|
z_rock90
Feb 22, 2006, 3:44 AM
Post #1 of 10
(2531 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 18, 2005
Posts: 126
|
I know this has been brought up about a 1,000 times but here it is agian, would you fall on a 00 ultralight tcu? I noticed that the 6.35 kn vs. old tcu 4.4kn do you think that you could trust them as much a #1 or 2 camalot ? "placed well"
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Feb 22, 2006, 4:13 AM
Post #2 of 10
(2531 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: I know this has been brought up about a 1,000 times but here it is agian, would you fall on a 00 ultralight tcu? I noticed that the 6.35 kn vs. old tcu 4.4kn do you think that you could trust them as much a #1 or 2 camalot ? "placed well"
You can't reliably make these sorts of generalizations. Each placement needs to be explicitly judged on its individual merits. A 00 placement (Ultralight or TCU) is only as good as the quality of the rock and the appropriateness of the placement geometry. It could be better than a poorly placed #8 or not having even been worth placing. I would and have fallen on well-placed 00's. It's all a matter of context and circumstance. If it's all you're gonna get I'd pay close attention to the placement and hope for the best. "Close attention" to mirco-details is key when placing really small pro whether it is active or passive if you want to be able to rely on it.
Edited to add: vegastradguy's comment on screamers is worth noting as well.
|
|
|
|
|
vegastradguy
Feb 22, 2006, 4:17 AM
Post #3 of 10
(2531 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 5919
|
In reply to: I know this has been brought up about a 1,000 times but here it is agian, would you fall on a 00 ultralight tcu? I noticed that the 6.35 kn vs. old tcu 4.4kn do you think that you could trust them as much a #1 or 2 camalot ? "placed well"
well, considering the #1 camalot is rated to 14kn- no, you cannot trust them as much from a numbers stand-point.
that said, if a 00 was my only protection, placed well in good rock (and i could evaluate the placement), sure, i'd climb above it.
of course, on any cam that small, a screamer is always a good idea, even if the placement is sound.
edited to add: healyje's response is spot on. but i'll leave my comments anyway....
|
|
|
|
|
taller_climber_dude
Feb 22, 2006, 4:20 AM
Post #4 of 10
(2531 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 21, 2005
Posts: 73
|
beautifully put Healyje
The risks that climbing presents is great, but the risk is worth it and rock climbing is safer than driving your car.
(i think, and was told by so'n'so)
|
|
|
|
|
rad_dog
Mar 5, 2006, 3:27 PM
Post #5 of 10
(2531 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2006
Posts: 34
|
The fine print that came with a 00 TCU I got recently stated that the unit strength was down-rated in the specifications. In other words they were not rating the ultimate strength of the unit in terms of what it would take to break it, they were reducing those numbers to allow for pullout due to the small cams shearing out of the rock in a real world situation. That TCU was not an ultralight - but I presume they still down rate them that way.
I usually place 0 and 00's like an adjustable nut whenever I can. Take advantage of any changes in the crack size and use that taper (if any) to keyhole them in. When placed like that I think they are pretty much bomber if the rock is solid. The low strength rating does not bother me at all.
After that Alien mess I'm really leaning toward gear that is well tested. Companies that test every unit to a fraction of its rated strength is a great idea and they will get my $ before somebody else does. I think metolius, wild country, and BD are good about that. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong...
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Mar 5, 2006, 3:41 PM
Post #6 of 10
(2531 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
A #1 or a #2 camelot in the spot formerly occupied by a #0 ultralight TCU?
Dude, that's not possible.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
z_rock90
Mar 6, 2006, 10:29 PM
Post #7 of 10
(2531 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 18, 2005
Posts: 126
|
not in the same spot, but as in terms of strenght
|
|
|
|
|
hosh
Mar 6, 2006, 10:49 PM
Post #8 of 10
(2531 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2003
Posts: 1662
|
I don't know, TCU's are fine and all, but I really like my Aliens, "recall" issues and all. Can't beat that black in super small cracks, I've placed mine several times and moved past it with full confidence. (Haven't fallen on it yet though...) But those TCU's are pretty sweet, I am looking to maybe add a few to my ever enlarging rack. I just need to make sure I can finance my son's birth first. My wife is pretty insistant that having enough money to finance our son's birth is more important than trad gear, but I don't know... ;)
hosh.
|
|
|
|
|
climboard
Mar 9, 2006, 2:28 AM
Post #9 of 10
(2531 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2001
Posts: 503
|
I would prefer not to fall on a 0 or 00 if at all possible. I'd choose a small nut over a small cam if a placement was available. Here's something from a similar thread not too long ago-
In reply to: We've done a lot of field testing of tiny cams in cracks. Here's what we found. When the cams were placed well retracted in what appeared to be a parallel sided granite crack: Max failure load was around 500 lbf. When placed in a constriction (like a stopper placement) at full retraction in granite: Cams would fail at or above rated strength. When placed in any kind of flare or at half-expansion: Cams would pull at verylow and very random forces. We'd pull the cams with a hydraulic chain puller hooked up to a dial dynomometer and could watch what happened very closely. Generally, when the cams begin to load tiny bits of rock would crumble at the contact points. Then the aluminum would deform slightly. The combination would cause the cam to either slip out or it would invert and break the cam. If the cam is too small for the placement and starts to drag through the rock all kinds of bad stuff can happen. See the "Whipper of the Year" thread on Supertopo for some good visuals. That was a case of placing a too-small cam (Ruby's takes Yellow TCU's perfectly. The first piece to fail was a Blue TCU then the Blue S4 Flex which is also smaller than a Yellow TCU.) in soft rock and having the placement fail. It's amazing that the guy didn't suffer more than bruised ribs. He said he's going to send me that cam but I still haven't seen it. We get higher strengths in test fixtures because we're not dealing with rock that crumbles. BTW, wet IC sandstone is waaaay weak. Consider any cam placement A3. Mal |
|
|
|
|
trebork2
Deleted
Mar 9, 2006, 2:52 PM
Post #10 of 10
(2531 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
I agree with climboard. I would rather fall on a small nut than a 00 or 0. The smallest cam I have taken a fall on in a .75 camalot and it held the fall. I was five feet over it and it was solid!
|
|
|
|
|
|
