|
tammarak
Jan 12, 2006, 7:20 PM
Post #151 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 29, 2003
Posts: 51
|
I just checked mine for the supposed "dimple" and of the 8 aliens I own 2 are suspect in my opinion, both my new grey and green units have microscopic dimples in their brazes. The Grey one however held a factor .375 fall this summer (luckly). I doubt a picture would be possible to post as the dimples on my units anyway are very small, more info on this would be a relief. Thanks for posting that info Bison!
|
|
|
|
|
outdoorsie
Jan 12, 2006, 7:26 PM
Post #152 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 15, 2003
Posts: 302
|
In reply to: They don't exist for the obvious reason that this is a very serious situation, and it would be repugnant for anyone to treat it in any level of an "I told you so manner"... I'M SURE EVERYONE WAS HOPING AND PRAYING THAT THIS WAS ACTUALLY AN ELOBOARTE HOAX, OR AT THE VERY LEAST AN EXTREMELY ISOLATED INCIDENT! Crying or Very sad
In reply to: because most everyone who's weighed in on this takes the entire subject quite seriously. I don't think anyone really cares if they are the perceived oracle of rc.com or get to notch their lipstick case with another debate win.
In reply to: For some reason, I'm not feeling incredibly victorious at the moment. I'd have rather been proven wrong.
In reply to: Considering: how much money we've spent on these, the fact that we have no receipts, and the fact that we are about ready to teach our son to lead. . . and that I have deep sympathy for not only CCH, but the employees as well.
Hey, Kudos to everybody for being so mature. I didn't mean to sound as if I was gloating, as I didn't participate much at all in any of the conversations before this, I have no right to say "I told ya so." But the fact that those who might have the place to gloat didn't... I am amazed. I really am. If I could rate today you'd all get trophies. Awesome. :-)
Lessons Learned By Outdoorsie:
1. Rc.com will always surprise you
2. Rc.com can make a difference... could save somebody's life
(or could kill you, depending on the thread. :lol: )
|
|
|
|
|
kaylinr
Jan 12, 2006, 7:26 PM
Post #153 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 13, 2004
Posts: 119
|
I don't think they are saying the dimples are in the braze, but just below the bulb on the solid metal piece that the axle passes through. Correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 12, 2006, 7:35 PM
Post #154 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
This would appear to be the only photo of a possible "defect dimple" (at the base of the bulb, not on the wire/brazing) available at the moment and it comes from the "Recall" thread.
http://eyecannon.com/aliendefect.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 12, 2006, 7:36 PM
Post #155 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
dupe
|
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jan 12, 2006, 7:38 PM
Post #156 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
In reply to: Lessons Learned By Outdoorsie: 1. Rc.com will always surprise you 2. Rc.com can make a difference... could save somebody's life (or could kill you, depending on the thread. :lol: ) |
|
|
|
|
td
Jan 12, 2006, 7:53 PM
Post #157 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 21, 2003
Posts: 63
|
In reply to: In reply to: CCH lists these ratings in the brochure: Black = 1860 lbs. = 8 kn Blue = 2200 lbs. = 10 kn Red, Green, Yellow = 2700 lbs. = 12 kn White, violet, orange = 3700 lbs. = 16.5 kn Yes, I wonder what they mean in light of another CCH statement: "Minimum Strength (kN): The minimum holding force for Alien cams is 5 kN."
My guess is that the 5kN number is mainly legalese related to the UIAA required 5 kN spec, and does not really relate to useful measured data. Obviously even a vague minimum strength of a CCH slcd will vary depending on size. I don't know if the UIAA defines the spec as 3 sigma. http://www.uiaa.ch/?c=188 The full details and sample size of the test are not online. It does say that when the range of a cam is more than 5mm, it needs to be tested at the 3/4 and 1/4 expansion positions.
Neither BD, CCH, Metolius, or Trango is listed on their website.
The only approved test labs listed are in Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
bison
Jan 12, 2006, 8:00 PM
Post #158 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2004
Posts: 10
|
I don't know about you all but I am now a Mountain Gear customer for life, I'm thinking about ordering something just because I can. THANKS MOUNTAIN GEAR! Oh and if you still don't trust your aliens just send them to me for proper disposal. (sorry I couldn't resist)
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Jan 12, 2006, 8:10 PM
Post #159 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
In reply to: I don't know about you all but I am now a Mountain Gear customer for life, I'm thinking about ordering something just because I can. THANKS MOUNTAIN GEAR! Oh and if you still don't trust your aliens just send them to me for proper disposal. (sorry I couldn't resist)
Bison, that joke got done already. Like 6 or 7 times. :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
bison
Jan 12, 2006, 8:18 PM
Post #160 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2004
Posts: 10
|
In reply to: In reply to: I don't know about you all but I am now a Mountain Gear customer for life, I'm thinking about ordering something just because I can. THANKS MOUNTAIN GEAR! Oh and if you still don't trust your aliens just send them to me for proper disposal. (sorry I couldn't resist) Bison, that joke got done already. Like 6 or 7 times. :lol:
Yeah but it still cracks me up 8^)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 12, 2006, 8:20 PM
Post #161 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: I called mgear to ask them to verify that the OP was a true representitive of mgear just to be sure we weren't being trolled or deceptively led by some guy with a grudge against CCH or some guy working for another company. Folks, it seems incredible to have to say this as we are way, way past it at this point, but... *** THIS IS NOT HOAX *** *** THIS IS NOT HOAX *** - THE OP, CCH, AND MGEAR DO AUTHENTICALLY REPRESENT WHO THEY CLAIM TO BE - THESE THREADS/POSTS ARE ABOUT REAL INCIDENTS/ISSUES - CCH AND MULTIPLE INDUSTRY PARTNERS AND PEERS HAVE BEGUN TAKING STEPS TO ADDRESS THE THESE ISSUES INCLUDING RETAILERS TAKING RETURNS AND CCH STARTING THE STEPS TO INITIATE A FORMAL RECALL - PLEASE DO NOT ARBITRARILY CREATE NEW CCH THREADS *** THIS IS NOT HOAX *** *** THIS IS NOT HOAX ***
As far as I'm concerned, the only thing that might be a hoax at this point is this dimple business.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
dynosore
Jan 12, 2006, 8:35 PM
Post #162 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
bison, you sound like a lacky for CCH at this point. "cams are most likely bomber". Wow that inspires confidence. I'd like to see the data correlating dimples to bad brazes, and no dimples to good brazes. What's that, you don't have any?
|
|
|
|
|
timm
Jan 12, 2006, 8:41 PM
Post #163 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 4, 2005
Posts: 314
|
In reply to: As far as I'm concerned, the only thing that might be a hoax at this point is this dimple business. Jay
I guess that this retailer is in on the hoax as well:
http://alpenglowgear.com
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 12, 2006, 8:43 PM
Post #164 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
In reply to: As far as I'm concerned, the only thing that might be a hoax at this point is this dimple business. Jay
Jay,
So far we have this from two posters and a notice to this effect is up on AlpenGlow's home page at:
http://alpenglowgear.com/gear/
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 12, 2006, 8:50 PM
Post #165 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: As far as I'm concerned, the only thing that might be a hoax at this point is this dimple business. Jay Jay, So far we have this from two posters and a notice to this effect is up on AlpenGlow's home page at: http://alpenglowgear.com/gear/
It seems odd that they were able to isolate the problem so quickly.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
thegreytradster
Jan 12, 2006, 9:00 PM
Post #166 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2003
Posts: 2151
|
I was wondering about this when I saw the first photos of the failed cam. When you braze or solder something in a socket type joint it is common practice to have a small weep hole at the bottom. This allows the expanding gasses to escape without blowing filler metal back out and you usually keep adding filler until a little runs out the weep hole providing conformation that the joint is full.
If there's a dimple where the weep hole is, that is completely consistent with the photos that were posted previously of what looked like a dry joint.
Still kinda hard to tell from this photo exactly what we are looking at.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jan 12, 2006, 9:01 PM
Post #167 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Additionally, it would be helpful to have the following data from the mgear test:
Of the three pieces that failed below rated strength, how many had the dimple.
Of the 6 pieces that did not fail below rated strength, how many had the dimple.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
bison
Jan 12, 2006, 9:05 PM
Post #168 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 14, 2004
Posts: 10
|
In reply to: bison, you sound like a lacky for CCH at this point. "cams are most likely bomber". Wow that inspires confidence. I'd like to see the data correlating dimples to bad brazes, and no dimples to good brazes. What's that, you don't have any?
Wow that was a hostile post. I have absolutely no data and I said in my orignal post to not take my word for it but urged everyone to call them to verify everything. The dimple is an identifying mark indicating that is was outsourced to this guy who didn't let the metal cool properly after he soldered it. It's a personal choice, believe them or don't believe them. It's up to you.
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 12, 2006, 9:11 PM
Post #169 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
If they suspect something like a mis-aligned jig, and the jig in question happens to leave the dimple mark as part of an alignmet or securing step.. then I could see it. Maybe it's not conclusive, but they are recalling the cams in question as a safegard.
See how optimistic one can be when purely speculating?
After all these pages and pages of Hoo-Haw, for me, it still boils down to this:
David Waggoner at CCH
In reply to: the cable will break ,not pull out
Paul Fish from Mountain Gear
In reply to: brazes failed and the cable pulled out.
BTW.. I grabbed the first 6 Aliens off of my rack, (2) of them are marked with the dimple as shown in the previously posted photo.
Also.. does anyone else have Aliens where the swaging varies on the same size of cam? I have some copper, some aluminum, and some mixed.
I honestly don't know enough about swaging to know if this would have any effect or not.
|
|
|
|
|
bobruef
Jan 12, 2006, 9:14 PM
Post #170 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 884
|
In reply to: Also.. does anyone else have Aliens where the swaging varies on the same size of cam? I have some copper, some aluminum, and some mixed. I honestly don't know enough about swaging to know if this would have any effect or not.
Mine have that variation too. Always wondered about that. Couldn't tell you which sizes though (I'm at work).
|
|
|
|
|
skinner
Jan 12, 2006, 9:21 PM
Post #171 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2004
Posts: 1747
|
In reply to: (I'm at work) |
|
|
|
|
tgreene
Jan 12, 2006, 9:34 PM
Post #172 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 22, 2003
Posts: 7267
|
What about the improperly drilled lobes..?
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Jan 12, 2006, 9:40 PM
Post #173 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
Moved post for Piton
=====================================
If you all inspect your alien braze joints. Look for good wetting of the cable wire and housing. should be gold yellowish in color.
Voids are Bad in braze joints
check for voids in the braze joints, ex are pin holes, fractures in the braze, or the braze joint is not bonded to the housing or cable wire. may need a magnifing glass to inspect close.
here's an ex pic but not of a cam wire harness
http://www.rdoinduction.com/...ering/pic3_large.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
cchildre
Jan 12, 2006, 9:40 PM
Post #174 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 5, 2004
Posts: 671
|
Well, in the midst of this CCH storm. I decided to go against the grain, shoot the bird to the mainstream logic, and ordered the alien's I have wanted since my trip to J-Tree at the end of the year. I know....their dangerous and an unknown....but, this is like when Jack in the Box was selling burgers with bad meat and got a bunch of people sick. I ate burgers there for the next month after they fixed the beef problem and they had the best beef in town. So I bet CCH will be locking down on quality control and produce bomber stuff and gather that which was defective. Never-the-less, my Aliens are coming and I am gonna climb on them straight out.
Long Live CCH!
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Jan 12, 2006, 9:49 PM
Post #175 of 240
(47267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
I said
In reply to: A rating on a climbing product doesn't guarantee anything. All it says is that according to our testing 99.87% of the products will fail at a load greater than the stated load.
In reply to: I think this does not contradict what I said, does it? (Ok, I said "guarantee", you say 99.87%, agreed)
In reply to: OK so 99.87% maybe does not meet the definition of "Guarantee" in your book, that's fine. But you're argueing semantics and splitting the finest of hairs. It is generally accepted understanding in our community that a piece of gear will hold at least what it's rated, safety factor or not. It's also commonly understood that these products would test at the same level in independant tests and most all of them do, when tested. (Does that happen often enough, I don't know) But of the 9 tested by Mgear and the one posted by the climber who had the failure we all started posting about, you're talking 40% failure. To paraphrase from earlier... if you picked up you car from the brake shop and the guy looked at you and said, "OK, you're all set. Those babies oughtta stop you, or at least slow you down, a good 60% of the time.", would you pay the man and accept it as is? Whether it meets your rather anal definition of "guarantee," the rating on climbing gear is meant to imply certain assurances of minimum performance. Ask the manufacturers and they'll tell you that, and poll 1000 climbers and they'll say that was their understanding too.
Semantics? The difference between 99.87% and guarantee IS NOT splitting hairs. Take your example, if you were sold brakes that 99.87% of the time you used them worked then that would be BAD. That would mean that 1in a 1000 times they would fail would go zooming into the cars in front of you.
It also means that 1 out of every 1000 cams will hold less than the rated level, that is NOT insignificant seeing that tens of thousands are sold.**
But this is all besides the point, which both of you failed to address. The argument was about safety factors which both of you conveniently side stepped when I showed you a link proving you wrong.
**
I am not saying that in actual reality 1/1000 cams will hold less than their rating. However this is what BD and other manufacturers state statistically about their products. In reality, with consistent manufacturing, the tails of the population distribution are likely to be truncated, that is ALL cams will hold their minimum rated load.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
