|
maculated
Mar 30, 2005, 5:37 AM
Post #26 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
You know, I have a pink .5, it just happens to be a Camalot Jr U-Stem.
I am so righteously old-school.
|
|
|
|
|
elvislegs
Mar 30, 2005, 8:05 AM
Post #27 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2002
Posts: 3148
|
i'm sorry, i know this has nothing to do with anything, but could all those in this thread who insist on calling rockprodigy "gumby", or asserting that he is not a "real climber" (tm), please go free an aid line up el cap or somewhere in zion, and get back to me.
please.
thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
rockprodigy
Mar 30, 2005, 3:07 PM
Post #28 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 1540
|
In reply to: Valid question but why not ask the author instead of the RC.com population at large. Surely, you knew you were going to get these kind of responses. Besides, if you've written a guidbook you already know the answer. Rockclimbing guidebook authors can be very lazy and who can blame them. There's not much money in it and ultimateley they'd rather be climbing.
...because I thought that there was a possibility that I was simply mis-reading the chart. I thought, for sure, one of the many very knowledgeable people here would be able to explain it to me.
What I have learned, is that the author decided to include theoretical sizes in the gear lists...hmmm, I guess that could sorta make sense from a very weird perspective, but from my perspective, I would guess it was a joke. Just like a little joke in my guidebook where I told people when driving to the crags, there are two routes, one is direct, but has two stop signs, the other has only one stop sign, but you have to speed through a school zone to beat your friend taking the other route.
I have my book with me today, so I can be more specific, here's the gear list for "Death of a Cowboy":
(1)0.4 (4)0.5 (1)0.75 (1)1.0 (1)2.0 (2)2.5 (2)2.5 (4)3.0 (3)3.5
Since the chart is so easy to understand, will someone please translate that into camalots for me? I'll add that there is no such thing as a 0.4, or 0.75 friend, and the #.05,#1,#3, and #4 camalots are not included on the chart for some reason.
I want to see what you guys come up with from that list, and I'll tell you if that's what I ended up using.
|
|
|
|
|
crackmd
Mar 30, 2005, 3:34 PM
Post #29 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2002
Posts: 444
|
I think I agree with you on this Rockprodigy. I have never really given any thought to "what is a 0.4 Friend?". Since I use mostly Metolius cams in the small sizes, I have always approached it as a 0.75 Friend being equivalant to the yellow Met, 0.5 Friend close to the blue Met, and 0.4 somewhere close to the purple or even grey (00) Met. When I racking to do a route that takes multiple cams in these small sizes, I use a combination of the recommend beta (which is usually close), my gestalt from viewing the crack from below, and lastly a security blanket in taking a few more than I think I will need (small cams don't weigh much).
On the whole, I think the IC guide is top-notch. It is about 1000X better than what we had before which was basically nothing. The previous 200-Select guide was merely a bunch of photocopies with ambiguous hand drawn topos sandwiched in a legitimate-looking cover. I say this with all due respect to the authors of the 200-Select because that guide was about 50X better than nothing.
The new guide gets you easily where you need to go and that's all that matters. If you don't like the stories then don't read them. If the pages are too glossy then spill some coffee on them. The guy put his heart and sole into the book; cut him some slack.
Soonafter I bought the book, my girlfriend absconded it and took it to Kinkos and had it spiral bound for a birthday present. It really was a great idea and works great (book stays open and lies flat).
|
|
|
|
|
tradklime
Mar 30, 2005, 3:52 PM
Post #30 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 1235
|
In reply to: I have my book with me today, so I can be more specific, here's the gear list for "Death of a Cowboy": (1)0.4 (4)0.5 (1)0.75 (1)1.0 (1)2.0 (2)2.5 (2)2.5 (4)3.0 (3)3.5 ...I want to see what you guys come up with from that list, and I'll tell you if that's what I ended up using.
This is what interpret: 1 blue alien, 4 green aliens, 1 yellow alien, 1 red alien, 1 purple alien, 2 clear aliens, 2 2.5 friends, 4 3.0 friends, and 3 3.5 friends.
|
|
|
|
|
tenesmus
Mar 30, 2005, 4:15 PM
Post #31 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2004
Posts: 263
|
In reply to: i'm sorry, i know this has nothing to do with anything, but could all those in this thread who insist on calling rockprodigy "gumby", or asserting that he is not a "real climber" (tm), please go free an aid line up el cap or somewhere in zion, and get back to me. please. thank you. |
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Mar 30, 2005, 5:48 PM
Post #32 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
In reply to: In reply to: i'm sorry, i know this has nothing to do with anything, but could all those in this thread who insist on calling rockprodigy "gumby", or asserting that he is not a "real climber" (tm), please go free an aid line up el cap or somewhere in zion, and get back to me. please. thank you. Yeah, I want to see one of these guys climb a crack at Indian Creek that is anywhere near .3-.4 inches. You can then call rockprodigy whatever you want. I
The rack reccomendation that he is refering to lists 18 cams 0.5 and up and one .4 and he equates that to a rad .4 splitter crack? Did he forget that it is a dihedral?
I got it, somebody wrote a new guidebook and that changed the size of the crack. That doesn't make much sense.
Funny thing is that as I recall, you do not really need anything under a .5 friend and you sure as hell do not need 3 3.5's
And then there is the person who thinks a .4 friend is a 00 tcu!!!
Gumbieville it is.
|
|
|
|
|
crackmd
Mar 30, 2005, 6:01 PM
Post #33 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2002
Posts: 444
|
In reply to: [ And then there is the person who thinks a .4 friend is a 00 tcu!!! Gumbieville it is.
Hey that's me and I'm not a gumby. The 0.4 Friend which we have already established does not exist is somewhere in the range of of a #0 TCU. If I was climbing a crack that required multiple units of that size then I would also take a couple #00 because they may fit better in certain spots (even IC cracks vary sizes a little). I never made the statement that a 0.4 Friend is equal to a #00 TCU. This previously helpful thread is turning into a bunch of insults and elitism. I'm out.
|
|
|
|
|
slobmonster
Mar 30, 2005, 6:15 PM
Post #34 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 28, 2003
Posts: 1586
|
In reply to: I got it, somebody wrote a new guidebook and that changed the size of the crack. That doesn't make much sense.
Indian Creek's increasing popularity --in no small part due to the publication of guidebooks, the most recent being simply the glossiest-- has widened some cracks as much as a quarter to half an inch. Most prominently, Incredible Hand Crack has been eroded to to a solid-wide #2 Camalot size, from a snug 2.5 Friend size.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Mar 30, 2005, 6:35 PM
Post #35 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
In reply to: In reply to: [ And then there is the person who thinks a .4 friend is a 00 tcu!!! Gumbieville it is. Hey that's me and I'm not a gumby. The 0.4 Friend which we have already established does not exist is somewhere in the range of of a #0 TCU. If I was climbing a crack that required multiple units of that size then I would also take a couple #00 because they may fit better in certain spots (even IC cracks vary sizes a little). I never made the statement that a 0.4 Friend is equal to a #00 TCU. This previously helpful thread is turning into a bunch of insults and elitism. I'm out.
Dude, on my rack there are seven different sized cams between a .5 friend and a 00 tcu.
.5 tech, yellow tcu, green alien, 0 tech, blue tcu, 0 tcu, 00tcu.
For myself that makes a .4 friend = a green alien
I am sorry for my tone, but when someone who has says that he has climbed the cassin, lotus flower, etc; and then spouts clueless sport gumbie type stuff about a sacred type place like the creek. I am sorry but that rubs me the wrong way.
One other point that I should verify. He is talking about david bloom's guidebook, right? Bloom seems like a good guy.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Mar 30, 2005, 6:41 PM
Post #36 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
In reply to: Most prominently, Incredible Hand Crack has been eroded to to a solid-wide #2 Camalot size, from a snug 2.5 Friend size.
I lean towards the idea that the block has shifted, more so then just being due to wear and tear.
|
|
|
|
|
tradklime
Mar 30, 2005, 6:55 PM
Post #37 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 1235
|
In reply to: For myself that makes a .4 friend = a green alien
Well that's the exact problem, what do you base that on?
The published range of a green alien is 0.5-.86, where does 0.4 fit into that?
If it was a hypothetical size following the convention of Friend sizing, where the size roughly equates to the cam fully expanded, than a 00 TCU can make sense (published range of .35-.53). If anything it's too big.
Now if you are to factor in the the .5 friend doesn't really folowing that convention and has a range of .67-.94, it gets a tad confusing.
Perhaps a .4 friend size is meant to be = to a 0 friend. But than why not just say so. If this is the case than green alien may make more sense...
So why ramble on like that? To illustrate that Rockprodigy's point is valid, the chart can lead to confusion. And it is reasonable to expect that if you are going to go through the effort, than why not do it right? Even if the Author is a good guy, I'm sure he is, the point is still valid.
|
|
|
|
|
triassic
Mar 30, 2005, 7:07 PM
Post #38 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 25, 2002
Posts: 49
|
When they were first climbing at Indian Ceek with cams they were using friends. A crack that fit a #1 friend was called a 1" crack, a #2 friend fit a 2" crack and so on. Wired Bliss came out with the first three cam units (tcu's) and they called the sizes below one inch the following: .75 wired bliss fit a .75" crack, climbers also called this a 3/4" piece; .5 wired bliss fit a .5" crack, climbers would call this a 1/2" piece; and a .4 wired bliss fit a .4" crack. (Aliens this size are called 3/8" pieces)
http://www.rocked-out.com/MKT%20415/Main/Prices/Cams/wbcam.htm
(this shows the names of the pieces from Wired Bliss)
Metolius tcu's came out and climbers would call these sizes, a "yellow" tcu (.75"), a "blue" tcu (.5"), a "purple" tcu (.4")
A black alien is called a .33, this would fit a .3" crack. (Aliens might have called this a 5/16" piece if they wanted.)
When Wild Country came out with cams below 1" they should have called them, .75" instead of 0.5; .5" instead of 0; and .4" instead of 00. They would have stayed true to the numbering system they were using on their larger cams.
I agree that the chart in the book is not well done, but I still think it's an awesome guide in spite of it.
|
|
|
|
|
rockprodigy
Mar 30, 2005, 7:31 PM
Post #39 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 1540
|
Well, so much for my hope that this forum could be helpful....
I don't know where you are deducing from my posts that I don't like Mr. Bloom. I've never even mentioned his name until now. In fact, I doubt if he even wrote the chart, it was probably someone at Sharp End. I really like the guide over all.
Don't you think it's possible to say that Return of the Jedi is a good movie, but the Ewoks are stupid?
When I started this, I was honestly hoping someone would explain it to me, since that hasn't happened yet, I guess the chart is just messed up.
I placed 4 #3 camalots on that route...I don't know what that is in Friends because they aren't on the chart, but I think that's 3.5 size.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Mar 30, 2005, 7:40 PM
Post #40 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
In reply to: In reply to: For myself that makes a .4 friend = a green alien Well that's the exact problem, what do you base that on? The published range of a green alien is 0.5-.86, where does 0.4 fit into that? If it was a hypothetical size following the convention of Friend sizing, where the size roughly equates to the cam fully expanded, than a 00 TCU can make sense (published range of .35-.53). If anything it's too big. Now if you are to factor in the the .5 friend doesn't really folowing that convention and has a range of .67-.94, it gets a tad confusing. Perhaps a .4 friend size is meant to be = to a 0 friend. But than why not just say so. If this is the case than green alien may make more sense... So why ramble on like that? To illustrate that Rockprodigy's point is valid, the chart can lead to confusion. And it is reasonable to expect that if you are going to go through the effort, than why not do it right? Even if the Author is a good guy, I'm sure he is, the point is still valid.
Dude, for someone that can write well, you don't communicate well. But you do seem to have a knack for confusing things.
My suggestion would be to actually place the cams in a crack and that should clear up most of your confusion.
Let's see, a .5 friend is a little to large. What should I do? Where's my cam chart?
You are hopeless if you do not even know your own rack. There have been any number of cam charts over the years. None of them have been very accurate, why should his be any different? The climbing mags have access to all the gear out there yet they haven't done it. One person actually sat down and measured all the cams, then skewed the data to suit his own prejudices.
Cracks do not lie. Either the cam fits or it doesn't. Simple.
|
|
|
|
|
slobmonster
Mar 30, 2005, 7:52 PM
Post #41 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 28, 2003
Posts: 1586
|
In reply to: In reply to: Most prominently, Incredible Hand Crack has been eroded to to a solid-wide #2 Camalot size, from a snug 2.5 Friend size. I lean towards the idea that the block has shifted, more so then just being due to wear and tear. |
|
|
|
|
tradklime
Mar 30, 2005, 7:54 PM
Post #42 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 1235
|
In reply to: Well, so much for my hope that this forum could be helpful....
I think triassic answered your question best in his first paragraph.
|
|
|
|
|
tradklime
Mar 30, 2005, 8:11 PM
Post #43 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 1235
|
In reply to: Dude, for someone that can write well, you don't communicate well. But you do seem to have a knack for confusing things.
In reply to: My suggestion would be to actually place the cams in a crack and that should clear up most of your confusion.
The problem with this thread, like so many others, is people's unwillingness to acknowledge that someone else might have a point. Then people polarize their positions to make their point, and everything spins out of control.
It started with a simple observation and question, valid ones at that. Do you really think he gave up on trying to climb? Do you really think he can't figure it out on his own?
Sounds to me like Rockprodigy really wanted to give the book, and the author's intention of providing information, the benefit of the doubt. He wanted to know if someone could explain how to use the chart. Not because he needs the chart... but if he wanted to utilize it, why not understand how to use it?
Now Rockprodigy doesn't need me to defend him, and I doubt he cares in the least. But you responded defensively and in a condescending manner for no reason. Then you backed it up with unlikely information, i.e. a 0.4 = green alien.
If your input is: dude just go climb the damn thing and descide for yourself... Yeah, thanks, now back to the question at hand.
|
|
|
|
|
bhilden
Mar 30, 2005, 8:23 PM
Post #44 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2003
Posts: 50
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: For myself that makes a .4 friend = a green alien Well that's the exact problem, what do you base that on? The published range of a green alien is 0.5-.86, where does 0.4 fit into that? If it was a hypothetical size following the convention of Friend sizing, where the size roughly equates to the cam fully expanded, than a 00 TCU can make sense (published range of .35-.53). If anything it's too big. Now if you are to factor in the the .5 friend doesn't really folowing that convention and has a range of .67-.94, it gets a tad confusing. Perhaps a .4 friend size is meant to be = to a 0 friend. But than why not just say so. If this is the case than green alien may make more sense... So why ramble on like that? To illustrate that Rockprodigy's point is valid, the chart can lead to confusion. And it is reasonable to expect that if you are going to go through the effort, than why not do it right? Even if the Author is a good guy, I'm sure he is, the point is still valid. Dude, for someone that can write well, you don't communicate well. But you do seem to have a knack for confusing things. My suggestion would be to actually place the cams in a crack and that should clear up most of your confusion. Let's see, a .5 friend is a little to large. What should I do? Where's my cam chart? You are hopeless if you do not even know your own rack. There have been any number of cam charts over the years. None of them have been very accurate, why should his be any different? The climbing mags have access to all the gear out there yet they haven't done it. One person actually sat down and measured all the cams, then skewed the data to suit his own prejudices. Cracks do not lie. Either the cam fits or it doesn't. Simple.
I think you have missed the whole point of this thread. The point is to have the guidebook tell you what gear you need before you go up the climb. If you have to take gear up the climb and then see if it fits, as you suggest, then what do you need the guidebook for?
I think rockprodigy makes an excellent point. There is no standard for gear size. We have three pages of discussion on this topic which clearly points that out.
|
|
|
|
|
zozo
Mar 30, 2005, 8:40 PM
Post #46 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2004
Posts: 3431
|
Ahhhh I love the smell of napalm in the morning!
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Mar 30, 2005, 9:17 PM
Post #47 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
Dude if you have to go stick cams in a crack everytime you go climbing in order to figure out what a .4 friend means.
So the bottom line is that you guys consider this to be inadequate gear beta.
Death of a cowboy:
(1)0.4 (4)0.5 (1)0.75 (1)1.0 (1)2.0 (2)2.5 (2)2.5 (4)3.0 (3)3.5
The best gear beta of any crag that I have ever heard of and you guys find it lacking.
If your problem solving abilities are such that you have a hard time figuring out what a .4 friend means then I would recomend changing to a less demanding pastime.
All you guys defending rocky's whining should be ashamed. I mean jeez, Indian Creek is already mostly sport climbing. And now you seem to be demanding brand specific gear beta.
|
|
|
|
|
tradklime
Mar 30, 2005, 9:42 PM
Post #48 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 1235
|
In reply to: So the bottom line is that you guys consider this to be inadequate gear beta. Death of a cowboy: (1)0.4 (4)0.5 (1)0.75 (1)1.0 (1)2.0 (2)2.5 (2)2.5 (4)3.0 (3)3.5 The best gear beta of any crag that I have ever heard of and you guys find it lacking.
Well you're are missing my point at least... My point is if you are going to provide such specific beta, then at least do it right.
I gave my take on what it means, but it sounds like you have a slightly different idea. So perhaps, it's fair to say that something so specific, when containing some inaccuracies, is subject to interpretation. As an extreme example to demonstrate a point, what if by 0.4 friend he actually meant #4 camalot? Certainly that would be confusing. While this situation is not that extreme, if I were someone who took such specific beta to heart (I am not) and I ran up this route with 4 pieces of a size I only needed one, and one of a size I really needed 4, I might be bummed.
No one is demanding anything. Just commenting on the fact that such specific beta, when not entirely accurate, can result in some confusion. A fair point.
I think you should read, or reread, rockprodigy's original post.
My guess is that the description for the chart should have read something like: "In keeping with tradition, cam sizes provided as beta are equivalent to Friend sizes for 1 and above, and Wired Bliss sizes for .75 and less."
Whatever, way to much energy spent on this topic. :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Mar 30, 2005, 10:13 PM
Post #49 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
The climbing language of cam sizes is based on friends due to their being pretty much the original cams. If you do not understand climbing lingo then I can see how you would have a problem.
You keep speaking of inacuracies. This seems to imply that a gear list is some sort of definitive thing. It isn't.
Gear lists are averaged out lists of the actual gear that a number of people of varying ability actually placed on the climb. The deal is that if you are an average climber for the route in question them most likely you can make do with the recommended rack.
This is the first time I have ever heard of an experienced climber being confused about what a .4 friend is.
Oh and your example of someone being confused about which one is larger on a scale of 0.4 to 4.0? Someone is going to mistake a .4 cam with a 5 inch cam? If that isn't an unrealistic complaint then I do not know what is.
|
|
|
|
|
brianinslc
Mar 30, 2005, 10:50 PM
Post #50 of 111
(7340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 13, 2002
Posts: 1500
|
In reply to: This is the first time I have ever heard of an experienced climber being confused about what a .4 friend is.
When did they come out with that size? I have some old 0's and .5's, but, have never seen the .4 friend. Is that a Zero (tm) cam size?
Ha ha.
The cam size chart seems FUBAR'd.
Was anyone else hoping that Ken Trout would do the guide for the creek?
The new creek guide is a nice effort. I guess I would have preferred a bit more of the "leave no trace" stuff, instead of pictures of folks burying turkeys and partying, but...probably too much to ask for... Color is nice. And, I'm glad they left out a few crags too...
Geez Rockprodigy, you move from Utar to Colorado and turn into a gumby? What next, asking which way to clip your sports draws to your harness? Wondering what type of cell phone to buy for your dew rag wearin' crag dog?
Cheers!
Brian in SLC
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
