|
sheldonjr
Feb 18, 2004, 12:51 AM
Post #26 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 31, 2003
Posts: 191
|
The only downside I see, besides weight, is these things look like a b**** to clean in awkward spots. But I suppose with all that range you don't have to retract it all the way. Yet, something tells me I'll be clipping alot of fixed Link-Cams in the future...
|
|
|
|
|
strider
Feb 18, 2004, 1:24 AM
Post #27 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 9, 2003
Posts: 173
|
Wow, that thing is a trip.
I notice that the picutre above shows the expansion range 2.06" in the first phase and .83" in the third phase. But what about the second phase. Can you place the piece in it's second phase?
Any more hard numbers on this cam?
-n
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Feb 18, 2004, 2:22 PM
Post #28 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
In reply to: Yet, something tells me I'll be clipping alot of fixed Link-Cams in the future...
For sure...
josh
|
|
|
|
|
taualum23
Feb 18, 2004, 2:27 PM
Post #29 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 2370
|
Interestingly, I now know what I want for my birthday. Even more interesting...(to me anyway) is that it IS my birthday. Cool. I want some. It'll be fun to watch the market when these and the MAx Cams come out. What'll they cost, how will they feel, what'll they weigh? New goodies!!
|
|
|
|
|
pawilkes
Feb 18, 2004, 2:44 PM
Post #30 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 10, 2003
Posts: 275
|
i see the massive advantage in having a huge range like that but since they are going to be considerably more expensive (I saw numbers like $80-90 somewhere) I don't know how people are going to be able to afford a rack of these. with other cams you have a bunch of sizes with a smaller range but you still have more of them which means you can place more so you have more pro on the wall. anyone else see this problem
|
|
|
|
|
mandrake
Feb 18, 2004, 3:47 PM
Post #31 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 7, 2004
Posts: 188
|
In reply to: i see the massive advantage in having a huge range like that but since they are going to be considerably more expensive (I saw numbers like $80-90 somewhere) I don't know how people are going to be able to afford a rack of these. with other cams you have a bunch of sizes with a smaller range but you still have more of them which means you can place more so you have more pro on the wall. anyone else see this problem
I don't see it as getting a full rack of 'em, but rather using them to reduce the size of my rack. With this sort of flexibility, you could really lighten the load. For a long pitch with varied size protection (say running pitches together in Red Rocks) my first thought is to stay with one complete set of cams then three-four of these puppies.
|
|
|
|
|
taualum23
Feb 18, 2004, 4:10 PM
Post #32 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 2370
|
That's exactly the way I was thinking of using them. A regular set of cams with maybe the most popular sizes doubled for the route, and carring a few of these guys for the unexpected placement.
|
|
|
|
|
coldclimb
Feb 18, 2004, 5:28 PM
Post #33 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 6909
|
In reply to: In reply to: i see the massive advantage in having a huge range like that but since they are going to be considerably more expensive (I saw numbers like $80-90 somewhere) I don't know how people are going to be able to afford a rack of these. with other cams you have a bunch of sizes with a smaller range but you still have more of them which means you can place more so you have more pro on the wall. anyone else see this problem I don't see it as getting a full rack of 'em, but rather using them to reduce the size of my rack. With this sort of flexibility, you could really lighten the load. For a long pitch with varied size protection (say running pitches together in Red Rocks) my first thought is to stay with one complete set of cams then three-four of these puppies.
Still though, the rack will have to stay the same size. Say you normally carry twelve camalots up a certain climb. Just because this cam covers the range of three camalots, are you only going to bring four cams?
You still have to bring just as many pieces of pro. And if the price quoted earlier in the thread is anywhere near correct, I'll never buy one of these.
I wonder if camalots will be getting cheaper... :?
Edit: Sorry, didn't read what you said clearly the first time. ;) You'd probably be right about carrying a full set plus extras of these. :)
|
|
|
|
|
flamer
Feb 18, 2004, 5:37 PM
Post #34 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2002
Posts: 2955
|
In reply to: I don't see it as getting a full rack of 'em, but rather using them to reduce the size of my rack. With this sort of flexibility, you could really lighten the load. For a long pitch with varied size protection (say running pitches together in Red Rocks) my first thought is to stay with one complete set of cams then three-four of these puppies.
I have held one of these in my hand, and trust me, lighten the load you will not!!! These puppy's are HEAVY.
I've never had a problem running pitch's together in Red Rocks using a standard rack- Nut's one and a half sets0 cams from blue alien to #4 Camalot- 1 of ea. and that's it. 3 of these would probably add between 4 and 4 POUNDS!!!
Only way I'll be getting any is when I booty the stuck one's, but I still won't carry them on m y rack.
josh
|
|
|
|
|
jkarns
Feb 18, 2004, 6:15 PM
Post #35 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 542
|
You are all forgetting the obvious benefit for climbing desert cracks!!
One set of these and you can climb splitter cracks of all different sizes, something that is not at all possible today.
|
|
|
|
|
telluryan
Feb 18, 2004, 6:55 PM
Post #36 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2002
Posts: 194
|
i saw that at the ouray festival as well. Definitely the coolest thing i saw there! Takes a lot of guesswork out of finding the right piece for the right placement.... the guy at the tent told me that they were going to be tested this year in the field and hopefully go well and be ready for production.
|
|
|
|
|
michaellane
Feb 18, 2004, 8:51 PM
Post #37 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 16, 2004
Posts: 89
|
http://omegapac.com/innovative2.html
Try this link ... you can see it in action.
Current protos are about 1.5 oz. heavier than other cams with same outside-range dimensions, btw.
Adios.
--Lane
_____________________________
Michael Lane
Omega Pacific
|
|
|
|
|
taualum23
Feb 18, 2004, 8:57 PM
Post #38 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 2370
|
Holy innovative, Batman! I can't wait to try those out. It does look like it could be a bear to clean, though.
|
|
|
|
|
norushnomore
Feb 18, 2004, 9:00 PM
Post #39 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 4, 2002
Posts: 414
|
Can I be a beta tester?
In reply to: http://omegapac.com/innovative2.html Try this link ... you can see it in action. Current protos are about 1.5 oz. heavier than other cams with same outside-range dimensions, btw. Adios. --Lane _____________________________ Michael Lane Omega Pacific |
|
|
|
|
cryder
Feb 18, 2004, 9:02 PM
Post #40 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2003
Posts: 391
|
In reply to: http://omegapac.com/innovative2.html Try this link ... you can see it in action. Current protos are about 1.5 oz. heavier than other cams with same outside-range dimensions, btw. Adios. --Lane
That thing is mezmorizing to look at. I would have a hard time taking my eye off it once trying to place it. Is it me or does that have hords of extra surface area on it?
- n -
|
|
|
|
|
norushnomore
Feb 18, 2004, 9:40 PM
Post #41 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 4, 2002
Posts: 414
|
In reply to: That thing is mezmorizing to look at. I would have a hard time taking my eye off it once trying to place it. Is it me or does that have hords of extra surface area on it? - n -
Interesting point, it might be indeed more stable and less prone to walking
|
|
|
|
|
dredsovrn
Feb 18, 2004, 10:35 PM
Post #42 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2003
Posts: 1226
|
Sorry towergod, but use the spell check. You're killing me. Buy for now. See wat I meen.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Feb 21, 2004, 3:19 AM
Post #43 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
Well I don't want them, but I want to play with them. They are going to get stuck a lot I think. After a while I'll just carry draws trad climbing and clip the stuck supercams :shock: . Give em a few years, it's a neat idea but the beta version is never good.
They'll work out the obvious bugs before I buy em. It's the same way that friends, aliens, BD, and everything has become better refined and more useful in time. Testing helps, but real world consumer feedback will be what makes them good.
Shallow Cracks????!!!
|
|
|
|
|
no_limit
Feb 21, 2004, 4:02 AM
Post #44 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 1, 2002
Posts: 973
|
check it out here http://www.omegapac.com/innovative.html
there's even a movie
|
|
|
|
|
telluryan
Mar 26, 2004, 11:23 PM
Post #45 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2002
Posts: 194
|
i actually saw a guy who had a prototype of the Omega P cam. He was testing them out at indian creek. Actually on INcredible Hand Crack. He placed the piece at the top of the roof and backed it up w/ a #2 Cam. Took an intentional, clean fall of about 15 feet. Result cam failed, backup held. The Prototype was so tweaked it hardly resembled a cam. back to the drawing board....the placement was perfect and the lobes were all torn apart and completely deformed.
|
|
|
|
|
sharpie
Mar 27, 2004, 7:32 PM
Post #46 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 8, 2002
Posts: 1111
|
I just asked a friend at OP (rc.com screen name: southernmtguide) about the incident that Telluryan is speaking about. Here's what he had to say:
In reply to: Sharpie, I do not know the speifics at this point. I know that we did have one come back from a tester that matches this description to a certain degree. I have not been into the office for the past week as I am attending to a death in the family. I will ensure that Michael Lane, Director of the test phase for this device, posts the test reults. From what I understand, this test was actually designed to test the outer limits of the device. The cam was placed fully extended, almost tippped out, and the fall was quite a bit longer than "15" feet, and that was just the runout above the piece, making the fall more than double that distance. The cam came back to the office with predicatably results. You have to remember that this is what "testing" is all about. Trying to push the limits of the device prior to people using them in real world applications. Instead of being concerned about this happening, I think you should be happy that Omega is going to tese lengths to test a new device prior to releasing it on the market. Once I get back to the office, I will make sure that everyone at RC. COM stays briefed as to where Omega is at with testing, and designs changes. Gary |
|
|
|
|
joshklingbeil
Jun 12, 2004, 3:06 AM
Post #47 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2002
Posts: 403
|
Quote: i actually saw a guy who had a prototype of the Omega P cam. He was testing them out at indian creek. Actually on INcredible Hand Crack. He placed the piece at the top of the roof and backed it up w/ a #2 Cam. Took an intentional, clean fall of about 15 feet. Result cam failed, backup held. The Prototype was so tweaked it hardly resembled a cam. back to the drawing board....the placement was perfect and the lobes were all torn apart and completely deformed . This is messed up Ocean Pacific is testing tipped out cams in Indian Creek.Don't thay know it leaves tracking marks.
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Jun 12, 2004, 3:19 AM
Post #48 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
I don't know how many of these I would want to carry on a free rack (particularly if they aren't as strong). But I could see a real benefit in aid climbing. Put one of these on each daisy/aider. Talk about crack Jumars.
|
|
|
|
|
dimitri
Jun 23, 2004, 2:18 AM
Post #49 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2004
Posts: 31
|
WICKED, OP has a flash vid on their site of someone opening and closing the cam. Very interested to see how they work out.
|
|
|
|
|
southernmtguide
Jul 16, 2004, 2:21 AM
Post #50 of 58
(10433 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2003
Posts: 55
|
Heads up to all....
Check out the site for the update in the next few days.... :twisted:
|
|
|
|
|
|
