However I think that the will cause the lobes to break in placements where the stem sticks straight out well before a BD or Wild country cam will break. For the Zeros they even say you can make a placement where the stem sticks straight out...

We're doing a couple things to address this:

1) We're looking at new link designs that strengthen the hinges to make them stronger.

and

2) We'll be rewriting our literature to emphasize proper placement of Link Cams with a clear warning about the potential consequences of placing them in ways they could be subject to damage.

Fantastic reply Michael.

... will cause the lobes to break in placements where the stem sticks straight out well before a BD or Wild country cam will break...

It is a matter of the material they chose and the manufacturing process not withstanding this type of load for the thin sections under this kind of placement.

You would think that they would highly advise against unusual placements even though the cam range allows you to make the placement. If you are using other cams I don't see this being quite as bad of problem since the design and material characteristics lend themselves to it better..

Not really. In the words of Jacque Marçal, "I kinda' threw up in my mouth a little bit" when I read Michael's post. Would it really be so hard to simply state the pros and cons of the cam without peppering the response with unctuous praise? Take a look at the posts by Mal Daly to see how a real mensch handles criticism.

Jay

Bottom line is that the technology that provides Link Cams their greatest benefit (range) is also what introduces their clearest limitation (durability during weird loads).
I can't see any argument here either as it is pretty damn true and honest.

Link Cams are safe, but they must be placed in direction of pull and in a manner that eliminates the likelihood of the cam rotating during a load. They are ideal pieces, but not necessarily for every placement you come across.
Pretty balanced view here too. If I was being picky the use of the word 'ideal' is a slight introduction of opinion, but one word in a large post is hardly a problem.

dingus aren't you still using aliens?

What sort of response do you want dingus? Testing takes time.

you do not need to be an engineer to figure this out but anytime you have a mechanical device that has too many moving parts, connections, attachments and linkages, and this device is going to be used for climbing and with potential of falling, then you are asking for trouble.

I don't own link cams but I'll happily buy your link cams off you dingus.

'Unctuous praise'?

Jay you must have read a different reply to me. The only 'praise' I read was pretty factual and contrasted with cons.

Sure not every company rep contributes to these forums in the same way as Mal. But for a Director of Sales & Marketing Michael seems pretty ready to be forthright about the Link cam's 'durability during weird loads'.


The following at the only 'praising' sentences I could find.


Link Cams are specialty pieces and have held up well for hundreds or thousands of climbers since we introduced them.
Well yeah I can't see how you can argue with this.

Bottom line is that the technology that provides Link Cams their greatest benefit (range) is also what introduces their clearest limitation (durability during weird loads).
I can't see any argument here either as it is pretty damn true and honest.

Link Cams are safe, but they must be placed in direction of pull and in a manner that eliminates the likelihood of the cam rotating during a load. They are ideal pieces, but not necessarily for every placement you come across.
Pretty balanced view here too. If I was being picky the use of the word 'ideal' is a slight introduction of opinion, but one word in a large post is hardly a problem.

...any increased versatility in terms of range is offset by their limitations in terms of very unpredictable behavior in non textbook placements.

Dingus. In his second post, Bradley states that he has been in contact with OP repeatedly. So essentially it sounds like he got the response you were asking for:

"dear LinkCam user..."


Just saying...

... and I have yet to see a definitive 'do this, don't do that' response from OP.

If there were only two dozen posssible placements a climber would ever encounter in life then maybe such a "definitive...don't do this" response might be possible - but placements are infinite and how each can be used is equally variable. If a climber can't take one look at the limitations of a Link Cam and the options afforded by a given placement and either match the two or reject it as an unusable combination, then they shouldn't be using them.

I'm somewhat stunned to the degree to which some climbers believe it's someone else's responsibility to think for them. If you can't figure out what the reasonable range of possibility is for a given piece when you pull it off your rack - any piece - you shouldn't be carrying it. Link Cams are more than self-evident and self-documenting in this regard.

I'm somewhat stunned to the degree to which some climbers believe it's someone else's responsibility to think for them. If you can't figure out what the reasonable range of possibility is for a given piece when you pull it off your rack - any piece - you shouldn't be carrying it.

I think the above is flat out wrong.

Expecting customers to reverse engineer designs and figure out the likely failure modes may suit the engineer geek in YOU but I have no interest in cam design as a hobby or whatever. Nor do a lot of other climbers.

It's not - it's reality. NO ONE BUT YOU is responsible for carrying or placing a piece of gear. OP's designers and engineers aren't going to be with you when you go to place a Link Cam - you are going to be alone, not even your belayer will be able to help you. What you'll be alone with is the stuff on your rack and the possibilities presented by the rock - nothing else. It's solely your responsibility to work within the advantages and limitations of your gear to establish a safe placement with what you brought.

NO engineering or design knowledge of any kind whatsoever is required to take one look at those cam lobe linkages and say - 'wow, now that looks a bit on the fragile side'. It ain't rocket science and anyone who looks at those cam lobe linkages and says - 'wow, bomb; good to go' is an idiot who shouldn't be trad climbing. Ditto for anyone who hasn't even bothered to look at those linkages or thought about it - stick with clipping bolts. But on looking at it and realizing that those linkages are fragile - then it isn't any leap of genius to say to yourself 'hey, maybe I should be careful and make sure there's no way for those linkages to break in this placement.'

Your basic sixth grade education should cover it. If not, and you really can't see or figure out those linkages are fragile - then I don't want to even think about what the result is, with any kind of pro, when you come upon marginal placements.

...if design limitations appear after use in the field...

Like it or not we have (some) responsibilities to each other.

The design limitations were more than obvious when the first photo of the design was released.

I think this is a really unfortunate aspect of today's socialized / consumer-oriented / group climbing scene - the perception and very notion that anyone else other than yourself [and your belayer] might have any role or responsibility whatsoever the moment you tie into the end of a rope. It's an entirely wrongheaded perception of the world for climbing purposes. If you aren't entirely self-contained and prepared to deal with the reality of being entirely alone on lead with the gear and rock exactly as they presents themselves for you to work with then you shouldn't be trad climbing.

Breaking in half in a fall is not a durability issue; it is a catastrophic and potentially lethal failure issue. Calling it a durability issue is a clear attempt to "spin" the incidents...
That said, my personal opinion is that this failure mode makes OP cams not worth the cost or weight...any increased versatility in terms of range is offset by their limitations in terms of very unpredictable behavior in non textbook placements.