|
|
|
|
designsolutions
May 31, 2004, 2:07 PM
Post #1 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 31, 2004
Posts: 1
|
I am in the process of researching to determine if enough interest exists for the development and production of an indoor “conveyor” type climbing wall. I’m thinking something along the lines of five or six foot wide and approximately ten feet high with a perforated slat type conveyor belt for the attachment of various styles of holds.
I am aware that these products are currently available in the marketplace but they are priced out of reach of the budget minded climber and seem to be marketed to giant family fun centers and theme restaurants along the lines of ESPN Zone. This product could/would be marketed to home gyms and indoor climbing centers. I am confident that the retail price could be kept around six thousand dollars depending on options and what the final dimensions turn out to be. The climbing speed would be variable and possibly the climbing angle, maybe 0 +/- 10 degrees?
Design Solutions, LLC is a design and development firm based in Louisville, KY. We have successfully developed and marked various types of machinery to industry since our inception in 1995. If significant interest exists for the climbing wall discussed above we will continue with development and prototyping.
Any and all comments are welcome and appreciated.
Thanks,
MP
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
May 31, 2004, 2:29 PM
Post #2 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
If you want to make this available to the budget-minded climber, price it under $100. Otherwise, you're asking me to go into debt for a treadwall. As for indoor climbing gyms, they'll make decisions based on whether the machine can enhance business enough to justify the expense. Why would I, as a hypothetical gym owner, spend $6k on a machine that will eventually break down after becoming clogged with chalkdust, when I already own thousands of square feet of climbable surface?
I think you'd be better off marketing it to rich non-climbers as a home workout machine and to family fun centers.
|
|
|
|
|
moeman
May 31, 2004, 2:47 PM
Post #3 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2002
Posts: 1417
|
There has been interest for such a product- so much intrest that such a product already exists, and has existed for years. Here is their website:
http://www.treadwall.com/
|
|
|
|
|
chizelz
May 31, 2004, 3:04 PM
Post #4 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
6k is a whole lotta plywood, tnuts, framing, holds, texturing, shoes, gear.......... my point is along the same lines as j_ung. I think that in its conception, its a great idea for a treadwall, but for that price, I don't think that its an attractive alternative to the home gym. As cool as the treadwall idea is, I believe that it wouldn't offer a whole lot of variety for the 'frequent user' or the 'home owner'. Sure the angle would be adjustable, and the holds adjustable, but after a couple of 'rounds' on the mill, it would become repititious...... and repetition = boredom, for me anyway, I don't want or wouldn't speak for everyone. IMHO, I could see the 'mill' being somewhat good for training endurance........ 6x10 is not a big area, especially to climb on continuously, the 6' width is reachable by most people, and the 10' height, would provide maybe one, two vertical moves... now I realize that because its a "treadmill" this climbing surface would be multiplied by at least two... so thats 240sq' probably a little more, but just the same, 240sq' for $6,000 :shock: I wish you the best of luck in your endeavor, whatever you decide to do.
|
|
|
|
|
munckee
May 31, 2004, 4:30 PM
Post #5 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2001
Posts: 455
|
In reply to: I am aware that these products are currently available in the marketplace but they are priced out of reach of the budget minded climber... I am confident that the retail price could be kept around six thousand dollars
Here's your problem. How is $6k fixing the issue of a product marketable to a "budget minded climber"? As others have said, I could build a phenomenal climbing wall in my home for $6k. Or a very useable one for under $1k.
|
|
|
|
|
josephine
May 31, 2004, 5:00 PM
Post #6 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 8, 2002
Posts: 5794
|
josephine moved this thread from General to Indoor Gyms.
|
|
|
|
|
livinonasandbar
May 31, 2004, 5:13 PM
Post #7 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 356
|
If you want to develop a useful new climbing product, how about a belayer's head/neck rest? Sumnabeeotch... I'd buy one ina nanosecond if I thought it would keep that scrunched cervical pain outa my shoulders and neck! (And I want 5% for giving you the golden idea...)
Scratch the "treadwall" tho... I agree with the previous posts.
G.
|
|
|
|
|
robmcc
May 31, 2004, 5:55 PM
Post #8 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 1, 2003
Posts: 2176
|
I don't think there are any budget minded climbers with $6,000 to spend on something like this.
Rob
|
|
|
|
|
orion
May 31, 2004, 10:13 PM
Post #9 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 8, 2003
Posts: 19
|
Hmm... (fiendish grin juxtaposed with a programming trance) ...now you've got me thinking.
I'm picturing a treadwall composed of an array of servo-like actuators (probably linear actuators) giving the wall whatever holds you want. Each trip around, the surface could very easily be randomly generated, perhaps with a settable difficulty rating as well as an AI that could tell how fast you're moving (breakable IR beams at given heights, a crashpad transducer to tell if you've fallen, etc.) and adjust the difficulty accordingly.
The surface generation algorithm wouldn't be too hard to write-- the allowable range of displacement gradient from one actuator node to the next would be inversely proportional to the difficulty setting. Within the allowable displacement "rails", the displacement gradient would just be randomly generated. I picture something like
dist(i) = dist(i-1) += ((2*rand-1)%(-difficulty+DIFF_MAX))
or so. My C skills are a bit rusty, but you get the idea.
Of course, the problem then would be to create a surface that would be appropriately textured. If the actuator nodes were spaced too far apart to just use the actuators themselves for the surface, some kind of external membrane would be needed; this doesn't sound like much fun to climb on, though. For that matter, neither does a bunch of raw linear actuators. Sigh...
Obviously, this DEFINITELY wouldn't be a low-budget item, so I suppose it has nothing to do with your original post! Still, I'd like to try to work out the design someday, or at LEAST the code...
But it's summer. I don't feel like thinking just yet. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
orion
May 31, 2004, 10:16 PM
Post #10 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 8, 2003
Posts: 19
|
In reply to: If you want to develop a useful new climbing product, how about a belayer's head/neck rest?
Hark, a voice of true wisdom speaketh!
|
|
|
|
|
phaedrus
May 31, 2004, 11:37 PM
Post #11 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2002
Posts: 3046
|
In reply to: If you want to develop a useful new climbing product, how about a belayer's head/neck rest?
THERE'S a useful product!! $6,000 for a home product? No way do I have that kind of money.... I don't know many climbers who do. Besides, if I had that kind of money, it'd be lots cheaper to join a local climbing gym or two- that way I'd still have a good $5,000 to spend on gear. While the product idea itself isn't a bad one, the price just makes it way too impractical for the average shmoe, in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
russwalling
Jun 1, 2004, 8:44 PM
Post #12 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 12, 2002
Posts: 239
|
In reply to: Design Solutions, LLC is a design and development firm based in Louisville, KY. We have successfully developed and marked various types of machinery to industry since our inception in 1995. If significant interest exists for the climbing wall discussed above we will continue with development and prototyping.
Quit now. It will save you over 3 million dollars. Please forward me my standard consulting fee of 4% of your savings upon abort.
|
|
|
|
|
climbingfreak
Jun 1, 2004, 9:01 PM
Post #13 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 10, 2004
Posts: 65
|
Dear DesignSolutions,
You obviously don't know anything about climbing because boulderers don't want to focus on speed, they want good boulder problems. Save that stuff for family fun centers or malls because no gym owner would buy that. For that price $6,000 you could build a decent bouldering wall.
|
|
|
|
|
gds
Jun 1, 2004, 9:18 PM
Post #14 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2004
Posts: 710
|
I don't even like treadmills! Why do we need all this expensive mechanical stuff to simulate things that we can do for free.
And its more fun to just go outside and do the real thing.
$6,000 - that is going to be one limited market- limited by both interest and $$$.
Now if you want to invent a $6,000 climbing product- make a personal flying device that can land and take off from a spot so I can avoid heinous approaches. I'll buy that for $6 K.
|
|
|
|
|
rocdaug
Jun 1, 2004, 9:34 PM
Post #15 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2003
Posts: 220
|
Sorry man. I would not be interested in such a thing. :(
I much prefer outside and if I can't do that, I head off to the gym.
... I like the teleporter idea though. :wink:
rd
|
|
|
|
|
fiend
Jun 1, 2004, 9:44 PM
Post #16 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2001
Posts: 3669
|
If I had $6,000 to blow on climbing then I'd say "I'm off to S.E. Asia... see you in 2007"
|
|
|
|
|
lnmego
Jun 3, 2004, 6:42 PM
Post #17 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 18, 2004
Posts: 72
|
My bet is that it won't increase the home market much unless it does something really interesting and new. $6k isn't all thay much less than $9-10k. There are walking treadmills that cost $6k and poeple buy them, but it'd be nice if there were an entry level $1k home climbing treadmill. I think that would really get home-exercise people interested.
Everyone spends their money differently and I get the idea that most posters in this thread don't climb for the workout primarily.
In all honesty, I am interested in what kind of rotating climbing wall you think you could do for $1k. It'd be nice if you could screw standard holds on it, rather than the proprietary stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
tech_dog
Jun 3, 2004, 6:48 PM
Post #18 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2004
Posts: 224
|
I think I paid $600 for my stairmaster.
My GF won't let me put holds on the wall in the living room.
I'd pay $1,200 or so for a self contained climbing exercise. That being said, I think a $1,200 machine would be so cheaply made that I woudln't want it.
|
|
|
|
|
cheapholds
Jun 4, 2004, 2:55 AM
Post #19 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 26, 2001
Posts: 93
|
i am pretty sure tredwall has a patent on this...
|
|
|
|
|
moeman
Jun 4, 2004, 4:12 AM
Post #21 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 1, 2002
Posts: 1417
|
That, my friend, would be a portaledge. Comfy, but a bit to heavy for regular climbing
|
|
|
|
|
winglessangel
Jun 4, 2004, 9:40 PM
Post #22 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 29, 2004
Posts: 459
|
I don't know about a regular portaledges, but that alluminium chair weights less then 2 pounds.
(what makes it VERY UNSAFE if held more than an inche above the ground)
|
|
|
|
|
jerrygarcia
Jun 4, 2004, 10:35 PM
Post #23 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 837
|
In reply to: --I am aware that these products are currently available in the marketplace but they are priced out of reach of the budget minded climber --This product could/would be marketed to home gyms and indoor climbing centers. --I am confident that the retail price could be kept around six thousand dollars
You're still to high of a price range for the "budget minded climber". Id buy my first climbing gym membership before I plunked down 6k on a wall. Hudson trail outfitters has them in their store on the east coast, looks like they are collecting dust. Ive never seen them anywhere else accept in the classified section of the newspaper.
|
|
|
|
|
indigo_nite
Jun 4, 2004, 10:42 PM
Post #24 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2002
Posts: 365
|
if one of these showed up in my gym (and I think they're mainly available in non-climbing type gyms, like 24-hour fitness), I would try it for novelty.
I wouldn't buy one for myself. even if it would provide a good workout. it would become too redundant and predictable too quickly. I think the static walls with removeable holds is more useful to own.
if you could have something that simulated slab climbing or crack climbing that would revolve around, well, that could be interesting. I'm not sure how...
|
|
|
|
|
dredsovrn
Jun 4, 2004, 11:20 PM
Post #25 of 28
(4173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2003
Posts: 1226
|
The idea is interesting, but I would be more likely to put 6K into my home wall (I am probably at 3K already) than to buy a climbing treadmill. Maybe I would need to try one. Something just seems unnatural about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
