|
mtnjunkie
Mar 18, 2005, 10:40 PM
Post #26 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 2, 2003
Posts: 58
|
In reply to: In the hand-size crack, the cam was almost fully expanded and only the very tips of the cam were touching the wall. |
|
|
|
|
corpse
Mar 11, 2006, 2:35 PM
Post #27 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2003
Posts: 822
|
Well, the max cams have been out for awhile now - and there doesn't seem to be any recent postings about em - so I thought I'd stir up the pot.. I chose this thread since I liked the title best
After last summer or a winter season of climbing in the south, what are some of the views on them? good bad or whatever? Any particulars in placing them? I got a few 2's and 3's to start with, to try them out - and will add on smaller sizes if I like them.. Being they are rather different, I'm assuming there will be a learning curve.
|
|
|
|
|
boadman
Mar 14, 2006, 7:40 PM
Post #28 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 7, 2003
Posts: 726
|
Also, will the annoying wide triggers be fixed in the next generation?
|
|
|
|
|
sixleggedinsect
Mar 14, 2006, 9:59 PM
Post #29 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2004
Posts: 385
|
In reply to: Well, the max cams have been out for awhile now - and there doesn't seem to be any recent postings about em - so I thought I'd stir up the pot.. I chose this thread since I liked the title best
After last summer or a winter season of climbing in the south, what are some of the views on them? good bad or whatever? Any particulars in placing them? I got a few 2's and 3's to start with, to try them out - and will add on smaller sizes if I like them.. Being they are rather different, I'm assuming there will be a learning curve.
i mentioned a few things in the gear reviews.
|
|
|
|
|
renohandjams
Mar 15, 2006, 12:43 AM
Post #30 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2005
Posts: 616
|
We all got some for my rack and if you are used to taking the camalot and just shoving it into a crack when you are pumped without working the trigger then you will be super annoyed with the max cam because if you just shove it in without pulling the trigger it twists the cams sideways because the stems not centered.
I haven't gotten into that habit with placing cams without pulling the trigger back so I think I prefer the max cam. I'm kind of sad they dropped their largest size though because that's where you saw even more expansion as far as distance is concerned, and I would really like one that covered the range of my green techfriend.
Since getting our link cam shippment though I didn't think I would like them more than the max cams, but probably since they are the latest thing at the shop I really do like them. Talking to Omega at the OR show they are planning on making a larger size too. I think if they made 2 larger sizes then I could almost replace my tech friend set. If you haven't played with one yet, just go to your local climbing shop, or REI and play with it, you'll be glad you did.
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Mar 15, 2006, 1:26 AM
Post #31 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
In reply to: In reply to: In the hand-size crack, the cam was almost fully expanded and only the very tips of the cam were touching the wall. I thought the exact same thing. The placement looks tenuous at best.
there are other issues. read on:
In reply to: We all got some for my rack and if you are used to taking the camalot and just shoving it into a crack when you are pumped without working the trigger then you will be super annoyed with the max cam because if you just shove it in without pulling the trigger it twists the cams sideways because the stems not centered. I haven't gotten into that habit with placing cams without pulling the trigger back so I think I prefer the max cam. I'm kind of sad they dropped their largest size though because that's where you saw even more expansion as far as distance is concerned, and I would really like one that covered the range of my green techfriend.
when placed in parallel sided cracks, one must be very careful of the cam walking. Why? Well, it seems that if/when the cam walks (because the lobes are independently sprung?) if the lobes interact in a specific manner the possibility exists that a strong yank MAY pull the cam from the crack. This tendency MAY be alleviated by use of a long runner, but then again it MAY not.
I didn't believe it till a friend set up a placement in his garage and showed me the entire process in action. If you'd like to know the details on how you can test your own, PM me... I'll describe it for you.
Now, I've got nothing against Trango. I've used some of their gear in the past, probably will again in the future... but not the Max-cam cam.
Needless to say, they may have their place on somebodies rack, but not mine.
~Sty
|
|
|
|
|
mesomorf
Mar 15, 2006, 1:45 AM
Post #32 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2002
Posts: 397
|
The only size I was interested in was the 4, and they decided not to produce that one.
From the Trango site,
In reply to: Available in six sizes from tips to stacked hands.
ought to say "five sizes from tips to fist."
|
|
|
|
|
styndall
Mar 15, 2006, 2:38 AM
Post #33 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2002
Posts: 2741
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In the hand-size crack, the cam was almost fully expanded and only the very tips of the cam were touching the wall. I thought the exact same thing. The placement looks tenuous at best. there are other issues. read on: In reply to: We all got some for my rack and if you are used to taking the camalot and just shoving it into a crack when you are pumped without working the trigger then you will be super annoyed with the max cam because if you just shove it in without pulling the trigger it twists the cams sideways because the stems not centered. I haven't gotten into that habit with placing cams without pulling the trigger back so I think I prefer the max cam. I'm kind of sad they dropped their largest size though because that's where you saw even more expansion as far as distance is concerned, and I would really like one that covered the range of my green techfriend. when placed in parallel sided cracks, one must be very careful of the cam walking. Why? Well, it seems that if/when the cam walks (because the lobes are independently sprung?) if the lobes interact in a specific manner the possibility exists that a strong yank MAY pull the cam from the crack. This tendency MAY be alleviated by use of a long runner, but then again it MAY not. I didn't believe it till a friend set up a placement in his garage and showed me the entire process in action. If you'd like to know the details on how you can test your own, PM me... I'll describe it for you. Now, I've got nothing against Trango. I've used some of their gear in the past, probably will again in the future... but not the Max-cam cam. Needless to say, they may have their place on somebodies rack, but not mine. ~Sty
I'd like very much to hear about this, and I'd also like to hear maldaly's thoughts, if he's still following this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Mar 15, 2006, 2:44 AM
Post #34 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
Oh I'm sure he is, but like i said - PM me...
|
|
|
|
|
roy_hinkley_jr
Mar 15, 2006, 3:58 AM
Post #35 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 652
|
In reply to: I didn't believe it till a friend set up a placement in his garage and showed me the entire process in action. If you'd like to know the details on how you can test your own, PM me... I'll describe it for you.
Dude, if you're going to make public accusations, post the details or STFU.
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Mar 18, 2006, 7:04 PM
Post #36 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
In reply to: In reply to: I didn't believe it till a friend set up a placement in his garage and showed me the entire process in action. If you'd like to know the details on how you can test your own, PM me... I'll describe it for you. Dude, if you're going to make public accusations, post the details or STFU.
STFU? WTHDTM?
From a series of PM to several interested parties:
Ok, its not specific to maxcams as it can be applied to ANY piece of pro, active or passive, but here's the deal:
Take the stated range for the particular max-cam you've got your hands on. I'll pull a number out of my ass for this one, how does the numbers for the number 1 sound at 21-55mm?
Ok. Take two solid objects with flat sides-- in my case a pair of cinder blocks -- and place them on the counter. utilizing a series of wooden blocks found in the scrap bin, as well as my metric tape measure, i create a spacer 50mm in width to fit between the blocks, then clamp the blocks together to prevent them from moving apart from one another.
First for comparison, slam a #1 or #2 camalot in the gap (whichever fits) and wiggle the sling up and down, with tension on it. Observe the cam walk all over the place, but remain secure when yanked as if fallen on.
Now for the Max-Cam:
Retract the cam and place it in the gap created between the blocks. (try slamming it home blindly -- doesn't work too well does it?) Now, to simulate the rope pulling through the sling... slight jiggling with some outward tension.
Hell, just grab the end of the sling and pull down on it. things look ok, right? now, with no more tension on the sling than it takes to hold it taught, bring it to a horizontal position to simulate rope-drag. release it. repeat a few times. observe closely the relationship between the cam faces and the rock surface. repeat a few more times. Now yank downward or outward.
Pick up your jaw.
I nearly shit my pants the first time I saw the thing in action. Reading about it will do you no good, you'll have to see it to believe it.
See what I mean?
{and...}
[brown]if you are unable to recreate the experiment i would feel much better about it, but let me know what happens.
Be sure to check the manufacturer's stated ranges to see where the failure point occurs... i mean try it with a 25mm spacer block, 30mm, 35mm, 40mm.... I think you'll find that the effective range is FAR less than what they say it might be.
I think the size I was shown the experiment with was the medium sized max-cam, but since the design is no different it should work ( or not work depending on how you look at it) with any of them.
~Sty[/brown]
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Mar 18, 2006, 7:12 PM
Post #37 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
:!:
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Mar 22, 2006, 3:04 AM
Post #38 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
In reply to: [brown]if you are unable to recreate the experiment i would feel much better about it, but let me know what happens. [/brown]
...Bueller?
...Bueller?
...Bueller?
|
|
|
|
|
andesite
Mar 22, 2006, 4:01 AM
Post #39 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2003
Posts: 10
|
I have Maxcam #2 and #3. I like them, the grippy teeth give me confidence that the cams will bite and engage the cam when called upon, I really like the thumbloop design and the extendo slings are useful.
The independent axles are a bit funky, and I can imagine that in the 'garage wiggle experiment' described above, some weird things may happen when the cam is not more than 50% cammed....
but, I wouldn't trust any cam that has been moved by rope drag, and go to great lengths to avoid this: long runners, double ropes, try to get placements where the cam is backed against an obstruction, or in a pod in the crack.
Also, I wouldn't place a cam in the range 50% to alomost fully open, unless there was absolutely nothing else, and if I did this, I would go to lengths to prevent it moving at all (extra long runner, piece in oppposition to hold the cam in place).
So, in a nutshell, while this experiment may have some academic interest, the relevance to the actual security of a Maxcam is IMHO minimal - I will continue to use my Maxcams as I always have, though I do reach for the C4's first!
Can't wait for some other size Maxcams to hit NZ... must have more cams... drool...
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Mar 22, 2006, 7:15 PM
Post #40 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
In reply to: In reply to: I didn't believe it till a friend set up a placement in his garage and showed me the entire process in action. If you'd like to know the details on how you can test your own, PM me... I'll describe it for you. Dude, if you're going to make public accusations, post the details or STFU.
I'd agree. Your proposing that we buy a MaxCam to test this out...so that we can see that they're a problem with them?
So you placed a minimally retracted cam in your garage...walked the hell out of it...and it pulled out of your two blocks?
1) i'd like to see this in a jig that won't move (not two cinder blocks on the floor)
2) it'd be nice to see pics/ video.
Until that, or I find one to play with myself...I don't belive it.
Cheers,
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Mar 28, 2006, 3:39 AM
Post #41 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
as i stated in the post above, clamp the blocks with the spacer between them to get any size splitter gap which falls within the manufacturers stated usable range. The blocks will not move apart from one another, provided you clamp them properly.
as andesite stated, he won't trust any cam which has walked.
I, on the other hand, will trust SOME placements that I know have a potential to walk, especially if they are positioned in a crack which is perfectly parallel as far as the arm can reach. In such a case (using all cams manufactured before 2005 that I'm aware of), the only real danger here is the piece walking out of the range of reach, thereby making retrieval impossible.
Not so with the max-cam, and not just when it's near the outer limits of its range.
May I suggest you take your cinder-blocks and your pre-cut spacer blocks and your clamps to your local gear store (you work at one, don't you jim?) and see for yourself where the failure-mode ceases to become an issue.
In the meantime, i will listen intently for word of an incident resulting from the effect observed in the experiment mentioned above. I just hope someone doesn't get killed as a result of it.
I guess it really all comes down to knowing the limits of your gear, and not working outside of said limits without special attention to the details. But when you stay within the safe limits (i've observed) of the max-cam, it really doesn't make sense to carry them, especially since:
they don't fill any holes in my camalot range
have less range and fewer uses than a camalot (afaics)
nothing is in the same class as my hybrid aliens
they don't go as small as my TCU's
they have an idio-syncratic usage parameters.
Caveat: I have not used one in the field, I have only observed the experiment within a controlled environment which leads me to believe that they really have no place on my (or any) climbing rack.
All posts to this thread (and this site) are solely my opinion (based upon my experience and observation), take it for nothing more than what it's worth. an opinion.
(if the opinion stated within this thread proves at any point in the future to be valuable to you (or could have been valuable to you if you had heeded its warning), please feel free to send cash/check/credit card donations to the ASCA, which I have no affiliation with.)
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Mar 28, 2006, 4:35 AM
Post #42 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Stym,
I'm a bit suprised by all the commotion relative to the Max Cam. We've been talking about them from before they were on the market and all these topics were covered more or less ad naseum between then and now. Did you simply not read any of them before you bought one? They work exactly as designed relative to both advantages and disadvantages - knowing both is essential to using them. They work nothing like traditional cams and if that was your expectation then I'd say you set yourself up to be disappointed because that isn't what they are about.
|
|
|
|
|
brutusofwyde
Mar 28, 2006, 11:06 PM
Post #43 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 3, 2002
Posts: 1473
|
Anyone who owns #1 Max cams -- Please be aware of the recall on batches 0605 and 0705 discussed elsewhwere on this site.
Brutus
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Mar 29, 2006, 2:30 AM
Post #44 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
In reply to: May I suggest you take your cinder-blocks and your pre-cut spacer blocks and your clamps to your local gear store (you work at one, don't you jim?) and see for yourself where the failure-mode ceases to become an issue.
I'l play around with one if I can, I just don't wanna scratch up a cam before it gets sold. Funkin' one out of a vice seems like a good way to scratch it up.
We'll see,
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
chalkfree
Mar 29, 2006, 3:53 AM
Post #45 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 27, 2004
Posts: 512
|
They do have this problem, luckily it is at the outside end of the range where the next size takes over.
I own a few, and like them better than c4's in the mid sizes. the #2 MC is the best cam ever period.
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Mar 29, 2006, 5:08 AM
Post #46 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
stymingersfink, I hate to chime in on this one because you're on a roll here but something you wrote on your last post is a bit scary. When we, and every other cam manufacturer I know of, state a size range, it refers to absolute range, not useable range. We, along with Metolius, BD, WC and CCH, all recommend that a cam only be placed in the lower half of its range. When you do that, and then perform your test you'll find that the cam reacts quite normally.
You also mention that you haven't used one in the field and that your opinions are formed by the cinder block test. I'd be happy to send you a demo or two to test in a real live crack on a real live climb. I'm out of the office 'till 4/10 but if you email me at mdaly@trango.com I'll arrange to get you some to try when I get back. There's a profound correlation between skeptics--virtually all you haven't actually used them--and fans--who actully have used them. Follow the threads on this site and you'll see.
BTW, be sure to see the link on the home page here: we've initiated a recall on the Size #1 for unrelated reasons.
Mal
|
|
|
|
|
phugganut
Mar 29, 2006, 5:51 AM
Post #47 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 17, 2003
Posts: 648
|
In reply to: stymingersfink, I hate to chime in on this one because you're on a roll here but something you wrote on your last post is a bit scary. When we, and every other cam manufacturer I know of, state a size range, it refers to absolute range, not useable range...
This should be common knowledge.
In reply to: ...I'd be happy to send you a demo or two to test in a real live crack on a real live climb... Mal
I guess the squeaky wheel gets the grease. I've been telling people about your Maxcams since mine came in the mail, and even recommended them at a lead climbing class I recently taught. Maybe I should talk bad about them so I can get some demos too.
|
|
|
|
|
lizard0fthetrail
Mar 29, 2006, 6:19 AM
Post #48 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2004
Posts: 133
|
Mal- Way to respond very respectively and professionally. Phugganut- grow up.
Personally, I'm very excited to use the Max cams.
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Mar 29, 2006, 4:05 PM
Post #49 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
In reply to: They do have this problem, luckily it is at the outside end of the range where the next size takes over. I own a few, and like them better than c4's in the mid sizes. the #2 MC is the best cam ever period.
Thanks for the response Malcom. I posted this earlier on another thread, maybe it bears reposting here. Link:
____http://www.rockclimbing.com/...php?t=108843&start=0__________________________________________________________
Text:
"What Joseph says above is true. Adding to it: I bought a #2 within a few min of them coming out, based on it being Climbing magazines gear of the year or whatever. After the initial excitement wore off, I tried a bunch of placements on the ground as trial placements to see what the range was. I was very disturbed, horrified even, to see that at the wide end of the range, OCCASIONALLY you could easily get the cam to walk and then the short cam side would flip open and the placement would fail.
BUT- I liked the spring action, loved the range and the fact that like all Metolius cams, the angle seemed optimized for holding better than most other cams, putting it in a crack that was flaring was always more secure than the Camalot I'd plug in the very same spot for instance. The trigger bar is significantly better than the tiny TCUs, ridged stem Friends and doesn't bother me at all. I think I might even like it somewhat.
Anyway, after carrying it all year on real climbs, and having practiced more on the ground to see what placements would be bad, in real life, not once did the lil fella wiggle out and fall out of the crack. In fact, I found that I started to grab it before my C4. Almost always.
I remember when the first friends came out, placement failures were not uncommon and would occasionally just happen to folks, and learning the tools strengths and weakness's was critical, and once learned essentially eliminated that issue for climbers using the ridged stem original friends. The same is very true in this case. Ignorance is not bliss. These cams like to be placed on the short side of range to be safe. You can use them more open, but be aware of the risk and the effect that a waggling rope will have on cam movement. They like to be placed into the crack, not jut jammed in or slid into position. Check that placement area in the crack carefully to make sure it necks down behind the cam. Once you start placing them regularly and have the optimized crack parameters sorted out mentally, you don't really just stop and think about it, you just grab and do. But you have to work out those mental thing first to get quick, reliable, solid placements.
That being said, I have a full set now and will be climbing on them this year. I will be watching closely to see if the issues I noted above are exacerbated on the larger piece, but I do not have any real strong concerns or I wouldn't have picked up a full rack of them. For new partners who have not used the piece, I'll try to do a short 5 min block of instruction if they need it, but Ujhan (partner) picked it right up and loved the piece without that so who knows. He would grab it off the rack before the C4, in fact I think he was the one who pointed that fact out to me and then I noticed that I was doing it too.
I think that having a set of these and another set of like the new Metolious cams may be the ultimate. I won't be buying more C4's - I can say with strong assurance. I do have the Green, Red and Yellow C4's already, all good sizes for me.
I will say that the Maxcm offset stem allows for amazing placements in solution pockets, better than any cam ever made. Ever. Once you see it you'll know what I'm speaking of, but you can't just plug and go, one side must be up and if you reverse it, the placement will be worse than a regular cam. If I primarily climbed at Joshua Tree, I would probably use these puppies exclusively. But I don't, so these will be a supplement to my rack.
Thats been my experience. Your results may vary etc. I see Brutus thinks they are the best thing since sliced white bread. I wouldn't go that far but after my initial misgivings, they kind of grew on me.
Regards;
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Mar 29, 2006, 4:13 PM
Post #50 of 53
(11817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
BTW, Little irony: I got the full set of Maxcams as trade when I sent a bunch of CCH Aliens back to Mgear for store credit. :lol:
(now I have 2 number 2's, that is a great size cause it pretty much seems to cover #1 and #2 camalot range)
Now I have a 0705 #1 I need to send back. But at least I trust Trango and won't feel bad returning it to them for replacement. I forgot it on the counter today when I left for work, I'll get it off UPS tomorrow.
:!:
|
|
|
|
|
|
