|
healyje
Sep 11, 2008, 5:15 PM
Post #26 of 283
(4995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
AlexCV wrote: Least you can do is send them an email about it. You're not the first one to complain about the cable not staying put and DMM did make an alteration to their drilling to make the fit tighter but I don't know if that was done pre-production or mid-production.
I haven't because as you said, the 'sliding' problem has, in theory, been addressed. This change in geometry is an entirely different matter as they are unlikely to pop for a new set of molds. I would contact them if I thought it would make a difference, but letting folks know about the problem and folks expressing their displeasure over the issue is more likely to be effective in the long run relative to new molds and restoring the HB design.
|
|
|
|
|
Arrogant_Bastard
Sep 11, 2008, 9:14 PM
Post #27 of 283
(4957 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2007
Posts: 19994
|
healyje wrote: The problem is that they did change the size in one dimension and, hence, the geometry. That in turn has changed how they place and the 'problem' is it did not improve them, rather it degraded them.
How so, are you noticing consistant problems somehow with the geometry? Saying that the new stoppers are trash because they no longer fit this one specific placement that your HBs did is a bit much I'd think.
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Sep 11, 2008, 9:27 PM
Post #28 of 283
(4954 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
I like the DMM offsets, but I find the anodized finish too smooth, so I took a jewellers saw to them and cut a cross-hatch pattern in them, now they stick like glue. Made all the difference in the world.
I also bought a set of the Faders brass nuts, the big blocky looking things with the odd angles. I bought them because of their shape, having lots of meat, allowed me to file them down into a nice set of brass offsets which I use all the time, they work great.
|
|
|
|
|
Factor2
Sep 11, 2008, 9:56 PM
Post #29 of 283
(4940 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 17, 2008
Posts: 188
|
skinner wrote: I like the DMM offsets, but I find the anodized finish too smooth,
I don't really think that the smoothness is going to make a very large difference in any way
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Sep 11, 2008, 10:04 PM
Post #30 of 283
(4931 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Arrogant_Bastard wrote: healyje wrote: The problem is that they did change the size in one dimension and, hence, the geometry. That in turn has changed how they place and the 'problem' is it did not improve them, rather it degraded them. How so, are you noticing consistant problems somehow with the geometry? Saying that the new stoppers are trash because they no longer fit this one specific placement that your HBs did is a bit much I'd think.
I don't think you're really getting the fine points here. This isn't a problem with 'consistency' as they are made with molds and every one that comes out of a mold is exactly the same size. The problem is the new mold designs are different than the HB's - i.e. the DMM Alloy Offsets are not the same size or geometry as the original HB Offsets.
Now, if you've never used either one before, that probably won't be an issue for you. But, if like me, and you've been using HB Offset Alloys since they were first made - it's a big f#cking deal. And even if you haven't used the original HB's, guess what, you still aren't, you're using something else - something that doesn't perform as well as the originals.
DMM obviously either felt a compelling need to somehow revisit the design and contribute "value" to the design, or they felt there was a problem with the HB design, or they simply blew it. I suspect it wasn't the latter. Again, I simply find such tampering with perfection ill-advised, unnecessary, and unfortunate.
|
|
|
|
|
Arrogant_Bastard
Sep 11, 2008, 10:17 PM
Post #31 of 283
(4923 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2007
Posts: 19994
|
healyje wrote: I don't think you're really getting the fine points here. This isn't a problem with 'consistency' as they are made with molds and every one that comes out of a mold is exactly the same size. The problem is the new mold designs are different than the HB's - i.e. the DMM Alloy Offsets are not the same size or geometry as the original HB Offsets.
No, I quite understand that. My understanding is that it seems, based simply on this thread, that you're main gripe with them is that the new #9 doesn't fit where the prior made a textbook placement. My point being that that really says nothing objective whatsoever about the new design. I know it's more than that, when you've gotten used to something through the years change to is is annoying. I'm just saying that doesn't make it a bad product. Had I been able to get the HBs I would have. Trust me, we've been plotting to kill Caughtinside for over a year now just to steal his. Well that, and most of us don't like him much.
healyje wrote: DMM obviously either felt a compelling need to somehow revisit the design and contribute "value" to the design, or they felt there was a problem with the HB design, or they simply blew it. I suspect it wasn't the latter. Again, I simply find such tampering with perfection ill-advised, unnecessary, and unfortunate.
This is an extremely common occurance, and as an engineer I'll tell you it's damn hard not to tweak something when reverse engineering. They most likely have justifications of why they did what they did. Now if the change brings in a flurry of issues, say as the oversized holes, then I think it's easy to say it was a crappy design change. My point, again, is that saying the new geometry is crap because it no longer fits in one specific placement, on one specific route, at one specific crag, is a silly argument.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Sep 11, 2008, 10:36 PM
Post #32 of 283
(4910 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Arrogant_Bastard wrote: This is an extremely common occurance, and as an engineer I'll tell you it's damn hard not to tweak something when reverse engineering. They most likely have justifications of why they did what they did. Now if the change brings in a flurry of issues, say as the oversized holes, then I think it's easy to say it was a crappy design change. My point, again, is that saying the new geometry is crap because it no longer fits in one specific placement, on one specific route, at one specific crag, is a silly argument.
Well, if you're an engineer, then you know it isn't the same product after these changes. And given geometry and size is the name of the game when it comes to nuts, then by definition changing them means their performance characteristics change as well. Now, this change in performance may or may not be to your liking, but as a long time user of the HB's it, along with the other changes they've made, is decidedly not to mine.
There is nothing wrong with them at all - unless of course you want and expect that they perform exactly as the originals do. They do not, and do not by a significant degree, as such they are a poor substitute for the real thing. Fortunately, I still have some of the 'real thing', and now I'm going to be watching ebay to insure I always have spares in case I lose any.
|
|
|
|
|
Chrisrow
Sep 12, 2008, 1:18 PM
Post #33 of 283
(4853 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Posts: 16
|
In reply to the various posters on this thread I'd like to clear up some of the matters raised.
Firstly, the Brass offsets will be available through DMM Stockists across America from Spring 2009. They were previously only sold on an exclusive. They will be distributed with all other DMM Products through Excalibur Distribution based in Sandy Salt Lake Utah. They will not have the colour coded plastic sleeve over the top of the wire as this degrades quickly, instead there will be an aluminium swage which will be colour coded.
The Aluminium Offsets sized 7 to 11 have been available since earlier this year. I'd like to emphasise that these products have been forged on the same Forging Dies as they had previously been by HB. The Dies have be re furbished, but no deliberate action has been taken to alter the dimensions of this excellent product. Inevitably there will be Forging tolerances,which would have also been the case when they were made by HB in Bangor, just 10 miles from our Factory here in Llanberis North Wales. Forging tolerances can be + or -,(perhaps the poster whose size 9 wouldn't fit had an HB one that was a little under and the DMM one was a little over. In any case both versions would have been forged to the same tolerances.
The only changes we made to the Nuts was with the post Forging operations where we have machined a full radius for the wire to sit against inside the top of the nut. This has two advantages. It reduces the overall size of the unit by eliminating the wire forming outside the nut, making shallow placements a little easier, and also it increases the overall strength of the unit.(we also use this system on our smallest wallnuts).
The problem with the nut sliding down the wire making placement and cleaning awkward has been noted, and the latest batches to leave the factory will all be glued inplace using an epoxy glue. This was in fact common practice by HB, but something we weren't aware of at time of going into production. This can be done retrospectively by anybody encountering this problem. Apologies to anybody who has been plagued by this niggle.
Anodising nuts/cams is common practice now, and as somebody pointed out it is a question of managing the waste systems properly, and we have ensured we use a very reputable company who has an excellent environmental record as well as producing a top quality finish(the company in question also does work for Rolls Royce)
We take great pride in the production of our equipment, so I hope this makes matters clear now. We are always keen to supply information and respond to customers questions or concerns regarding our products and will continue to do so in the future.
Chris Rowlands
Brand Manager DMM
|
|
|
|
|
Arrogant_Bastard
Sep 12, 2008, 3:22 PM
Post #34 of 283
(4823 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2007
Posts: 19994
|
Thanks Chris, nice post. Glad to hear the brassies are coming too.
I must not have received one of the disfunctional #9s, as I've found many placements for it and expect to come across many more.
|
|
|
|
|
vegastradguy
Sep 12, 2008, 3:37 PM
Post #35 of 283
(4813 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 5919
|
thanks for the quick reply, chris- much appreciated!
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Sep 12, 2008, 3:48 PM
Post #36 of 283
(4804 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
Arrogant_Bastard wrote: Thanks Chris, nice post. Glad to hear the brassies are coming too. I must not have received one of the disfunctional #9s, as I've found many placements for it and expect to come across many more.
Please see user profile maldaly & sterlingjim for some of the better examples of the kind of rapport a manufacturer/distributor can foster here on RC.com.
I would suggest you avail yourself of this resource more in the future, as it can affect a rather large audience's perception of your company. Besides, you could be getting paid to browse/post in these forums, as I suspect many here are (whether their employers know/approve of it or not!)
edit: llnkify
(This post was edited by stymingersfink on Sep 12, 2008, 3:51 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
AlexCV
Sep 12, 2008, 4:17 PM
Post #37 of 283
(4784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 25, 2008
Posts: 283
|
stymingersfink wrote: Please see user profile maldaly & sterlingjim for some of the better examples of the kind of rapport a manufacturer/distributor can foster here on RC.com.
Don't forget Michael Lane from OP as a good example.
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Sep 12, 2008, 4:35 PM
Post #38 of 283
(4775 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
AlexCV wrote: stymingersfink wrote: Please see user profile maldaly & sterlingjim for some of the better examples of the kind of rapport a manufacturer/distributor can foster here on RC.com. Don't forget Michael Lane from OP as a good example.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Sep 12, 2008, 5:56 PM
Post #39 of 283
(4740 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
stymingersfink wrote: AlexCV wrote: stymingersfink wrote: Please see user profile maldaly & sterlingjim for some of the better examples of the kind of rapport a manufacturer/distributor can foster here on RC.com. Don't forget Michael Lane from OP as a good example. iz troo 
|
|
|
|
|
stymingersfink
Sep 12, 2008, 6:03 PM
Post #40 of 283
(4736 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 12, 2003
Posts: 7250
|
sungam wrote: stymingersfink wrote: AlexCV wrote: stymingersfink wrote: Please see user profile maldaly & sterlingjim for some of the better examples of the kind of rapport a manufacturer/distributor can foster here on RC.com. Don't forget Michael Lane from OP as a good example. iz troo What about Madcock???
|
|
|
|
|
coolcat83
Sep 12, 2008, 6:03 PM
Post #41 of 283
(4735 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2007
Posts: 1007
|
always good to hear from a company and see that they are taking interest.
|
|
|
|
|
tomtom
Sep 12, 2008, 9:15 PM
Post #42 of 283
(4705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 9, 2004
Posts: 366
|
Thanks for the post Chris.
But don't be surprised by Joseph's future point-by-point rebuttal of the errors in your ways. If he thinks that something is different, then you need to recalibrate *your* tools.
|
|
|
|
|
jeremy11
Sep 12, 2008, 10:22 PM
Post #43 of 283
(4689 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2004
Posts: 597
|
healyje wrote: Arrogant_Bastard wrote: healyje wrote: The problem is that they did change the size in one dimension and, hence, the geometry. That in turn has changed how they place and the 'problem' is it did not improve them, rather it degraded them. How so, are you noticing consistant problems somehow with the geometry? Saying that the new stoppers are trash because they no longer fit this one specific placement that your HBs did is a bit much I'd think. I don't think you're really getting the fine points here. This isn't a problem with 'consistency' as they are made with molds and every one that comes out of a mold is exactly the same size. The problem is the new mold designs are different than the HB's - i.e. the DMM Alloy Offsets are not the same size or geometry as the original HB Offsets. Now, if you've never used either one before, that probably won't be an issue for you. But, if like me, and you've been using HB Offset Alloys since they were first made - it's a big f#cking deal. And even if you haven't used the original HB's, guess what, you still aren't, you're using something else - something that doesn't perform as well as the originals. DMM obviously either felt a compelling need to somehow revisit the design and contribute "value" to the design, or they felt there was a problem with the HB design, or they simply blew it. I suspect it wasn't the latter. Again, I simply find such tampering with perfection ill-advised, unnecessary, and unfortunate.
healyje: try taking some calipers to the HB #9 and DMM #9 and comparing. Remember that the DMM will most likely fit where the HB will not - although having the sizing so close could be confusing - maybe leave it for aid routes.
another great manufacturer on rc.com is Graham, owner of Cilogear!!
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Sep 13, 2008, 12:25 AM
Post #44 of 283
(4650 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Chrisrow wrote: ...perhaps the poster whose size 9 wouldn't fit had an HB one that was a little under and the DMM one was a little over. In any case both versions would have been forged to the same tolerances.
Chris, I'll have to slap a micrometer on them when I get a chance, and I will post up the specs on each but the difference is not small - by eye it would appear to be well beyond any 'one a little under, the other a little over' kind of difference. I'll also check them against a couple of other sets of HBs as well.
Glad to hear about you guys epoxying them, as that's definitely a critical contribution to their performance on cleaning.
The wire tubing I'm somewhat ambivalent about, but in the end going lean in that respect is fine, aid climbers may feel otherwise.
Anodizing? All you manufacturers need to get togehther and develop a standard or all of you should just follow the lead of the 800 lb. gorilla and call it good.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Sep 13, 2008, 12:31 AM
Post #45 of 283
(4648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
How could we forget cilo gear?
or fish?
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Sep 13, 2008, 12:32 AM
Post #46 of 283
(4647 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
or climbingaddict?
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Sep 13, 2008, 12:33 AM
Post #47 of 283
(4646 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
jeremy11 wrote: healyje: try taking some calipers to the HB #9 and DMM #9 and comparing. Remember that the DMM will most likely fit where the HB will not - although having the sizing so close could be confusing - maybe leave it for aid routes.
Jeremy, I will be to the new one and several of the old ones, but as I stated above the difference is significant. The DMM #9 didn't just 'not quite' slip through keyhole the HB #9 went through very loosely - it wasn't even close to fitting through.
Yes, the converse is true, but that's not the issue. I'm a long time user and them being 'close' isn't good enough when 'close' is this large a difference. If your talking a few 100ths of an inch fine, but this is more like and 1/8 of an inch - too much two carry mixed sets - at least for me.
|
|
|
|
|
Chrisrow
Sep 15, 2008, 7:55 AM
Post #48 of 283
(4538 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Posts: 16
|
Sorry I can't help re the offset sizing, it's difficult to comment further without seeing the units in the flesh.
Re anodising, I agree it'd be very useful for the climber if manufacturers tried to standardize sizing/colour coding. It would be a big ask, as sizing varies from company to company , but I reckon you could probably get a fair amount of concensus. We did this with Wild Country a few years ago with Wallnuts/Rocks, and both sets of Cams.
Chris
Brand Manager DMM
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Sep 15, 2008, 8:39 AM
Post #49 of 283
(4533 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
Chrisrow wrote: Sorry I can't help re the offset sizing, it's difficult to comment further without seeing the units in the flesh. Re anodising, I agree it'd be very useful for the climber if manufacturers tried to standardize sizing/colour coding. It would be a big ask, as sizing varies from company to company , but I reckon you could probably get a fair amount of concensus. We did this with Wild Country a few years ago with Wallnuts/Rocks, and both sets of Cams. Chris Brand Manager DMM
Good choice.
BTW, any cosmetic seconds of the offsets can be sent to me for... size testing...
|
|
|
|
|
Arrogant_Bastard
Oct 20, 2008, 6:21 PM
Post #50 of 283
(4353 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2007
Posts: 19994
|
Chrisrow wrote: The Aluminium Offsets sized 7 to 11 have been available since earlier this year. I'd like to emphasise that these products have been forged on the same Forging Dies as they had previously been by HB. The Dies have be re furbished, but no deliberate action has been taken to alter the dimensions of this excellent product. Inevitably there will be Forging tolerances… can be + or -,(perhaps the poster whose size 9 wouldn't fit had an HB one that was a little under and the DMM one was a little over. In any case both versions would have been forged to the same tolerances.
jeremy11 wrote: try taking some calipers to the HB #9 and DMM #9 and comparing...
healyje wrote: I will be to the new one and several of the old ones, but as I stated above the difference is significant. The DMM #9 didn't just 'not quite' slip through…
I had a chance to compare a friends HB offsets to my DMMs this weekend. Numerous things stuck out immediately, such as the shape, depth and fillet of notch in the face, the radius on the outer edges, and fundamentally – the size. Many of them were close, but there are definitely differences quite noticeable to the naked eye, no calipers needed. I couldn’t remember which specific stopper Healyje mentioned in this thread, but it was obvious to me that the #9 is the greatest deviator from the original. I wasn’t very surprised to drag up this thread and see that that was the exact stopper Jeff had issue with.
I still stand by my original stance of ‘who cares’; having a slightly different dimension doesn’t affect my climbing or ability to use them effectively in the least.. However, I’m confirming Jeff’s observations that the new DMMs are in no way identical to their predecessors. This isn’t just a tolerance issue, they are grossly different dimensions. I'm more startled by a claim from a DMM representative that they were cut from the same die. If this is true I’m a bit surprised at the (lack of) engineering work that went into their manufacturing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
