Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Jaybro
Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
|
|
|
Jul 15, 2009 - 01:53am PT
|
Ever since I helped Denny Moorehouse (the DM of DMM) push start the Cilley mobile, while fighting off Pterendons, I should have been expecting this.
Hopefully they will make good stuff that will keep the market competitive. And not just yet another inferior knockoff. How big will they go?
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 15, 2009 - 02:21am PT
|
I owe a little bit of DMM gear, and would probably say its the highest quality (and oftentimes in the states priciest!) gear I own. Kinda like Arcteryx, you love it... when you can get it!
The new offsets, the phantom crabs, shadow locking, their 'pons.... sweet, sweet stuff! Right up there with BD, if more form than function sometimes ^^ but i'm kind of a tech weenie ahyhow (got called that today at work... ouch).
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Jul 15, 2009 - 02:37am PT
|
Hopefully not made in China like camalots.
|
|
Daphne
Trad climber
Mill Valley, CA
|
|
|
Jul 15, 2009 - 02:51am PT
|
Is anyone using the Revolver biner? Or, can anyone afford the Revolver?
(thanks to J Werlin for the steer on using italics, if the above comes out with "afford" in italics)
edit: Yay! it works!
edit again: so how did I miss the whole thread on the physics of the Revolver? I am keeping my post to celebrate my intrepid use of italics, however, for the main question, nevermind...
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
|
|
|
Jul 15, 2009 - 02:56am PT
|
Spin the revolver and take your chances, kinda like big wall climbing...
maybe for industrial applications (climbing schools, gyms) but that could be a sword of damocles, that pin, that you cant see, will wear out, why bother?
|
|
Peter Haan
Trad climber
San Francisco, CA
|
|
|
Jul 15, 2009 - 08:26am PT
|
Jaybro,
They go up to 114mm (4.49"). God there are so many cams on the market.
|
|
Scared Silly
Trad climber
UT
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2009 - 12:23am PT
|
I am posting my views here on this thread as the other has drifted.
Today at the OR show I got to compare the Camalots and Dragons. One of the first things I found interesting is that the patent for the double axle cam expired in 2004. It has taken 5 years for another double axial cam to be presented. To me this lack of competition implies two things, 1) Single cams still have a lot potential 2) BD had some damn good patents that protected other aspects such as the stem.
The first thing I noticed about the new Dragons is that they were noticeably lighter than the Camalots. I was told that they are about 10% on the larger units and less on the smaller units. There are two areas for the difference. The first is in the thickness of the lobes and second is the milling. While the Camalot lobes are milled with vertical slots (lighting holes) the Dragons have similar slots but the thickness of the cam is tapered.
The other area where weight is saved is in the stem. The Dragons utilize a single wire for the stem with a T swag to form a loop for clipping a biner. At the other end the wire is either swaged into the axle housing (smaller units) or have swag on the end that is then press fit into axle housing.
Camalots use a wire that is doubled up to form the stem and clipping loop.
The axle housing on the larger Dragons is milled with lightening holes.
Both SLCD use similar triggers and spring systems.
The contact angle on the Dragons is the same as Friends 13.75 while the Camalots is 14.5.
Dragons will probably not be available until sometime next year and be around the $75-$80 range.
Overall - there is going to be some really good competition. If I were to be replacing my rack tomorrow and the Dragons were available I would buy a set.
The thread posted below by munge has turn into a "made in your azz" rant. It would be great if this thread could kept to a technical discussion.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2009 - 02:16am PT
|
I have reservations about the stem cable decision. It seems like a strictly competitive trade-off accepting complexity to shave weight as opposed to the stem design itself being a functionally superior or more innovative. Swaging isn't rocket science, but to my mind the design doesn't yield enough weight savings to justify the complexity. They could have stopped at better axles and lighter cam lobes and still had me.
|
|
Scared Silly
Trad climber
UT
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2009 - 09:08am PT
|
The decision behind the stem was due to several reasons. The biggest was probably patent issues (BD had subsequent patents on different aspects of the cam). As such, DMM needed to design a stem that would not infringe yet still be functional. But you are correct it is more complex and more then likely costly.
|
|
FeelioBabar
climber
Sneaking up behind you...
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2009 - 10:33am PT
|
"$75-$80 range."
How about them apples!
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2009 - 11:45am PT
|
A #2 camalot costs 70 bucks now, cost seems slighly higher but competitive.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2009 - 01:27pm PT
|
The biggest was probably patent issues
Do you or anyone else know if this is really the case relative to the stem design?
|
|
Scared Silly
Trad climber
UT
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2009 - 09:58pm PT
|
Joe, I was told this information on the stems directly from Steve Petro. So I would say it is accurate. I would have to ask my contacts at BD about what patents are still in affect. Although a reverse search on the Camalot would yield that info as well.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2009 - 10:03pm PT
|
Scared, thanks - that probably explains it, got to work around what you can't implement directly. A legal driver for the design decision makes me even less happy than a competitive/weight one, but it sounds like their hands were tied if they wanted to market something. C'est la vie.
|
|
tenesmus
Trad climber
slc
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2009 - 11:48pm PT
|
I also posted this on the other thread and like the tone here better.
"I held them yesterday at the show and I gotta say they look cool. The 3-dimensional cut of the metal is pretty neat looking.
But I'm much more into function over form and pulling the trigger of a camalot is much, much more satisfyingly smooth. These guys are stiff and clunky in comparison.
No thanks.
edit to question why so many hate BD? Always been good to me."
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jul 24, 2009 - 12:00am PT
|
For me, mainly because from the first version of the Camolots to the C4s I've always found them to be rattly with a sloppy feel in all respects and I've never cared for the thin axles.
|
|
reddirt
climber
Elevation 285 ft
|
|
|
Jul 24, 2009 - 12:26am PT
|
with all due respect to reps & climbing co. people, DMM does have the best slogan/life mantra:
climb now, work later.
DMM: I ♥ your nuts too, esp the offset ones ; P
|
|
ontheedgeandscaredtodeath
Trad climber
San Francisco, Ca
|
|
|
Jul 24, 2009 - 12:33am PT
|
I don't hate BD at all. But I think the C4s are the first generation of camalots that are worth their weight and deserve some limited preference over other cams (at least down to .75 or .5).
I need to get a DMM cam in my mitts before deciding, but that company makes some solid shite.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!