|
Valarc
Jan 22, 2009, 3:02 AM
Post #26 of 38
(1239 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2007
Posts: 1473
|
brent_e wrote: I will have another version with foam as the core. if anyone wants to try that version send me a PM.
I know nothing about ice climbing, have never ice climbed, and own no ice climbing gear. And I live in a state that probably has a total of three crappy frozen drips on highway cuts that might be topropable. But I still like the idea of trying them out.
I won't bother to send the PM though 
The thought of leading ice scares the shiznit out of me, but I would totally love to toprope something sometime just to try it out.
|
|
|
|
|
tigerlilly
Jan 22, 2009, 1:49 PM
Post #27 of 38
(1207 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 2, 2006
Posts: 564
|
angry wrote: tigerlilly wrote: Just out of curiosity (I do not need new tools) how much did they cost you to make? Personally, my idea of an ideal ice tool for my needs would be a Quark pick on a Grivel Quantum Tech handle. Kathy Do you have a traumatic head injury? Huffing glue? A brain sucking slug? Seriously, the Quark is beyond inferior in every way, right down to the pick.
Caution: Thread hijack
I crashed my bike in the street a number of times as a child, before bike helmets existed, which may explain some of my issues. But, how do you explain the long lasting popularity of Quarks, if they are as bad as you say? It's not like they're cheap. I once climbed one of the ravines in the Catskills, and there were at least 4 other teams of 2 or 3 there, and about half of us were using Quarks. The remaining climbers were on an assortment of other tools, no two pairs alike. My only gripe with them is that I have the upper body strength of a gnat, and so the uber-light Quantum Techs work better for me.
Back up your blather, man. The floor is yours. And I'm actually curious to hear what your beef with them is.
Kathy
|
|
|
|
|
brent_e
Jan 22, 2009, 3:52 PM
Post #28 of 38
(1193 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 5111
|
angry wrote: tigerlilly wrote: Just out of curiosity (I do not need new tools) how much did they cost you to make? Personally, my idea of an ideal ice tool for my needs would be a Quark pick on a Grivel Quantum Tech handle. Kathy Do you have a traumatic head injury? Huffing glue? A brain sucking slug? Seriously, the Quark is beyond inferior in every way, right down to the pick.
I actually like the Quark pick and used it in a previous tool.
Kathy,
here are the costs:
Picks------------------100
water jet---------------75
aluminum-------------25
carbon-----------------25
resin and
infusion product-------25
wood-------------------10
CAD work--------------60
Hours of toil-----------???
first swing--------------priceless
the cost of the next set will be down as I have the CAD done, I'll save money with the water jet cutting, but I'll have to buy some structural foam. There will be fewer hours of toil, as well.
next ones will look better, be designed to either be the same weight and stronger, or be lighter. I can save weight in the handle as there is no material removed from the aluminum.
|
|
|
|
|
the_climber
Jan 22, 2009, 4:42 PM
Post #29 of 38
(1174 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 9, 2003
Posts: 6142
|
tigerlilly wrote: angry wrote: tigerlilly wrote: Just out of curiosity (I do not need new tools) how much did they cost you to make? Personally, my idea of an ideal ice tool for my needs would be a Quark pick on a Grivel Quantum Tech handle. Kathy Do you have a traumatic head injury? Huffing glue? A brain sucking slug? Seriously, the Quark is beyond inferior in every way, right down to the pick. Caution: Thread hijack I crashed my bike in the street a number of times as a child, before bike helmets existed, which may explain some of my issues. But, how do you explain the long lasting popularity of Quarks, if they are as bad as you say? It's not like they're cheap. I once climbed one of the ravines in the Catskills, and there were at least 4 other teams of 2 or 3 there, and about half of us were using Quarks. The remaining climbers were on an assortment of other tools, no two pairs alike. My only gripe with them is that I have the upper body strength of a gnat, and so the uber-light Quantum Techs work better for me. Back up your blather, man. The floor is yours. And I'm actually curious to hear what your beef with them is. Kathy
Grivel is as popular in Europe as Petzl or BD is here. The difference could be boiled down to Advertising, and brand loyalty. Everyone sees so many people climbing on those brands. I used to climb on both CM and BD tools, but after trying other brands such as Simond, some of the DMM, and Grivel tools I found that the refinements in swing and feel of these other brands was much greater than that of CM/petzl and BD. Especially for Grivel, which is why I own 2 sets of Grivel tools.
Not saying the Quarks are a bad tool, just that the Simond, Grivel, and some of the DMM's are much more refined than tools such as the Quark and many of the BD tools.
|
|
|
|
|
adatesman
Jan 22, 2009, 4:53 PM
Post #30 of 38
(1169 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479
|
|
|
|
|
|
brent_e
Jan 22, 2009, 8:18 PM
Post #31 of 38
(1148 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 5111
|
adatesman wrote: brent_e wrote: here are the costs: Picks------------------100 water jet---------------75 aluminum-------------25 carbon-----------------25 resin and infusion product-------25 wood-------------------10 CAD work--------------60 Hours of toil-----------??? first swing--------------priceless I'm curious.... Was the aluminum supplied by whoever did your cutting or did you source the material yourself? That seems like quite the good price compared to where I've been getting the barstock for my cams.....
the piece i got for 25 dollars is 1/4" X6" by 40" and it took 28 inches to get 2 tools (they get cut nestling into each other).
I know the guy that I bought it from so he may have given me a deal, but i'm not sure. I think a competitor may have asked $40 for a similar sized piece (metal supermarkets).
|
|
|
|
|
adatesman
Jan 22, 2009, 9:09 PM
Post #32 of 38
(1133 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479
|
|
|
|
|
|
brent_e
Jan 23, 2009, 2:31 PM
Post #33 of 38
(1103 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 5111
|
adatesman wrote: brent_e wrote: I know the guy that I bought it from so he may have given me a deal, but i'm not sure. I think a competitor may have asked $40 for a similar sized piece (metal supermarkets). Sounds like he gave you a deal on it.... MetalExpress is telling me ~$30 for it, plus another $5 for handling and who knows how much for shipping.... I really miss working at a machine shop and having regularly scheduled deliveries of material and big discounts. 
It's a grossly expensive material. Any discounts are very nice.
what do you use to cut your cams? CNC?
|
|
|
|
|
tigerlilly
Jan 23, 2009, 3:50 PM
Post #34 of 38
(1089 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 2, 2006
Posts: 564
|
the_climber wrote: tigerlilly wrote: angry wrote: tigerlilly wrote: Just out of curiosity (I do not need new tools) how much did they cost you to make? Personally, my idea of an ideal ice tool for my needs would be a Quark pick on a Grivel Quantum Tech handle. Kathy Do you have a traumatic head injury? Huffing glue? A brain sucking slug? Seriously, the Quark is beyond inferior in every way, right down to the pick. Caution: Thread hijack I crashed my bike in the street a number of times as a child, before bike helmets existed, which may explain some of my issues. But, how do you explain the long lasting popularity of Quarks, if they are as bad as you say? It's not like they're cheap. I once climbed one of the ravines in the Catskills, and there were at least 4 other teams of 2 or 3 there, and about half of us were using Quarks. The remaining climbers were on an assortment of other tools, no two pairs alike. My only gripe with them is that I have the upper body strength of a gnat, and so the uber-light Quantum Techs work better for me. Back up your blather, man. The floor is yours. And I'm actually curious to hear what your beef with them is. Kathy Grivel is as popular in Europe as Petzl or BD is here. The difference could be boiled down to Advertising, and brand loyalty. Everyone sees so many people climbing on those brands. I used to climb on both CM and BD tools, but after trying other brands such as Simond, some of the DMM, and Grivel tools I found that the refinements in swing and feel of these other brands was much greater than that of CM/petzl and BD. Especially for Grivel, which is why I own 2 sets of Grivel tools. Not saying the Quarks are a bad tool, just that the Simond, Grivel, and some of the DMM's are much more refined than tools such as the Quark and many of the BD tools.
I said it would be "my" ideal tool, not everyone elses. I have no problems with the Quark pick, think they clean easier than the xmonster picks and the pick angle works well for the stuff I climb.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Jan 23, 2009, 4:12 PM
Post #35 of 38
(1072 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
Mostly it's advertising and brand loyalty like "the climber" said.
There is definitely an intangible when it comes to swings and sticks. I've never liked the way the Quarks hit the ice. The X-monster seems to displace a lot less ice too.
As far as cleaning, it's never been an issue for me unless I'm on actual Monsters, but you know what they say about a big tip.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jan 24, 2009, 4:08 AM
Post #36 of 38
(1032 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
tigerlilly wrote: Just out of curiosity (I do not need new tools) how much did they cost you to make? Personally, my idea of an ideal ice tool for my needs would be a Quark pick on a Grivel Quantum Tech handle. Kathy
Running with your hijack, perhaps John is right. By quantum tech you mean the carbon fiber ones, yes? In which case I have a set, and prior to those I had a set of DMM Venoms (which suked for what I wanted, a sound tool though) and I stole my pal's Quarks often.
Now, I feel that perhaps the finish on my particular picks are not as fine as the finish on Grivels Cascade pick (I got cosmetic 2nd picks...) they still climb beautifully, just dont swing to hard - they stick like spindrift to the back of yer neck.
I've done a few mixed routes (John - I got the 80-hang route clean, guidebook sez M7... might lead it tomorra. Sketch about the finish, though)
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Jan 24, 2009, 4:57 AM
Post #37 of 38
(1025 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
sungam wrote: tigerlilly wrote: Just out of curiosity (I do not need new tools) how much did they cost you to make? Personally, my idea of an ideal ice tool for my needs would be a Quark pick on a Grivel Quantum Tech handle. Kathy Hey Kathy! Running with your hijack, perhaps John is right. By quantum tech you mean the carbon fiber ones, yes? In which case I have a set, and prior to those I had a set of DMM Venoms (which suked for what I wanted, a sound tool though) and I stole my pal's Quarks often. Now, I feel that perhaps the finish on my particular picks are not as fine as the finish on Grivels Cascade pick (I got cosmetic 2nd picks...) they still climb beautifully, just dont swing to hard - they stick like spindrift to the back of yer neck. I've done a few mixed routes (John - I got the 80-hang route clean, guidebook sez M7... might lead it tomorra. Sketch about the finish, though)
Whoa, it's been so warm I forgot people are still ice climbing. I've got a bit of sun on my shoulders and just established the hardest trad lead in a particular area, just for the leg humpers. I had the pleasure of "Brothers in Arms" yesterday, a 100' perfect diagonal finger crack.
I need to get up to Vail again, probably next week.
Just lead the damn thing, you've been in Ouray so long by now that absolutely everything about ice should be easy to you at this point. Have you ventured yet? The park won't keep you honest with yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jan 24, 2009, 5:03 AM
Post #38 of 38
(1023 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
I got pretty ill and had to take 3 or 4 days off. I think stairway is on the books for tomorrow, then... sunday... Bridalvail... maybe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
