|
|
|
|
fear
Jan 4, 2006, 8:38 PM
Post #126 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 475
|
In reply to: In reply to: When I buy gear I expect it to work as advertised (ie to not fall apart). They get my $54, I get a cam that works. The risk starts there, not before I even buy the cam. exactly
Wrong.... The risk starts when you decide to leave the ground. If you find that you "can't" get two pieces of gear at the crux then you make the decision to go on and trust your life or health to one small piece of aluminum and steel wedged into cracks. So be it. I've done it too.
My objection is to the "oh my God, you mean this stuff can break?" attitude in this thread. No, it shouldn't. But it can and does. People have died from similiar failures in the past.
Do you test every cam or piece of gear you've ever bought? Of course not. No one does. So you really don't know anything about the particular cams you're using. We can guess and hope but won't ever know for sure until you test it. Maybe that bomber #10 WC rock in the perfect constriction has a crappy crimp on the cable.
Modern climbing gear is extremely lightweight for it's intended purposes. It's generally made in small quantities by small companies with slim profit margins. More defects are going to occur...
Of course there's problem that CCH needs to address quickly. But they need to be given a chance.
And don't think that CCH is the only gear company out there with problems... And as everyone jumps on the lighter=better bandwagon it's going to get worse...
-Fear
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 4, 2006, 9:05 PM
Post #127 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: When I buy gear I expect it to work as advertised (ie to not fall apart). They get my $54, I get a cam that works. The risk starts there, not before I even buy the cam. exactly Wrong.... The risk starts when you decide to leave the ground. If you find that you "can't" get two pieces of gear at the crux then you make the decision to go on and trust your life or health to one small piece of aluminum and steel wedged into cracks. So be it. I've done it too. My objection is to the "oh my God, you mean this stuff can break?" attitude in this thread. No, it shouldn't. But it can and does. People have died from similiar failures in the past. Do you test every cam or piece of gear you've ever bought? Of course not. No one does. So you really don't know anything about the particular cams you're using. We can guess and hope but won't ever know for sure until you test it. Maybe that bomber #10 WC rock in the perfect constriction has a crappy crimp on the cable. Modern climbing gear is extremely lightweight for it's intended purposes. It's generally made in small quantities by small companies with slim profit margins. More defects are going to occur... Of course there's problem that CCH needs to address quickly. But they need to be given a chance. And don't think that CCH is the only gear company out there with problems... And as everyone jumps on the lighter=better bandwagon it's going to get worse... -Fear
Actually, you may believe you can give CCH a slide by slagging other companies work and QA by asserting they all perform the same, but that's a crock. CCH in the past year has demonstrated a failure rate that is beyond pale. BD, Metolius, Wild Country, Trango, et al manage to crank out cams with rigorous QA and a very low defect rate many orders of magnitude below what we are talking about here.
Now you may have some shred of a point relative to gear getting lighter weight and that generating its own issues - but even there all the lightweight gear I know of dynos in as high as the old stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
climb_ian
Jan 4, 2006, 9:32 PM
Post #128 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 28, 2005
Posts: 77
|
so what the consensus here safe unsafe? return or not return ?
|
|
|
|
|
fishercrack
Jan 4, 2006, 9:57 PM
Post #129 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 18, 2005
Posts: 27
|
Ample time has been allowed. By now cch shoul have consulted with an attourney to figure out what they could say without putting themselves in greater risk of civil action. They have already stated that they are aware of the situation. If they do not in the next 24 hours, come out and at least make a simple statement along the lines of "We are looking into this matter," I will never purchase another cch product.
|
|
|
|
|
climbs4fun
Moderator
Jan 4, 2006, 10:06 PM
Post #130 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 19, 2003
Posts: 9679
|
In reply to: so what the consensus here safe unsafe? return or not return ?
I think I'd talk to the company and give them the opportunity to make it right.
|
|
|
|
|
sumo
Jan 4, 2006, 10:53 PM
Post #131 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 28, 2005
Posts: 176
|
If anyone is scared to climb on their Aliens
PM me with pics and prices
haha... seriously though
A lot of good points in here
but it really isn't a black and white issue.
I've never had a problem with any of my Aliens. It is unfortunate for the few that have had problems. Both for them and CCH.
I realize there have been previous cases, but you can't expect an immediate response.
Take a look at natural disasters or other major recalls. There is a lot of things that go on behind the scences.
S
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 4, 2006, 11:10 PM
Post #132 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: When I buy gear I expect it to work as advertised (ie to not fall apart). They get my $54, I get a cam that works. The risk starts there, not before I even buy the cam. exactly Wrong.... The risk starts when you decide to leave the ground. If you find that you "can't" get two pieces of gear at the crux then you make the decision to go on and trust your life or health to one small piece of aluminum and steel wedged into cracks. So be it. I've done it too.
The risk of a 54 dollar cam disasembling itself after a less than spectacular fall, or any reasonable fall for that matter is unacceptable, period. There are many risks willingly encoundered when you decide to leave the ground, but there is no good reason that this should be one of them. The practice of doubling up on pro before a crux is no new idea, and should be based on the chance of placement failure, and not manufacturing defects. If a micronut shears out of a tiny slot after a 20 footer that is reasonable. The alien situation is not.
Climbing is about carefully managing risks. Maybee poorly constructed gear is ok to you. Fine, go have a hayday and buy up all of the used gear on ebay. I will continue to expect the companies that I do business with to deliver.
I've got three new aliens purchased within the past month, and I'd be thrilled to see at the very least some sort of response to all of this. Would it be so hard to issue one on their website? or to make some response to the questions in this forum?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
md3
Jan 4, 2006, 11:25 PM
Post #134 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 13, 2004
Posts: 172
|
While few things may be truly black or white, isn’t the catastrophic failure of the cable/stem attachment on a new cam under expected loads pretty close?
In reply to: look at natural disasters or other major recalls
What are you talking about? What do natural disasters have in common with the recall of products designed for critical uses because manufacturing flaws have made them susceptible to failure when used as anticipated?
|
|
|
|
|
josephgdawson
Jan 4, 2006, 11:31 PM
Post #135 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 20, 2004
Posts: 303
|
Whewwww weeeeee, CCH's response is strong.
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Jan 4, 2006, 11:32 PM
Post #136 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
from that thread
In reply to: "Without an actual report by a lab we will assume this is a staged hoax. "
are you kidding? I was hoping for so much better. I was hoping more along the lines of the recall by CAMP for the tri cam pin problem, the WC helium recall, Omega Pacifics Five-O locker recall. Not necessarily an immediate recall but at least some show of responsibility and not calling the OP a hoax..
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1195082#1195082
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=65849&postdays=0&postorder=asc&topic_view=&start=15
http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=532470#532470
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Jan 4, 2006, 11:52 PM
Post #137 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
In reply to: i have one question, and i'm sorry if its been asked already (7 pages is way too much to read through for my attention span)......did the cam walk when you moved past it or when you were grabbing rope for the next clip? its very common for cams to walk in indian creek cracks. if the cam rotates upside down when you were pulling rope, and then you fell, it would create dangerous tourquing forces on the cam.
I could understand that if a cam had walked or inverted that a fall could shear the cams lobs off (I've seen this on a blue alien).
However, I don't care what position the cam is in, I don't believe the head of the cam should come off without there being a manufacturing defect.
I also don't find CCH response unreasonable as far as wanting to examine the piece first. No manufacturer would admit liability until they have closely examined the piece. That's just the way the world works.
Now whether there are other issues that CCH should have already adressed, that is something else.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpstrength
Jan 4, 2006, 11:56 PM
Post #138 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 285
|
to me, aliens just dont look as strong as my metolius fcus and tcus or my bd c4s. I think I am done collecting aliens. Calling this a hoax is ignoring the problem. Not offering to at least assist in finding the problem is laughable.
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Jan 5, 2006, 12:29 AM
Post #139 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
Hey Kevin,
I've been following this thread with interest and I have a few questions.
In your first climb photo it looks like the Alien and C4 are stacked right on top of each other. Is that the way you placed them? It almost looks like a single cam. Was there any way that two cams placed right together could have put a weird load onto the Alien?
In the second photo, the cam lobes look like they're still attached to the cam. Was it still together when you stopped falling or had it fallen apart? If the head of an Alien just pulls off the cable like the picture seems to show, the four cam lobes, the trigger wires, trigger and cable sheath assembly would still be up in the crack. When we've field tested cams with a hydraulic puller, occasionally the cable breaks at the head. When it does the cam lobes and trigger assembly remain in the crack and are a bitch to get out.
Any speculation on why that trigger wire broke? Again, if the cable pulled out due to a fautly braze, then there wouldn't be much of a load on the trigger assembly. Do you think that maybe that C4 tweaked them as the cam loaded?
How do you keep your hands looking so nice?
Mal
|
|
|
|
|
fear
Jan 5, 2006, 12:41 AM
Post #140 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 16, 2003
Posts: 475
|
Hey Kevin,
Looking at that first pic you posted at the cable stump where the head sheared away there is some kind of interesting looking discoloration on the cable. In the closeup pic you posted later, there's nothing but shiny solder.... Maybe flip it over and take another closeup?
Thanks...
-Fear
Here is the spot that seems odd:
http://contract.fearnot.emailcorner.net/oddalien.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
climbinginchico
Jan 5, 2006, 12:46 AM
Post #141 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 3032
|
In reply to: Hey Kevin, I've been following this thread with interest and I have a few questions. In your first climb photo it looks like the Alien and C4 are stacked right on top of each other. Is that the way you placed them? It almost looks like a single cam. Was there any way that two cams placed right together could have put a weird load onto the Alien? In the second photo, the cam lobes look like they're still attached to the cam. Was it still together when you stopped falling or had it fallen apart? If the head of an Alien just pulls off the cable like the picture seems to show, the four cam lobes, the trigger wires, trigger and cable sheath assembly would still be up in the crack. When we've field tested cams with a hydraulic puller, occasionally the cable breaks at the head. When it does the cam lobes and trigger assembly remain in the crack and are a b---- to get out. Any speculation on why that trigger wire broke? Again, if the cable pulled out due to a fautly braze, then there wouldn't be much of a load on the trigger assembly. Do you think that maybe that C4 tweaked them as the cam loaded? How do you keep your hands looking so nice? Mal
By far, the best post on the thread. Well said, Mal.
|
|
|
|
|
paganmonkeyboy
Jan 5, 2006, 12:50 AM
Post #142 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 30, 2003
Posts: 663
|
ten pages in - pmb gets overwhelming urge to throw all four aliens he owns (bluegreenyellowred 4+ yrs old)in a choss crack 2 miles from here and bounce from aider to aider on tr, in the dark, perhaps to music of some sort...(not because I think they will fail, mind you - just that I love climbing, and my aliens are afeelin ornery...)
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 5, 2006, 12:59 AM
Post #143 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Hey Kevin, Looking at that first pic you posted at the cable stump where the head sheared away there is some kind of interesting looking discoloration on the cable. In the closeup pic you posted later, there's nothing but shiny solder.... Maybe flip it over and take another closeup? Thanks... -Fear
Kevin,
I too would like to see a flip side closeup and one close up straight down the axle centerline as well if possible. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
climbinginchico
Jan 5, 2006, 12:59 AM
Post #144 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 3032
|
Insano, do you have full res pics available? I'd like to see the full res versions to answer some of the questions Mal raised.
|
|
|
|
|
leapinlizard
Jan 5, 2006, 1:12 AM
Post #145 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 14, 2004
Posts: 200
|
In reply to: Hey Kevin, I've been following this thread with interest and I have a few questions. In your first climb photo it looks like the Alien and C4 are stacked right on top of each other. Is that the way you placed them? It almost looks like a single cam. Was there any way that two cams placed right together could have put a weird load onto the Alien? In the second photo, the cam lobes look like they're still attached to the cam. Was it still together when you stopped falling or had it fallen apart? If the head of an Alien just pulls off the cable like the picture seems to show, the four cam lobes, the trigger wires, trigger and cable sheath assembly would still be up in the crack. When we've field tested cams with a hydraulic puller, occasionally the cable breaks at the head. When it does the cam lobes and trigger assembly remain in the crack and are a b---- to get out. Any speculation on why that trigger wire broke? Again, if the cable pulled out due to a fautly braze, then there wouldn't be much of a load on the trigger assembly. Do you think that maybe that C4 tweaked them as the cam loaded? How do you keep your hands looking so nice? Mal
I can't rate posts today, but this is the certainly the best post I have seen recently. Mal Rocks. As for the OP and Insaino, I am curious which climbing store you guys work for, I remember insaino saying you worked for one in a previous thread. Do they sell aliens, and if so what has the store's reaction been to this whole thing.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 5, 2006, 1:19 AM
Post #146 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Hey Kevin, I've been following this thread with interest and I have a few questions. In your first climb photo it looks like the Alien and C4 are stacked right on top of each other. Is that the way you placed them? It almost looks like a single cam. Was there any way that two cams placed right together could have put a weird load onto the Alien? In the second photo, the cam lobes look like they're still attached to the cam. Was it still together when you stopped falling or had it fallen apart? If the head of an Alien just pulls off the cable like the picture seems to show, the four cam lobes, the trigger wires, trigger and cable sheath assembly would still be up in the crack. When we've field tested cams with a hydraulic puller, occasionally the cable breaks at the head. When it does the cam lobes and trigger assembly remain in the crack and are a b---- to get out. Any speculation on why that trigger wire broke? Again, if the cable pulled out due to a fautly braze, then there wouldn't be much of a load on the trigger assembly. Do you think that maybe that C4 tweaked them as the cam loaded? How do you keep your hands looking so nice? Mal
Malcolm,
Looks like the heads were about 3-4" apart so you probably can't entirely rule out some interation. With regard to the unit staying together. I believe if it had instead seperated the stem wire from the wirecap immediatly adjacent/above the trigger bar it would have resulted in exactly what you suggest, the whole assembly staying in the crack. But with just the head seperating from that wirecap the trigger would have stayed with the stem and the force of the fall would have acted exactly like someone pulling the trigger back. It's easy enough for me to believe that that would be enough to do the job of releasing the piece almost intact rather than in two pieces, particularly in slick creek stone.
Any idea on a good independent lab or someone willing to be an "escrow" it in the process?
|
|
|
|
|
styndall
Jan 5, 2006, 1:20 AM
Post #147 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2002
Posts: 2741
|
In reply to: In reply to: Hey Kevin, I've been following this thread with interest and I have a few questions. In your first climb photo it looks like the Alien and C4 are stacked right on top of each other. Is that the way you placed them? It almost looks like a single cam. Was there any way that two cams placed right together could have put a weird load onto the Alien? In the second photo, the cam lobes look like they're still attached to the cam. Was it still together when you stopped falling or had it fallen apart? If the head of an Alien just pulls off the cable like the picture seems to show, the four cam lobes, the trigger wires, trigger and cable sheath assembly would still be up in the crack. When we've field tested cams with a hydraulic puller, occasionally the cable breaks at the head. When it does the cam lobes and trigger assembly remain in the crack and are a b---- to get out. Any speculation on why that trigger wire broke? Again, if the cable pulled out due to a fautly braze, then there wouldn't be much of a load on the trigger assembly. Do you think that maybe that C4 tweaked them as the cam loaded? How do you keep your hands looking so nice? Mal By far, the best post on the thread. Well said, Mal.
As to the second question:
It seems like, once the head pulled off, all the weight of the fall would be on the trigger wires, forcing the head to collapse and, in effect, cleaning the cam.
Try it yourself: place a cam in a parallel crack and then yark on the trigger. It should come right out. This is exactly what would happen in a situation like the OP's.
|
|
|
|
|
jermeng
Jan 5, 2006, 1:30 AM
Post #148 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2005
Posts: 64
|
Check the dates, as REI has pulled Orange Aliens with the date code "0105" through "0605" from their shelves. Just orange sizes, as the ones within this range may not have the correct expansion range. Range was the original reason for the recall, though it seems there could be another issue here...
Insainio, is your cam from that date range?
|
|
|
|
|
leapinlizard
Jan 5, 2006, 1:37 AM
Post #149 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 14, 2004
Posts: 200
|
I thnk he said that it had a munufacture date of 8/05
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 5, 2006, 1:38 AM
Post #150 of 522
(71635 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: Check the dates, as REI has pulled Orange Aliens with the date code "0105" through "0605" from their shelves. Just orange sizes, as the ones within this range may not have the correct expansion range. Range was the original reason for the recall, though it seems there could be another issue here... Insainio, is your cam from that date range?
He had already posted up that is an "0805" unit...
|
|
|
|
|
|
