|
|
|
|
lonequail
Nov 23, 2004, 6:05 PM
Post #1 of 51
(14342 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 8, 2004
Posts: 65
|
To all owners/users of original Chouinard Camalots,
I recently discovered a dangerous condition with my Camalots that everyone should be aware of. These are the original Chouinard double stem units in which the stems are thick cables covered with sliding plastic sheaths.
Upon recent inspection, I observed that the stem cables are partially broken at the connection to the head. The stem cables are apparently breaking strand by strand as the cables flex at the connection point. It is the same failure mode that is frequently observed for triggers, where the trigger cables break at the swages with the trigger wires. However, unlike the triggers, these cables are structural and the units can fail. :shock:
The units have been heavily used since I purchased them 15 to 20 years ago. Two of my four original units exhibit some stem cable damage. Obviously they are being retired. If you have such units, please inspect them. Also, please pass on this information to other climbers.
|
|
|
|
|
salathiel
Nov 23, 2004, 6:32 PM
Post #2 of 51
(14340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 28, 2002
Posts: 132
|
Twenty years of use! Are you going to have a funeral/ wake for your old cams? are any of us invited?
B
|
|
|
|
|
parrish02
Nov 23, 2004, 9:18 PM
Post #3 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 29, 2004
Posts: 3
|
Why would you use ANY piece of climbing gear for 15-20 years?
A) Because my life isn't worth the 50-100 bux to replace the cam(s).
B) Because I'm not very smart.
C) Because I have a death wish.
D) ........????
E) All of the above.
Curious minds want to know.......
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Nov 23, 2004, 9:25 PM
Post #4 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
dmt
|
|
|
|
|
plund
Nov 23, 2004, 9:43 PM
Post #5 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2003
Posts: 302
|
In reply to: In reply to: Why would you use ANY piece of climbing gear for 15-20 years? A) Because my life isn't worth the 50-100 bux to replace the cam(s). B) Because I'm not very smart. C) Because I have a death wish. D) ........???? E) All of the above. Curious minds want to know....... What a nasty thing to say. And that to someone who was just giving a heads up. DMT
Gotta love it - first post nastiness, & an anonymous profile....what gonads!!
"Richard Cranium"...nice!!
|
|
|
|
|
salathiel
Nov 23, 2004, 9:44 PM
Post #6 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 28, 2002
Posts: 132
|
Why not use them for twenty years? The metal doesn't wear that quickly. It sounds like the guy takes care of his gear, and recently noticed this phenomenon. I have made a belay off of fifty year old pitons at Seneca. You may sleep in a house that is made of wood framing that is over twenty years old, and wouldn't question the integrity of that. I would say that wood degrades far faster than aluminum and steel. Maybe this guy is a weekend warrior who climbs once or twice a year. Should he have to replace gear that sits in a nice dry closet every year or so? You are jumping to too many conclusions my friend.
So maybe the answer is "F": because the equipment is well designed and actually lasts longer than you think it does.
Thanks again Dingus.
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Nov 23, 2004, 9:44 PM
Post #7 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
richard cranium... hee hee.
|
|
|
|
|
drector
Nov 23, 2004, 9:46 PM
Post #8 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 1037
|
Even if many of us don't have equipment that old, it is a nice reminder to inspect our stuff every few years at a minimum to check for cable breakage or similar, less common, failures.
Thanks for the info.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Nov 23, 2004, 9:58 PM
Post #10 of 51
(14340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
In reply to: Why would you use ANY piece of climbing gear for 15-20 years? A) Because my life isn't worth the 50-100 bux to replace the cam(s). B) Because I'm not very smart. C) Because I have a death wish. D) ........???? E) All of the above. Curious minds want to know.......
- rigid stem Friends that are older
- wired nuts that are way older
and irregularly
- pins that are way older.
Fire away.
|
|
|
|
|
jimfix
Nov 23, 2004, 10:20 PM
Post #11 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2004
Posts: 314
|
Admittedly its good to get the heads up on any gear with "poor" design (not that any BD gear can be termed poor for the time of manufacture), however regular inspection of gear should be commonplace, no matter the age. I'd watch out for stem wear on all cams, as I doubt that singles are free from this kind of failure.
20 years is nothing, I hope I'm still climbing in 20 years! I bet a lot of my gear will out live me.
|
|
|
|
|
parrish02
Nov 23, 2004, 11:02 PM
Post #12 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 29, 2004
Posts: 3
|
So, I guess I am going to get ripped for posting my opinion...... :oops:
Perhaps it is the way that I worded it that offends you?
How about this, instead:
Lonequail,
While I appreciate the heads up on the problem with the old style Camalots, it is my opinion that lead gear should be retired before it gets to be 15 or 20 years old. The reasons for this are many, but in the case of cams or nuts with cable, the constant flexing of said cable can cause the problem you describe. This problem is especially prevelent at the juncture where a cable is soldered or swaged. You are lucky that you were able to spot this breakage before it became a problem. In your post, you state that two of the four cams you have display this problem and that you are retiring them. Congratulations! My worry is that you don't state that you are retiriing the other two, which may have the same damage, just not to the extent that you can see it readily.
Better?
And to Salathiel who said: "Maybe this guy is a weekend warrior who climbs once or twice a year."
In his original post, Lonequial stated:"The units have been heavily used since I purchased them 15 to 20 years ago."
Well, I may be alone in this opinion, but I don't use gear that I have had for 15-20 years and have "used heavily." The lone exception is a 20 + year old Choiunard Yosemite hammer that will not die. Not exactly a life or death piece of gear, and we take a back-up on a big wall anyway....
So, sorry to those that I offended, I will try not to be such a "Dingus Cranium" in the future.
Peace
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Nov 23, 2004, 11:41 PM
Post #13 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
Parrish. Your first post was pretty aggressive and sarcastic. Most of us who have been arround awhile have 15-20 year old gear. I retire stuff here and there but a good bit of my gear is pretty old. 3 years ago i was climbing on 1986 foot fangs and simond chacals & hummingbirds that were a few years older than the fangs. My 3 year old grivel rambocomps are riddled with stress cracks . maby they used to make gear a bit more rugged than they do today.
|
|
|
|
|
sowr
Nov 24, 2004, 12:12 AM
Post #14 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2004
Posts: 13
|
IMHO The design of the original Camalots was compromised from "the drawing board" stage (probably forced upon them by a WC patent, and to think Jardine approached them first), I retired mine 10 years ago, it's not the frayed wires that I can see that worry me, it's the ones I can't see. All of my replacements are non-BD designs. The new Camalots, although much improved still do not trip my trigger (sorry couldn't resist).
|
|
|
|
|
salathiel
Nov 24, 2004, 12:13 AM
Post #15 of 51
(14340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 28, 2002
Posts: 132
|
I just felt the first post was pretty sarcastic and needed to be met with same. Nice catch on the "weekend warrior" comment of mine. Hooked on phonics never told me what the words meant, just how to pronounce them.
How's that for sarcasm?
Blur
Plus, it amazes me how one post can incite such a response form all of us, who are honestly just looking out for each other. The Lonequail with the heads up, Parrish, looking out for lonequail in their own sarcastic way. The rest of us, using the 1st person plural, jumping all over your ass to protect lonequail. All of us probably old, rusty, climbers who act like proverbial mother hens protecting one of our own.
B
|
|
|
|
|
parrish02
Nov 24, 2004, 12:51 AM
Post #16 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 29, 2004
Posts: 3
|
Pretty good violation of intenet posting decorum for my first ever RC.com post, wouldn't you say?
Sowr makes a good point. He says "I retired mine 10 years ago, it's not the frayed wires that I can see that worry me, it's the ones I can't see."
Great point to ponder for those of you who think that your 20 year old gear is still bomber.
|
|
|
|
|
climboard
Nov 24, 2004, 2:36 PM
Post #17 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 10, 2001
Posts: 503
|
Wow- a thread that goes from a flamefest to a civilized discussion. How refreshing and backwards.
|
|
|
|
|
matttracyg
Nov 24, 2004, 3:15 PM
Post #18 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 22, 2003
Posts: 36
|
In reply to: Why not use them for twenty years? The metal doesn't wear that quickly. ..... So maybe the answer is "F": because the equipment is well designed and actually lasts longer than you think it does.
I have Camalots that I purchased in 1989 that I still use. And my stoppers and hexes are nearly that old.
I don't even remember if they are Black Diamond or Chounard. I think that was around the year the name changed.
I'll be sure to inspect them. The Metolious TCUs and FCUs that are slightly newer than my Camalots were great when they were new, but soon after got all sticky and really suck. The old Camalots are still as sweet as ever!
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Nov 24, 2004, 3:25 PM
Post #19 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
this is hilarious. lonequail is an engineer, and a hell of a lot more qualified to judge the condition of his gear than just about any of us internet spraylords. well designed gear should last a really long time(my rigid stems friends are well over 10 years old and still going strong), and any design that hides critical parts is a bad one. older camalots definitely have a few flaws and the worst trigger cable designs on the market, so take the heads up for what its worth.
hey kent, this thread says you are a weekend warrior. so quit trying to drag us poor mortals up desert 5.11+ offwidth all day long now!
|
|
|
|
|
maxdacat
Nov 24, 2004, 3:42 PM
Post #20 of 51
(14340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2004
Posts: 142
|
hey i laughed, but then again i appreciate sarcasm.....anyway how do you go from having a username of parrish02 to it showing Richard Cranium in the response...am i missing something?
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Nov 24, 2004, 3:44 PM
Post #21 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
OK, I still have two of the old ones, blue and black. I inspected them. The cables are fine. I inspect them at least once a year anyway. Now of course I can't see the cable inside the ball joint, but I can't envision how they could break inside that joint without the fraying noted in the original post. Nor can I inspect the axles.
The cam surfaces are intact. There are no structural cracks.
Other than the fact that they are heavy and the cam aluminum is too hard by modern standards, they seem to be servicable units. I havne't replaced a trigger in YEARS, so I don't know what all the whining about triggers is centered on. Generation 2 camelots were the ones with the stupid triggers. I did the string through the hole thing on the oldies and never replaced a trigger again.
Care - I hang all my gear up, rather than leaving it stuffed every which way in a pack, at the end of each trip, or most of them anyway. I think hanging the gear like that preserves triggers, prevents some of the flexing that may eventually fray the cables, blah blah blah
So with all that, yes, they are 15 years old probably. Don't really remember. Just what is it I should be afraid of in terms of structural integrity? I'm not too interested in mysterious bugaboos and all, and I don't believe in the myth of microcracks.
They are not my first line choice but sometimes I need them. I am aware these are the cams Goran Kopp was using when he was killed and his pro ripped. I don't recall the specifics, but I don't recall a broken cam either.
So now that we're past multiple choice insults, just what is it that lurks hidden beneath the surface?
Any *substanciated* concerns out there?
BTW, I have lots of old gear, most of it quite servicable. Much of it is secondary gear for big projects, fixing lines, etc. But to say that gear 15 years old should be retired based upon the age alone sounds faintly supersticious.
Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
boulderinemt
Nov 24, 2004, 3:50 PM
Post #22 of 51
(14340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 9, 2003
Posts: 282
|
i have a couple of cams that i bought from my uncle that have got to be 15 years old. they are still perfectly functional. believe you me i looked around with those cams...made sure the wires were good, all that noise. i haven't used them yet, but i wouldn't be hesitant to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
csoles
Nov 24, 2004, 4:09 PM
Post #23 of 51
(14340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2002
Posts: 329
|
In reply to: They are not my first line choice but sometimes I need them. I am aware these are the cams Goran Kopp was using when he was killed and his pro ripped. I don't recall the specifics, but I don't recall a broken cam either.
The real issue with these antiques is the narrow cams. It's a harder alloy but that's irrelevant other than it allowed them to go thinner. Compared to all others, they had the least surface area which means they are the most prone to tracking out. This was likely a bigger factor in the Kropp case than the biner. Personally, I'd still use 20 year old Friends but not original Camalots, no matter how good their condition.
|
|
|
|
|
dead_milkman
Nov 24, 2004, 4:43 PM
Post #24 of 51
(14341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 241
|
In reply to: ... 3 years ago i was climbing on 1986 foot fangs and simond chacals & hummingbirds that were a few years older than the fangs ...
You poor sod!
Please don't hurt me... I'm only joking... but really... foot fangs?
|
|
|
|
|
asandh
Nov 24, 2004, 4:55 PM
Post #25 of 51
(14340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 13, 2002
Posts: 788
|
:D
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
