|
rockboarder
Nov 25, 2004, 12:57 AM
Post #1 of 13
(2358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 3, 2004
Posts: 5
|
This may or may not have been discussed yet but anyone have or used the link cams from omega pacific? I like the idea of having that kind of range on one cam. I'm asking because I heard Jeff Lowe mention them at a conference workshop and he seemed to think that they were the best thing out as far as cams go, but he might be slightly biased since his brother designed them.
EDIT: Check them out! They have the expansion size of at least 3 normal cams maybe 4 for some brands
http://www.omegapac.com/...oducts_linkcams.html
|
|
|
|
|
grj
Nov 28, 2004, 4:10 AM
Post #2 of 13
(2358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 12
|
I believe the current release date is mid-Feb 2005. I know that I am waiting in anticipation to see them once they are released.
|
|
|
|
|
mccooljc
Nov 28, 2004, 5:09 AM
Post #3 of 13
(2358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2003
Posts: 25
|
Yes, Mid-Feb is the proposed release date. You can pre-order them on Mountain Gear's website. As far as the hype goes, check the specs for yourself: they don't have 3 or 4 times the range of other cams. For instance, their #2 size goes from 25.4 mm to 64 mm at a weight of 207 grams. Black Diamond's C4 Camalots can cover this range with a #0.75 and a #2. The Link cam has a range of 38.6 mm compared to 16.8mm for the #0.75 C4 and 27mm for the #2 C4. So they have 1 1/2 - 2 1/2 times the range of a comparable cam - i.e. Black Diamond's newest design compared to Omega Pac's newest design. Now, carrying those 2 BD Camalots would weigh 32% more than the 1 Link cam, so you do get more range for the weight, but in the end, you still have to fit 1 cam in the rock, and that one link cam costs 47% more than 1 BD Camalot.... To make a long story short, getting more range out of each cam is great, and I really like the link-cams from an engineering design perspective, but at $87.50 a placement, I couldn't afford to do a very long route!
|
|
|
|
|
coldclimb
Nov 28, 2004, 5:11 AM
Post #4 of 13
(2358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 6909
|
Yeah, there's been a ton of discussions here about them, and a lot of people here have messed with them and reported what they thought. Try a forum search and you'll get a bunch of info. :)
|
|
|
|
|
mccooljc
Nov 30, 2004, 3:55 AM
Post #6 of 13
(2358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2003
Posts: 25
|
Wow, that is a cool video. Too expensive to have a rack of those, but I think will be getting at least one to try. The pictures I'd seen before didn't do the cam justice. Thanks for the link.
|
|
|
|
|
gunksgoer
Nov 30, 2004, 4:17 AM
Post #7 of 13
(2358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 1290
|
ok, now who wants to buy one for me to play with?
|
|
|
|
|
imcd
Dec 7, 2004, 8:31 PM
Post #8 of 13
(2358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 25, 2003
Posts: 96
|
seams like they would be a good second set
|
|
|
|
|
jon06
Dec 7, 2004, 8:56 PM
Post #9 of 13
(2358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 28, 2004
Posts: 99
|
I like to keep my options open when climbing. I always bring to much gear on a climb. You know, just in case that crack way above my head is bigger than it looks. Stuff like that. Having a Cam or two with that range sure could solve my problem.
I've been waiting to long to get my hands on one.
|
|
|
|
|
jimfix
Dec 7, 2004, 9:27 PM
Post #10 of 13
(2358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2004
Posts: 314
|
mccooljc wrote:
In reply to: ...they don't have 3 or 4 times the range of other cams. For instance, their #2 size goes from 25.4 mm to 64 mm at a weight of 207 grams. Black Diamond's C4 Camalots can cover this range with a #0.75 and a #2. The Link cam has a range of 38.6 mm compared to 16.8mm for the #0.75 C4 and 27mm for the #2 C4. So they have 1 1/2 - 2 1/2 times the range of a comparable cam...
This may be technically correct, however with only a .75 and a 2, for the middle of the range you would need to over cam the 2 or under cam the .75. Admittedly the double axel will stop unit frailer in undercamed placements, but placement is likely to be poor. This is why the range of cams overlaps. To be fair you need the 1 camalot as well, so we’re back to 3-4 “comparable cams”.
If you really want to make cams look bad, compare them to hexes. Cow bells for life.
Also, I bet link cams would be great for highly flared placements.
|
|
|
|
|
johnson6102002
Dec 7, 2004, 9:28 PM
Post #11 of 13
(2358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2004
Posts: 843
|
:roll: another link cam thread :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
coylec
Dec 7, 2004, 10:59 PM
Post #12 of 13
(2358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 12, 2003
Posts: 2024
|
Did you know?
Right below the title of this thread is a little bit of text that says "This thread refers to product Link Cams". And Link Cams is a hyperlink. Click on it.
You'll find 10 OTHER discussions on the cams.
Hyping a product on RC.com is considered spam after the first hype.
coylec
|
|
|
|
|
climbingbums
Dec 7, 2004, 11:52 PM
Post #13 of 13
(2358 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2003
Posts: 117
|
got to play with one last year at the ice festival. i already have them pre-ordered from mountain gear, thet're worth the wait and the money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
