. I have found that the C3s fit great in the old pin scars at the gunks. I've certainly seen rare cam tracks in sandstone but never in granite or gunks grit.

I wrote what I wrote intentionally though I may be wrong. I also wrote a reply to MarkC before Chip posted, but I decided I did not want my guesses/arguments in this discussion to be taken as argumentative, especially when there are so many here that probably know the correct answer - so why guess.

Chip, C3s are 3 cam units and I can understand why angles would make perfect placements for them. What pins make placements that are better, far better for four cam units? Please explain. Is it the way they are hammered out? Have the tracks gotten smaller and smoother over the years, or have the tracks gotten deeper?
Whatever the cause,they fit four cam units much better than three.

I quess what I'm saying is that I find C3s fit fine in old pin scars of appropriate size: bigger scars also accept 4 cam units fine, although sometimes need a hybrid. I always assume 4 cams are better than 4 as the surface area is usually better, but the C3s have a narrow enough profile that the need for tiny hybrids(like black/blue or blue/green aliens) is much less. This may be a reflection of the climbs I generally am on, but so far seems pretty consistent.

It depends. I can offer specific guesses about specific placements if I saw an example, but it's kinda moot since I don't really agree that pin scars are more suited to 4 cam units than TCUs. And the "tracks" as you call them are certainly not getting any deeper if no one's been hammering any pitons into them. Simply placing and removing SDLCs did not cause the grooves nor does it deepen them. The rock is harder than the aluminum alloy used in cams; otoh, chrome-molly pitons are much harder than the rock.

One example I remember of using a C3 instead of a hybrid is on one of the cruxes of Birdland's first pitch, where most need a green/ yellow alien and a yellow C3 works very well. I am not sure if it is sufficient to make up for the lost surface area of a 4 cam unit, but the C3s have a wider than normal surface of each cam. I have never had to completely trust a tipped out cam but the cam stops certainly are a nice addition. I've never seen a C3 walk at all, which I believe is due to the tighter springs. I was sceptical that these would be difficult to work with but now I much prefer the stiffness. I probably sound like a product rep but I do feel pretty sold on these, especially in light of the CCH issues. In reality, you can find use for any and all pro that is munufactured but finding something you can apply to as many situations as possible is the key. I've actually been real happy with SMC Camlocks, Clog Gogs, Titons and other pro now gone the way of the Dodo in many situations but the limitations are in the versatility. I never did like those Crack-N-Ups, though.

Chip, you liked Titons? I had a couple of them years ago and never got them to sit like they were theoretmically supposed to. I though SMC Camlocks were better but still hated them. I'm simplistic. I like stoppers for stuff like that.

My partner and I took to calling them Teeter-tons. We did carry a few of the larger sizes (4" - 6") on a couple of Yosemite routes with wide cracks (couldn't afford Big Bros and really big SLCDs weren't made yet), but that was about it.

Perhaps I’m going to have to ask someone to explain in person. I have a lot of pieces of a puzzle but don’t see how to get them together. Mind you I’ve never pounded a pin in my life, so I don’t doubt that I was wrong. Anyway there are things that don’t make sense to me:

I always heard that pin scars take hybrid Aliens perfectly. So, I figured that I would know a pin scar when I saw it by the fact that it would look like a perfect hybrid Alien placement. The placements I refer to are perfect four cam placements, so I don’t understand why anyone would rave about hybrids in them, or even want one for them.


> rock is harder than the aluminum alloy used in cams; otoh, chrome-molly pitons are much harder
>than the rock.

Yes of course, but that doesn’t stop holds from being polished buy many hands and shoes, or canyons from being cut by “water”.


> it's kinda moot since I don't really agree that pin scars are more suited to 4 cam units than TCUs.

Originally neither did I! I’m more confused than when I started.


Night.

The pin scars that are adapted to hybrid Alien placements are in granite. Typically, they are pockets carved into a crack by placing increasingly larger pitons in the same position. Climbs like Serenity Crack have finger-sized pockets that have been carved into what was once a knifeblade-sized crack.



[Ivan Rezucha photo]

These pockets can look a bit like a cupped pair of hands, the way you'd join them for scooping up some water. They get their shape not only from the placing of the pin, but also from the removal, which involves banging the pin up and down to loosen it. Since they are typically in a vertical crack, smaller cams at the bottom and larger cams at the top make for a sounder placement, hence Alien hybrids.

Pin scars in the Gunks are rarely like granite pin scars. Firstly, they are usually in horizontal cracks. Secondly, the amount of crack alteration isn't even remotely close to what has happened in granite. This is partially because Gunks conglomerate is far harder than Yosemite granite, and partially because people following aid climbs often drove their pins into the scars made by their predecessors, and the Gunks hasn't seen even a tiny fraction of the aid climbing done in Yosemite. Many pin scars in the Gunks are barely noticeable, being marked mostly by a little breakage at the lip of the crack but no enlarging of the crack itself.

The one type of scar that is more noticeable is made by (repeated) placements of angle pitons. Such pitons are placed in horizontal cracks with the vertex of the angle up, and so the the sides of the angle cut parallel channels in the lower wall of the crack. I assume it is these channels that MW refers to as accomodating 4-cam placements, and in such configurations hybrids offer no advantage.

This is not to say that hybrids don't have their uses in the Gunks; many cracks, especially in the smaller sizes, are far from parallel-sided. If they taper in one direction, a hybrid placement is perhaps better than a regular one. You have to believe this strongly enough to load up your rack with these extra gadgets, but some people find them very useful.

Well said. Nice picture. You are smooth, RG.

Yes that must be what I have seen so many of. After I thought about this the occasional pin scar in a vertical crack, but still a horizontal placement, or app straight out from the face makes good sense only as a pin placement and not as a cam placement even though I sometimes use them anyway.


I was not doubting the utility of hybrids except in the pin scars I see at the Gunks, and you have answered that too.


Thanks RG.


MW.

C3s are quite nice, they don't have the "aahhh" fit of the aliens, but they fit in the same spots great and can take a beating.

I used the old BD .1 and .2 along side my aliens and protected a few falls with each. BD has learned from some of the problems that faced these two well-made cams (wiggling due to the stiff stem, and "spring action" loss...even with a cleaning and fresh lube...after a few or even one hard fall)and R&D has produced an excellent, well-made, versitile and smooth product.

The stem design while stiff, doesnt torque the cam like its predecessor did, and the wider cam lobes have a lot more bite.

The 0's have the feel of the aliens, but I personally dont find them as good as the BDs...the BDs are stronger at the smaller sizes and despite their stiffness can take hard falls when placed in a horizontal crack...field tested ;). Overall I like the 0's but the BDs just feel better in my hands, and are pleasantly versitile in their placements.

TCUs are well-made but imo i dont like em...I dont like the tri-lobe on the larger pieces, and I dont like the obtrusive outer stems on the smaller peices, which has made quick placement on tough climbs difficult for me, and made me uneasy about possibly slotting the wrong size.

All 3 are well manufactured, and wont "snap" on you. Its all about choosing what you can slot quickly and comfortably, and move upward with unwavering confidence.

For me the c3s are strong, easy to place quickly and securly, after wearing out countless ropes from my falls on BDs...slotting one provides me with utter confidence.

RIP CCH, aliens have helped me climb through all of my hardest redpoints, and protected me from many falls...esp the green/yellow offset...I still have my 4yr old aliens on my rack, but after taking many falls on each, am sadly ready to retire them in hopes that their design is purchased and brought to market by a company with great R&D...petzl anyone?

Why purchase what you can clone? The Alien is patented, but they are getting a little long in the tooth and the patent will expire sooner or later.

In fact, the Alien patent expires December 2, 2008, based on:

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4923160.html

and

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=2434

If you were a small independent business like CCH, which had one product, and you expected competition to begin when your patent expired, wouldn't you cut investment in your operations to a minimum?

No, not if you had a solid product with a strong following. You would retain the same loyal customer base, who wouldn't want to buy the copycat... And they would tell their friends.

Of course, if you are having MAJOR PR issues, then yeah... Ramping down your operations is probably prudent.

TrippleB - sounds like you've had a lot of experience with smaller cams, so maybe you can voice an opinion about this.

I like the old BD .1 and .2 cams, too, and certainly trusted them. But I also found the difference between an easily removed cam and an overcammed placement to be rather small. Perhaps it's my poor technique, but I've had fewer problems with stuck TCUs. So I'm wondering what you've found with the C3s in this regard.

Ya gotta love some gear talk early in the morning before a climbing weekend...

You mean after a climbing week, don't you?

Frank,

I have found the c3s to be an improvement over the old .1 and .2s in that regard for 3 reasons...and I will sound like a commercial here but...

1. the lobes are more rounded like the TCUs, allowing them to securely fit without as much overcamming...

2. the lobes overlap...really a HUGE amount of surface area for a cam of this tiny size, again helping with bite in a regular closed position

3. also more importantly the trigger and stem design put more spring action, more than any other cam that size, onto the lobes...this really helps with the fit and security. also these spings independently drive each cam head...A BIG deal if the crack is flared...it really helps with any wiggle issues which are magnified at these small sizes...all other cams use the same spring design of their larger brethren, but the c3s are the first to really pack on the pressure. This sping pressure is typically overlooked in larger cams as a critical protection component, but in the micro sizes is so important since the lobes are very light thin and have a small amount of "play"...basically it really helps you place them better and faster.

I find that they slot with similar ease to the blue and black aliens...and tbh the stiffer stem helps when slotting at F'ing awkward angles which is a common occurance on a climb where you actually need to use these guys.

warnings:
1. the 000 is not for lead...you need brassys for slots that small
2. these are not great for vertical pin scars(where the cam stem will be perpandicular or slightly perpandicular to the direction of fall)...the stem is very stiff laterally, so the torque on a placement will be extreme...and if you must place a cam in such a spot..(The flaring fingertip crack on the winter comes to mind)...the more alienesque design of the 0's may suit you...though again I prefer brass...another topic.

I find the new UL Metolius TCU's do very well. The C3's take some getting used to, as they are a tighter spring tension, and they have more lateral stiffness. That said, I have a set of each.