Friends: Black Diamond vs. Wild Country
T.P.
Europe, for some years. Or, more correctly, I haven't used them very
much because of my little trust in them. Anyway, I have decided to buy
some good (and expensive) ones. The local climbing store offers three
types of friends
* Black Diamonds
* Wild Country - forged friends (maybe "forged" means that they are from
Eastern Europe as well ;-) )
* Wild Country - New Tech friends
The B.D.'s have a much wider range (w.r.t. crack width) than the W.C.'s.
You need about 6 W.C. friends to cover the range that can be covered by
4 B.D. friends. But on the other hand 4 B.D. friends cost and weight
about the same as 6 W.C. friends. So I wonder if this is really an
advantage of the B.D.'s?
What else can be said for and against each type of friends?
Do the stiff forged friends, which are much cheaper, have serious
drawbacks compared to the B.D.s and the W.C. New Tech's, which are built
pretty much in the same way?
Cheers,
Thilo
Kelly Rich
> ...What can be said for and against each type
> [BD vs. WD] of friends?
Here's one where you'll get 6 different opinions
from 3 different people. But, as my mom would
say, that's what makes for horse racing!
Personally, I like WC friends the best. I carry both
forged and tech friends. I also have a set of
BD Camalots. They're great too, but I still favor WC.
From the way I see it, a #1, 2, and 3 Camalot
covers the same range of a #2, 2.5, 3, 3.5 Friend.
I don't have any gear with me, but I see the claim by
BD that the double axel gives a much wider range per
unit is pretty much a crock. True, they do have a slightly
wider range, but compare the camming range of a #3 Cam
to a #3.5 Friend. At the large size, there should be a big
difference if the double axel really makes a difference.
I think from the literature I read, there's like a .2 inch
difference (I know someone will look this up, and my arse
will be fried if I'm way off). Now compare a #1 Cam with
a #2 Friend.
But, supposing there is a big difference in the range of
each piece. What does this buy you? Sure, if you're on a
climb where there's a 10 foot section of crack, then the
extended range helps, you cover what you might need
with fewer pieces. However, if you're climbing a 150 foot
crack, just covering the range isn't going to do it--you'll
still need to place (perhaps) a dozen pieces, regardless
if they are the same size or not. So you're going to be
doubleing up on sizes no matter what.
One overlooked point is the working range of the cam.
Personally, I don't like the look of a Camalot when placed
anywhere near the tipped-out range. True too of Friends,
but I'd ranther trust a a Friend at 90% of it's width than a
Camalot at 90%. Chalk this up to the angle of the dangle
of the cams. BD has a wider range per piece because
the angle of their cams is steeper, while WC has
patented the constant cam angle (13.5 degrees?).
To me, BD cams are less stable because of their
cam angle. One more reason I like WC.
>Do the stiff forged friends, which are much cheaper, have
>serious drawbacks...?
Again, personally, I like forged friends a lot. There is
a bit of a drawback when you think about placing them
in horrizontal cracks, but that really depends on where
you climb. I've seen massive falls held, where the stem
took a beating, but the unit still held. Anyway, I don't
smaller than a #1.5 in the rigid stem.
So, there's my 2c. Now, it's off to the races!
:- Kelly
John Byrnes
> Personally, I like WC friends the best...
> So, there's my 2c. Now, it's off to the races!
I agree with all that Kelly wrote, but he forgot to mention a
key advantage of Friends... they're lighter weight. If you
take into account all of the points he discussed, then the
added weight of Camalots can't be justified.
Many people argue that the extra weight is insignificant, but
it depends on where you climb. Let me site an extreme example
to illustrate...
In Indian Creek it's common to need 8 pieces of a given size.
One crack I did required the following rack (placed in order!):
Two #2 Friends, Eight #2.5, Eight #3, Two #3.5.
In this case it's easy to see that several ounces per cam
adds up to a large weight increase overall.
- Lord Slime
Ben Craft
On Fri, 4 Jun 1999 rata...@zdnetmail.com wrote:
> correct size to the slot in front of you. What brand do your partners
> use? A mixed rack is a real pain to carry, because for every placement,
> you have to not only pick a size, but also a style. Look, I need things
> as simple as possible up there, or I can't get up anything.
Yeh, like any one manufacturor will produce good cams throught the entire
size range.... Just aint gonna happen. Alians will always rule in the
small size, Camalots are only good for 1 and 2,and friends will make up
the meat of the rack.
Ben Craft
loon time.
Here's a solution to the wires twisting and breaking on BD cams. I
haven't had a wire break or twist on my BD cams since I started doing
this.
First get some shrink rap that just fits around the swage on the trigger
wire. Cut about 1/2 inch and slide it over the swage and heat treat. The
purpose of the shrink rap is to keep the wire from twisting or bending at
extreme angles. Before you put the cam together take somekind of tape and
make your own cam stop.
#######
#####\_O -Ben Craft-
####/\/>
#### /"
### \
On 4 Jun 1999, AL18677345 wrote:
> W.C. friends are the shit in my opinion. Those camalots with fucked up trigger
> cables really piss me off! You spend about $65 a pop and the cables always
> take a shit. Doesn't happen on the friends. Lightweight is also a plus of
> W.C.
>
> Mike
>
>
rata...@zdnetmail.com
> One overlooked point is the working range of the cam.
> Personally, I don't like the look of a Camalot when placed
> anywhere near the tipped-out range. True too of Friends,
> but I'd ranther trust a a Friend at 90% of it's width than a
> Camalot at 90%. Chalk this up to the angle of the dangle
> of the cams. BD has a wider range per piece because
> the angle of their cams is steeper, while WC has
> patented the constant cam angle (13.5 degrees?).
> To me, BD cams are less stable because of their
> cam angle. One more reason I like WC.
>
A little technical correction here:
The WC/Jardine patent is on the stem and trigger set up. Archimede's
patent on the constant angle cam ran out a while ago. BD cams use
essentially the same angle as Friends ( 13.75 deg as I remember ) as do
the Metolius and other brands. The only brand I know that uses a larger
( aggressive ) cam angle is CCH Aliens.
Extra cam range comes from having the cams turning on offset axles.
Essentially, Camalot cams are bigger for the size crack they fit, so
they have greater range, since the working range is proportional to the
size of the cam, not the size of the crack. ( Working range is not very
well defined, so catalog comparisons are not very useful ).
Since I have a fiduciary interest, I'll refrain from plugging one brand
or the other ( so to speak ) but - It is best to carry all of one brand,
rather than mixing styles. That way your eye gets tuned to picking the
correct size to the slot in front of you. What brand do your partners
use? A mixed rack is a real pain to carry, because for every placement,
you have to not only pick a size, but also a style. Look, I need things
as simple as possible up there, or I can't get up anything.
JRattus Utahnus
t...@bdel.com
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Benjamin Joseph Faber
: - Lord Slime
I also agree with the previous 2 posters. I would like to add that if you
do a climb, especially one that has varying-size placement opportunities,
a set of friends allows for more placements (read shorter whooper) than a
set of camalots covering the same range. Having said that, I would like
to add that I have both friends and camalots because I believe that more
is better and sometimes you will find that one brand of cam will fit a
placement better than the other.
BEN
--
Benjamin Joseph Faber
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
Email: gt5...@prism.gatech.edu
AL18677345
Dylan Sutton
snip
> The B.D.'s have a much wider range (w.r.t. crack width) than the W.C.'s.
> You need about 6 W.C. friends to cover the range that can be covered by
> 4 B.D. friends. But on the other hand 4 B.D. friends cost and weight
> about the same as 6 W.C. friends. So I wonder if this is really an
> advantage of the B.D.'s?
The argument that x (eg 4) camalots cover the same range as y (eg 6)
friends if often used. It is an advantage in the sense that a given
camalot is more likely to fit a given crack than the same size friend.
Assuming camalots have more overlap between sizes (???), if the climb
uses multiple pieces of around the same size, you might have a better
chance of sticking in a camalot. I think having half-sizes largely
cancels this out. Realistically, I haven't climbed enough with camalots
to see a clear advantage.
Even if true, it does _not_ mean that you need to carry less cams,
except in very limited circumstances on multipitch climbs. For single
pitch climbing you only get to place each piece of gear once (unless you
back clean) so each piece of gear you leave behind is one less point of
pro. For multipitch you might be able to take less cams if you're only
going to place a particular cam once, and another size camalot (but not
friend) could cover it. This holds true only so long as you don't want
to place both those cams on the same pitch!
The number of cams I carry on a climb is determined by the number of
placements I am likely (or hopeful!) to find. The same applies to my
friend who uses camalots. If I'm climbing a 40m pitch, I'd rather have 6
cams than 4 between me and the deck...having 6 cams also gives me a
better chance of finding optimal placements (even if only for 4 of them)
than 4. The result is that both our racks have the same number of cams,
covering roughly the same range, but his weighs more than mine. Once you
factor in 2 belays plus a long pitch of climbing in between, you'll want
either more cams and/or bigger balls. FWIW, we're both equally happy
with our racks so YMMV.
Dylan
Karl Baba
> > One overlooked point is the working range of the cam.
> > Personally, I don't like the look of a Camalot when placed
> > anywhere near the tipped-out range. True too of Friends,
> > but I'd ranther trust a a Friend at 90% of it's width than a
> > Camalot at 90%. Chalk this up to the angle of the dangle
> > of the cams. BD has a wider range per piece because
> > the angle of their cams is steeper, while WC has
> > patented the constant cam angle (13.5 degrees?).
> > To me, BD cams are less stable because of their
> > cam angle. One more reason I like WC.
This is far from true. Camalots are strong enough to use as nuts, fully
tipped out to the max. Friends are not.
BD should be shot for having such failure prone triggers but the wide
range rules. WHen you are pushing a #4 or #5 camalot up an offwidth
with you, that range matters! Some of those flexible friends seem to
have a tendency to get stuck in my experience.
My vote is for BD. (I just ordered a swager to fix my dead pile of them)
Karl
http://extra.newsguy.com/~climbing
--
Yosemite Area Guiding (remove NOSPAM from the return address)
Ben Craft
> This is far from true. Camalots are strong enough to use as nuts, fully
> tipped out to the max. Friends are not.
For the past few years friends also have cam stops. Just as strong as
nuts in the open position.
> BD should be shot for having such failure prone triggers but the wide
> range rules. WHen you are pushing a #4 or #5 camalot up an offwidth
> with you, that range matters!
Try a #5 and 6 friend. The width is about the same as a friend. Only the
number 1 and 2 camalot benifit from the double axle.
Camalot
#3 51-86mm 2.0-3.4inches
#3.5 61-104mm 2.4-4.1
#4 74-124mm 2.9-4.9inches
#5 107-178 mm 4.2-7.0
Friends
#3.5 51-82mm 2.0-3.2inches
#4 64-100 2.5-3.9
#5 84-138 mm 3.3-5.4
#6 118-194mm 4.6-7.6
Now unless you have some custom camalots, It is a myth that the camalots
cover a larger range (excludind #1 and #2)
>
> My vote is for BD. (I just ordered a swager to fix my dead pile of them)
Did you ever own a Yugo?
Ben
Alistair Veitch
> This is far from true. Camalots are strong enough to use as nuts, fully
> tipped out to the max. Friends are not.
This isn't true for the latest line of Friends (they now have cam stops).
In any case, I don't really like the idea of using cams as nuts, and I
think this (perceived) advantage isn't as great as it's made out to be.
In 10 years of climbing, I think I've only had one or 2 placements where
I thought this might be important.
Cheers,
Alistair (Friend user, but all my partners use Camalots...)
Spiral Climbing Company
>
> I have been using some very cheap friends, which were made in Eastern
> Europe, for some years. Or, more correctly, I haven't used them very
> much because of my little trust in them. Anyway, I have decided to buy
> some good (and expensive) ones. The local climbing store offers three
> types of friends
>
> * Black Diamonds
>
> * Wild Country - forged friends (maybe "forged" means that they are from
> Eastern Europe as well ;-) )
>
> * Wild Country - New Tech friends
>
> You need about 6 W.C. friends to cover the range that can be covered by
> 4 B.D. friends. But on the other hand 4 B.D. friends cost and weight
> about the same as 6 W.C. friends. So I wonder if this is really an
> advantage of the B.D.'s?
>
>
> Do the stiff forged friends, which are much cheaper, have serious
> pretty much in the same way?
>
> Cheers,
> Thilo
Sorry, but there are no such thing as "cheap Friends". Friends are the
brand name of cams manufactured by Wild Country. Wild Country designed
the first production camming unit. Please refer to your "cheap cams" as
"cheap cams."
--
Sincerely,
Anthony Ingenito, Owner
Spiral Climbing Company
"Rock Climbing Equipment at Discount Prices"
----------------------
Visit our web site at:
www.spiralclimbing.com
Dingus Milktoast
came of age in climbing using these tools and they fit me like a well worn
glove. Having said that, the differences between camming devices from
reputable manufacturers are mostly small, cosmetic and/or preference. The
reason I state this is...
I know top flight climbers who use and swear by cams from WC. I know others
who claim cams from BD are the best. Still others who say Metolius rules. All
are better climbers than me (by far) and all cite the same or similar reasons
as to why their cams are better than others. I don't think it really matters
that much in the grand scheme of things whether Camelot triggers are too
fragile, or that Friend stems represent a fundamental design weakness or that
Metolius cams are too stiff or whatever! You put the friggin camming device in
the crack properly, clip it, climb above it and then fall, the camming device
catches you and you don't die. I guess that cam just paid for itself bro and I
don't give a rats ass which cam did the saving!
I'm a contrarian myself... if all my partners had Camelots, I would go with
something else, both to be different and to fill in the gaps in their racks.
Ultimately, for me, familiarity matters most, price matters a lot as does
weight, repair issues come next followed by unit strength and preference for a
particular company matters the least.
I'll stick with my Aliens, Metolius 3-cam units, Friends, the occasional
Camelot, the odd botty cams I have, etc. But then again, I'm not in the market
for cams! However, I need an additional set of micro cams and will be taking a
look at the new HB cams. The picture is interesting and they claim they will
have a very competitive price. Maybe you should consider those as well.
DMT
Kelly Rich
> .... Before you put the cam together take somekind of tape and
> make your own cam stop.
Ummm, do you mean make your own trigger-bar stop? I don't
want to put a bunch of tape all over the cams, or do I?
Also, your idea about the shrink wrap on the cables is great.
Maybe BD (and WC) should do this on their new cams...
:- Kelly
Kelly Rich
> > One overlooked point is the working range of the cam.
> > Personally, I don't like the look of a Camalot when placed
> > anywhere near the tipped-out range. True too of Friends,
> > but I'd ranther trust a a Friend at 90% of it's width than a
> > Camalot at 90%. Chalk this up to the angle of the dangle
> > of the cams. BD has a wider range per piece because
> > the angle of their cams is steeper, while WC has
> > patented the constant cam angle (13.5 degrees?).
> > To me, BD cams are less stable because of their
> > cam angle. One more reason I like WC.
> >
> A little technical correction here:
>
> The WC/Jardine patent is on the stem and trigger set up. Archimede's
> patent on the constant angle cam ran out a while ago. BD cams use
> essentially the same angle as Friends ( 13.75 deg as I remember ) as do
> the Metolius and other brands. The only brand I know that uses a larger
> ( aggressive ) cam angle is CCH Aliens.
Thanks much for clearing this up--I thought I read on a WC marketing
piece that they patented the constant cam angle. (This is probably
why BD is seving me.)
Maybe I'm wrong here, but I'm pretty sure that the first few
generations of Camalots did not use a constant cam angle.
They've improved their design a LOT since then, including fatter
cams and better trigger bars. But since some of my Camalots are
from the first couple of generations, these based the first impression
of my opinion.
> Extra cam range comes from having the cams turning on offset axles.
> Essentially, Camalot cams are bigger for the size crack they fit, so
> they have greater range, since the working range is proportional to the
> size of the cam, not the size of the crack. ( Working range is not very
> well defined, so catalog comparisons are not very useful ).
In my original post, what I referred to as "working range" was the
range of crack widths that I actually use the cams. Since I don't like
BD cams when they are close to tipped out, the fact that they have a
wider range means little to me. However, I'll point out, I don't have
a drop tester to see who's gear holds better when 90% expanded.
> Since I have a fiduciary interest, I'll refrain from plugging one brand
> or the other ( so to speak ) but - It is best to carry all of one brand,
> rather than mixing styles.
This I simply disagree with. I love to carry all sorts of gear. I use about
7 or 8 different styles of wired stoppers, and I have 6 or 7 different
styles
of cams (and now, I even have some cool curves hexes!). However, I sit
up nights for hours at a time fondling my gear, so I know it pretty well
when
I open for business. Makes it easier when you climb with other peoples racks
too. (I guess "sport climbers" don't worry about this too much though, huh.)
> JRattus Utahnus
> t...@bdel.com
:- Kelly
Chuck Spiekerman
> T.P. wrote:
> >
> > I have been using some very cheap friends, which were made in Eastern
> > Europe, for some years. Or, more correctly, I haven't used them very
>
> Sorry, but there are no such thing as "cheap Friends". Friends are the
> brand name of cams manufactured by Wild Country. Wild Country designed
> the first production camming unit.
Sure there are. WC Friends bought in Canada are cheaper than WC Friends
bought in the US.
> --
> Sincerely,
> Anthony Ingenito, Owner
> Spamming Climbing Company
> "Rock Climbing Equipment at Discount Prices"
> ----------------------
> Visit our web site at:
> www.climerware.com
>
>
burp
For me ... Metolius TCUs for the real small stuff, Wild Country forged
friends for everything else, and a #5 camelot (can be handy at times in
those offwidths).
Why? I've been using W.C. Friends forever ... they're easy to use, reliable
and have always done the job for me (fairly light too). In general, BD
Camelots have always been difficult for me to place (I have trouble with the
trigger and the flex in the things). I've been using TCUs since they came
out ... they've always been dependable and easy to use (I must admit though
... TCU's do make me a little nervous in Indian Creek ... when I place them
in Indian Creek, I always place several together in case one spits on me. I
feel like I can rely more on friends there ... even though they can spit out
in Indian Creek too.)
As for the question about W.C. forged Friends in horizontals ... I don't
know if it is still recommended practice or not, but I use friends strung
with spectra (the same stuff I have my old Hexentrics strung with) through a
hole in the stem (near the trigger). When I place a friend in a horizontal,
I simply unclip the webbing and clip the spectra instead. The stem
typically won't be levered on the horizontal, because the spectra runs over
the horizontal. Anyway, you aught to check around about this ... we always
used to use it before all the flexifriends and stuff came out. I do know
that I've seen some serious falls held by a horizontally placed friend with
this sort of setup.
Not a recommendation, just an opinion.
Enjoy!
burp
Kelly Rich wrote in message <7j6gmu$4i3$1...@mailint03.im.hou.compaq.com>...
>T.P. wrote in message <7j67c0$b...@ds2.acs.ucalgary.ca>...
<snip>
>>Do the stiff forged friends, which are much cheaper, have
>>serious drawbacks...?
>
>Again, personally, I like forged friends a lot. There is
>a bit of a drawback when you think about placing them
>in horrizontal cracks, but that really depends on where
>you climb. I've seen massive falls held, where the stem
>took a beating, but the unit still held. Anyway, I don't
>smaller than a #1.5 in the rigid stem.
>
>So, there's my 2c. Now, it's off to the races!
> :- Kelly
>
chris
>
> I also agree with the previous 2 posters. I would like to add that if you
> do a climb, especially one that has varying-size placement opportunities,
> a set of friends allows for more placements (read shorter whooper) than a
> set of camalots covering the same range. Having said that, I would like
> to add that I have both friends and camalots because I believe that more
> is better and sometimes you will find that one brand of cam will fit a
> placement better than the other.
Although I do agree that it is important to have a lot
of peices(i.e. shorter runouts), the camalots added
range does have a key advantage. since it has a larger
range in each peice, you are more likely to find the
right size on the first stab. with other companies, a
peice may just barely too big, and then you have to
sort through your rack again to find the right peice.
Ropes4U
strength when i am trying to decide which cam looks the coolest..
John
Rbw1966
>wire. Cut about 1/2 inch and slide it over the swage and heat treat. The
>purpose of the shrink rap is to keep the wire from twisting or bending at
>make your own cam stop.
>
Wont the shrink wrap and tape possibly hide any evidence of wear/fraying or
stress fractures?
rob "just curious"
Walter Pienciak
I'm a visual kind of guy, so I whacked together a quick and
dirty comparison and stuck it on the web at
http://walter.dsl.frii.net/family/walter/gear.html
Walter
Ben Craft
trigger was pushed up at near 90 degrees when you dump your rack in the
pack. When you put shrink rap around the swage it can no longer bend that
extreme. The cams also still work independently of eachother if you
desire that safety feature. I used to break the wires alot,but since I
retro-fitted them I haven't had a single one break yet;) It's also nice
because even with the bumper you do not get any of that funky twisting of
the trigger which can be annoying. With the retro-fit I think the BD cams
are very dependable.
#######
#####\_O -Ben Craft-
####/\/>
#### /"
### \
Karl Lew
reslinging trick that allows you to rack short and clip long. I have
two Friends that my wife gave to me as a present and that I will
sadly probably never use because of that. Camalots can be reslung
with 5.5mm Titan Spectra from Blue Water to make an amazingly adjustable
cam. www.climerware.com/camalot.shtml
--Karl
Drew
1. If you are going to carry enough rack to place a cam every
body-length in Canyonlands, then Wild Country Friends will save you
weight. Camalots are heavier. Advantage: Wild Country
2. Grabbing the triggers before placing, or "indexing" the piece when
you're pumped is easier with Wild Country cams. Camalot triggers? Don't
get me started. Advantage: Wild Country
3. "Walking" of camming units, especially in the larger sizes, can be a
major problem. Ever followed a pitch where the leader's #4 camalot has
walked into the crack, out of reach? The tighter springs and wider, more
stable axle of the WC Tech Friends, especially the 5&6, give them an
edge. Advantage: Wild Country
4. Offsets. In flaring or very irregular cracks the new Wild Country
offsets (or Alien offsets) are a bonus. Tommy Caldwell commented after
he redpointed the Salathe Wall that he felt some of the flared pitches
would be a lot harder without offsets. Advantage: Wild Country and CCH
5. Range. This is an issue in the 1-inch to 2-inch area. The .5, .75 and
#1 Camalot do make placements in the range less exacting. Wild Country
has introduced a 1.25 and 1.75 Tech Friend which are too new to pass
judgment on. Advantage: Camalots
Just for full disclosure: I carry Metolius TCUs and FCUs up to a 1.5",
one each Camalot .5, .75 and the rest of the rack is Tech Friends to a
number 6.
- Drew Bedford
Karl Baba
<Pine.SOL.4.05.990604...@rigel.oac.uci.edu>, Ben Craft
<bcr...@rigel.oac.uci.edu> wrote:
> Did you ever own a Yugo?
>
> Ben
No but I have had three Volkswagons and an Audi, all of which were bad
enough
Karl
Mays, Stephen (EXCHANGE:RICH1:2778)
>
> T.P. wrote:
> >
> > I have been using some very cheap friends, which were made in Eastern
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Thilo
>
> Sorry, but there are no such thing as "cheap Friends".
Wrong - I bought some real cheap. About half price in fact. They're WC
flexo's.
> Friends are the brand name of cams manufactured by Wild Country.
And friends is the frequently used generic reference to SLCDs.
> Wild Country designed
> the first production camming unit.
Did he design them or did a fellow named Ray?
>Please refer to your "cheap cams" as
>"cheap cams."
or cheap friends.
> Anthony Ingenito, Owner
Steve
Kelly Rich
> ... BD has a wider range per piece because
> the angle of their cams is steeper, while WC has
> patented the constant cam angle (13.5 degrees?).
A little technical correction here:
The WC/Jardine patent is on the stem and trigger set up. Archimede's
patent on the constant angle cam ran out a while ago.
Through my ignorance, I got educated.
Well, BD didn't serve me papers, but John Bercaw
from BD did straighten me out on some facts, at
least from the view of BD.
First, WC doesn't have a patent on the cam angle
(as far John knows). So, my non-scientific estimation
of a steeper cam angle on the Camalots was probably
wrong.
However, to the untrained eye, it appears that
the BD cam has a steeper curve. I guess this is
due to the double-axel. While the "cam angle"
is probably an optimum 13.75 degrees, the actual
curve of the cam has to be diffent than the curve
of single-axel cams. Comparing BD to WC cams, the
BD has a steeper-looking curve. Maybe this is why
Camalots appear less stable in when more-fully
expanded. I don't know, probably personal perception.
Now on to the meat--cam ranges. Here's the
view from BD:
CO. | Size | Range (in) | OVRLAP | STR | WGT | ForgedWC
BD 0.5 0.78 1.30
61% 12kN 119g
0.75 0.96 1.58
65% 12kN 140g
1.0 1.19
2.01 63% 16kN 151g
2.0 1.45
2.52 68% 16kN 184g
3.0 1.99
3.43 50% 16kN 240g
3.5 2.42
4.14 70% 16kN 314g
4.0 2.88
4.85 73% 16kN 349g
4.5 3.30
5.77 79% 12kN 351g
5.0 4.24
7.00 62% 12kN 545g
WC 0 0.51
0.75 N/A 14kN 87g
N/A
0.5 0.67
0.94 33% 14kN 92g
N/A
1.0 0.75
1.14 71% 14kN 100g
89 gm
1.25 0.82 1.29
82% 14kN 103g 94 gm
1.5 0.91
1.38 82% 14kN 105g
94 gm
1.75 0.98 1.60
84% 14kN 111g 100 gm
2.0 1.14
1.73 50% 14kN 117g
106 gm
2.5 1.30
2.17 73% 14kN 135g
120 gm
3.0 1.69
2.60 55% 14kN 151g
143 gm
3.5 2.01
3.23 65% 14kN 176g
168 gm
4.0 2.52
3.94 58% 14kN 224g
216 gm
5.0 3.31
5.43 44% 14kN 340g
N/A
6.0 4.53
7.48 43% 14kN 520g
N/A
(For a graphical view of this info, check out the following
web page which was given in another post:
http://walter.dsl.frii.net/family/walter/gear.html)
I'm not sure how the OverLap Percent is computed,
or what it really means. Perhaps it means how much
the size range of one cam overlaps the ones next
in size. I dunno.
However, let's pull some of the data:
CO. | Size | Range (in) | OVRLAP | STR | WGT | ForgedWC
BD 0.5 0.78 1.30
61% 12kN 119g
WC 1.0 0.75 1.14
71% 14kN 100g 89 gm
In this size, BD has a range of .52 inches while WC
has a range of .39 inches. That gives a range advantage
of .13 inchs to BD in the #1 size (since the beginning
of cam technology, I've always used the WC sizes as the
standard, while I know others who use BD's sizes).
Now for some wierd fun. The midpoint of the full range
of these cams is 1.025 inches:
(1.30 - .75) / 2 + .75 = 1.025"
Divide midpoint of the size by the advantage in inches:
.13"/1.025" = 0.12682
I think this means you get about a 12.7% increase in
range for the BD at this range.
Now let's look at the #3.5 size:
CO. | Size | Range (in) | OVRLAP | STR | WGT | ForgedWC
BD 3.0 1.99 3.43
50% 16kN 240g
WC 3.5 2.01 3.23
65% 14kN 176g 168 gm
Here, BD has a range of 1.44" and WC has a range of 1.22",
a range advantage to BD of .22".
OK, percent advantage is 8.1%, calculated as follows:
Midpoint inches: (3.43 - 1.99) / 2 + 1.99 = 2.71"
Cockamaimie advantage: .22" / 2.71" = 0.08118
So there's some numbers to crunch out.
I always found it interesting that forged
Friends were lighter than Cams or Techs.
Anyway, bring along the Camalots to burn
those extra grams of fat.
Cheerio...
:- kelly
"There's a lot of truth to these facts"
Tech Writer's Axiom
PS:
Here's some other "facts" forwarded to me by
BD, in the original form that I received them.
Chop away...
COMPANY | TYPE | [Small] SIZE | [Large] SIZE | RANGE | LOW SIZE
| RANGE | HIGH | % OVERLAP | STRENGTH | WGT
Wild Country Offset Friends 0/.5 0.51 0.74 N/A 14kN 92
Wild Country Offset Friends .5/1 0.66 0.94 35% 14kN 102
Wild Country Offset Friends 1/1.5 0.74 1.14 71% 14kN 105
Wild Country Offset Friends 1.5/2 0.90 1.30 60% 14kN 115
Wild Country Offset Friends 2/2.5 1.14 1.73 40% 14kN 125
Wild Country Offset Friends 2.5/3 1.29 2.16 75% 14kN 142
Wild Country Offset Friends 3/3.5 1.69 2.50 54% 14kN 170
Wild Country Offset Friends 3.5/4 2.00 3.22 62% 14kN 198
Wild Country Clog Cams 0 0.51 0.75 N/A 14kN 84
Wild Country Clog Cams 0.5 0.67 0.94 33% 14kN 90
Wild Country Clog Cams 1 0.75 1.14 71% 14kN 100
Wild Country Clog Cams 1.5 0.91 1.38 60% 14kN 106
Wild Country Clog Cams 2 1.14 1.73 0% 14kN 119
Wild Country Clog Cams 2.5 1.30 2.17 73% 14kN 136
Wild Country Clog Cams 3 1.69 2.60 55% 14kN 147
Wild Country Clog Cams 3.5 2.01 3.23 65% 14kN 176
Wild Country Clog Cams 4 2.52 3.94 58% 14kN 224
CJ
Friends.
How do Wired Bliss cams stack up against these two? I've heard some really
good things about Wired Bliss, but have never seen their products in the
stores or on the rocks. Anyone here have any experience with them?
--
Christopher Jain
Lake Forest, California
c j a i n @ i x . n e t c o m . c o m
http://www.netcom.com/~cjain/
[Modify address before e-mailing]
Patrick C Leger
> So far all of the discussion has focused on BD Camalots vs. Wild Country
> Friends.
>
> How do Wired Bliss cams stack up against these two? I've heard some really
> good things about Wired Bliss, but have never seen their products in the
> stores or on the rocks. Anyone here have any experience with them?
One of my partners has Wired Bliss...they're inexpensive and fairly
light, though I tended to always pull out one size too big since I'm
used to Camalots! They're pretty similar to Metolius in general
construction, though I don't recall the cams being hollowed out to
save weight and they don't have as much texture on the surface of the
cams (though that supposedly has little impact on holding ability).
Good action, from what I remember; I guess the only drawback is that
they're hard to find.
If the larger sizes are like Metolius (i.e. narrow profile), then they
may be prone to easily tipping in cracks. I've had the large
Metolius cams twist on me, even when using an extra sling, so that on
each side one cam was full retracted and the other was fully extended.
The Camalots (and some others, probably) are wider and I haven't had
that problem with them.
Chris
jcor...@my-deja.com
cjainREM...@ix.netcom.com (CJ) wrote:
> So far all of the discussion has focused on BD Camalots vs. Wild Country
> Friends.
>
> How do Wired Bliss cams stack up against these two? I've heard some really
> good things about Wired Bliss, but have never seen their products in the
> stores or on the rocks. Anyone here have any experience with them?
>
> Christopher Jain
> Lake Forest, California
> c j a i n @ i x . n e t c o m . c o m
> http://www.netcom.com/~cjain/
>
> [Modify address before e-mailing]
>
I have a complete set of Wired Bliss and IMHO they are great.
I generally carry BD Camalots, Wired Bliss, the first 5 CCH aliens, I alter
this rack based on which climb I am doing (get rid of the big ones or small
ones depending on crack size, I look for an opportunity to leave behind the
#4, 4.5, 5 Camalots) I also own the following other cams for sake of
comparison: WC friends (old style) Trango cams (3,4 and 1 new mono cam) HB
Fix (old rigid stems) Kong Outland (1 3cam, 1 4 cam) Smileys ABC Spider cams
Russian Titanium cams
Jim Cormier
Cormier Mountaineering
Ben Craft
> > Now let's look at the #3.5 size:
> >
> > CO. | Size | Range (in) | OVRLAP | STR | WGT | ForgedWC
> > BD 3.0 1.99 3.43 50% 16kN 240g
> > WC 3.5 2.01 3.23 65% 14kN 176g 168 gm
> >
> > Here, BD has a range of 1.44" and WC has a range of 1.22",
> > a range advantage to BD of .22".
> >
> 18%.
Based upon the above analysis a WC #6 is better when compared to BD
#5
Thats 1/4 of an inch! Like it's really gonna make a difference on a
placement.
Comparing the same two pieces.....
Size Range Weight Cost Cost/inch g/inch
3.5 Friend 1.22" 168g 49 40 138
3 Camalot 1.44" 240g 67.5 46 166
The BD cames are a 15% increase in cost and a 20% increase in weight per
inch!
You guy's have been sitting in the office too long.
rata...@zdnetmail.com
Kelly Rich <ke...@karumba.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure how the OverLap Percent is computed,
> or what it really means. Perhaps it means how much
> the size range of one cam overlaps the ones next
> in size. I dunno.
Correct! - give that man a handhold.
> However, let's pull some of the data:
>
> CO. | Size | Range (in) | OVRLAP | STR | WGT | ForgedWC
> BD 0.5 0.78 1.30 61% 12kN 119g
> WC 1.0 0.75 1.14 71% 14kN 100g 89 gm
>
> In this size, BD has a range of .52 inches while WC
> has a range of .39 inches. That gives a range advantage
> of .13 inchs to BD in the #1 size (since the beginning
> of cam technology, I've always used the WC sizes as the
> standard, while I know others who use BD's sizes).
>
> Now for some wierd fun. The midpoint of the full range
> of these cams is 1.025 inches:
>
> (1.30 - .75) / 2 + .75 = 1.025"
>
> Divide midpoint of the size by the advantage in inches:
> .13"/1.025" = 0.12682
>
> I think this means you get about a 12.7% increase in
> range for the BD at this range.
That seems a really convoluted way of comparing ranges. How about just:
(Range of CamBrand#1)/(Range of CamBrand#2) {Use cams of similar size}
or, for the above example: (Camalot .5)/(WC #1)=(.52)/(.39)=1.333 or
Camalot .5 has a 33% wider range than the WC Friend #1.
> Now let's look at the #3.5 size:
>
> CO. | Size | Range (in) | OVRLAP | STR | WGT | ForgedWC
> BD 3.0 1.99 3.43 50% 16kN 240g
> WC 3.5 2.01 3.23 65% 14kN 176g 168 gm
>
> Here, BD has a range of 1.44" and WC has a range of 1.22",
> a range advantage to BD of .22".
>
Or, more naturally for me, 1.44/1.22 = 1.18 or Camalot Range bigger by
18%.
Of course, everyone has their own feeling for how wide a placement they
are willing to feel comfortable with, for each brand. My intuitive
feeling is that Camalots have about a 25% wider range and are thus
easier to place. But they weigh more.
Jratus Utahnus
t...@bdel.com
(Opinions expressed are personal and may or may not be similar to my
employers.)
Dylan Sutton
> Size Range Weight Cost Cost/inch g/inch
> 3.5 Friend 1.22" 168g 49 40 138
> 3 Camalot 1.44" 240g 67.5 46 166
>
> The BD cames are a 15% increase in cost and a 20% increase in weight per
> inch!
>
> You guy's have been sitting in the office too long.
No no no Ben, you have it all wrong! You really do get what you pay for:
Camalots are cheaper, so long as you pay by weight;)
Size Range Weight Cost Cost/inch g/inch cost/g
3.5 Friend 1.22" 168g 49 40 138 0.290
3 Camalot 1.44" 240g 67.5 46 166 0.277
If you check the last column, it's obvious you save nearly 5% on the
cost of friends by buying camalots;)
Dylan
Stefan Axelsson
Dylan Sutton <dsut...@mail.usyd.edu.au> wrote:
>If you check the last column, it's obvious you save nearly 5% on the
>cost of friends by buying camalots;)
Yeah, all that "less is more" crap is just that, crap, right? It's
obvious even to small children that "more is more".
Don't let WC cheat you out of good steel, that you've paid for!
(not)
Stefan,
--
Stefan Axelsson Chalmers University of Technology
s...@rmovt.rply.ce.chalmers.se Dept. of Computer Engineering
(Remove "rmovt.rply" to send mail.)
Ken....@alumni.cs.cmu.edu
> > Divide midpoint of the size by the advantage in inches:
> > .13"/1.025" = 0.12682
> >
> > I think this means you get about a 12.7% increase in
> > range for the BD at this range.
>
> That seems a really convoluted way of comparing ranges. How about just:
>
> (Range of CamBrand#1)/(Range of CamBrand#2) {Use cams of similar size}
>
> or, for the above example: (Camalot .5)/(WC #1)=(.52)/(.39)=1.333 or
> Camalot .5 has a 33% wider range than the WC Friend #1.
Whoa there, Jratus. Though the previous computation may seem
convoluted, I detect a distinct bias in your method of calculating
overlap: You chose to compare absolute expansion ranges for units of
about the same smallest (most compressed) size - the WC unit you
picked is actually smaller than the BD - exaggerating the computed
percentage difference between units.
The way I see it, BD has just 10% greater range than WC at Camalot
size 0.5. Here's why:
Recall:
: CO. | Size | Range (in) | OVRLAP | STR | WGT | ForgedWC
: BD 0.5 0.78 1.30 61% 12kN 119g
:
: WC 1.0 0.75 1.14 71% 14kN 100g 89 gm
: 1.25 0.82 1.29 82% 14kN 103g 94 gm
Now see what happens when we compare units with about the same largest
size:
(Camalot .5)/(WC #1.25)=(.52)/(.47)=1.11
The Camalot appears to have an 11% wider expansion range than WC
Friend 1.25, the only Friend whose expansion range lies wholly within
the range of Camalot 1.
However, I don't think even this is a completely fair comparison. I
believe you need to compare units with the same largest size. If we
scale up the Friend by a factor of (1.30/1.29) to create a theoretical
friend (call it 1.26) whose large size equals that of Camalot 0.5, the
Camalot's advantage becomes 10% (alternatively, WC's disadvantage is
9%).
Ken
Kelly Rich
>... If we
>scale up the Friend by a factor of (1.30/1.29) to create a theoretical
>friend (call it 1.26) whose large size equals that of Camalot 0.5, the
>Camalot's advantage becomes 10% (alternatively, WC's disadvantage is
>9%).
>
>Ken
I was hoping to get some more "wierd fun" out of those numbers.
And this is defintely getting wierd.
:- k
PS. What's even more wierd is that this is beginning to make sense.
x15...@my-deja.com
wire for a friend compared to........geez louise, I have lost count.
Which is why I don't but camelots anymore! Camelot triggers break too
often and increase the cost of owning them. One can fix them with
shrink wrap and do all that neat stuff, but time is money and at an ok
salary of $35hr the price of the camelot gets even higher. BD stands
for Breaks Down.
> > Size Range Weight Cost Cost/inch g/inch
> > 3.5 Friend 1.22" 168g 49 40 138
> > 3 Camalot 1.44" 240g 67.5 46 166
> >
> > The BD cames are a 15% increase in cost and a 20% increase in
weight per
> > inch!
> >
> > You guy's have been sitting in the office too long.
>
> No no no Ben, you have it all wrong! You really do get what you pay
for:
> Camalots are cheaper, so long as you pay by weight;)
> Size Range Weight Cost Cost/inch g/inch cost/g
> 3.5 Friend 1.22" 168g 49 40 138 0.290
> 3 Camalot 1.44" 240g 67.5 46 166 0.277
>
> cost of friends by buying camalots;)
Keith Hoffman
1. The question is probably from a beginner who probably has little to spend.
You won't go wrong with either, but if you only have money for $150-$200 worth of
cams, you will get a better range out of the BD. Period. Some of those size
ranges discussed have .2" on both end. Definitely true for the 1&2 camalot.
2. The "I'm going to carry lots of cams anyways" is most relevant to a
long-time climber who has built up a large rack and indian creek climbers. Don't
most of us reach for the stoppers first if possible?
3. What is this business about .25" inches not being a big difference. That
can be a really big difference.
4. Aliens are my new pet rock pro. The yellow (3/4) and red (1) are
especially nice.
5. Mixed racks: many of us carry multiple brands. But when you are starting
out, you are better off with three cams in a row of one brand, just as you are
better off with a mostly full set of BD or WC nuts, rather than alternating
brands with each size increase.
6. Funny. No one has mentioned the buy U.S. factor here. BD is a US brand
with commitments to climbing access and conservation. WC is on the other side of
the pond.
--
Keith Hoffman
keithho...@foxinternet.net
Ben Craft
> 3. What is this business about .25" inches not being a big difference. That
> can be a really big difference.
hmmmmm. 1/4 is not.
> 6. Funny. No one has mentioned the buy U.S. factor here. BD is a US brand
> with commitments to climbing access and conservation. WC is on the other side of
> the pond.
You think BD is all american.... Guees what. It is not.
Ken....@alumni.cs.cmu.edu
> My two cents:
>
> 6. Funny. No one has mentioned the buy U.S. factor here. BD is a
> US brand with commitments to climbing access and conservation. WC
> is on the other side of the pond.
I wouldn't go around dissin' Wild Country's commitment to access. For
one thing, the head of Wild Country, USA, Bill Supple, was president
of the Access Fund until his retirement this April. This is a major
contribution to to the cause. Also, the head of Wild Country (UK) was
a big supporter of access, conservation and the environment (I don't
what's happened across the pond since the takeover). Finally, despite
the fact that WC isn't earning as much as BD, they are still a major
sponsor of the Access Fund.
Of course, Black Diamond has shown they care - Big Time. Both of
these companies (and others) are worthy of your support for the
quality of their gear and their concern for our sport.
Cheers!
Ken Cline
Access Fund board member.
rata...@zdnetmail.com
Actually I just took the sample from the previous poster, without really
analyzing it's bias. But, yes, your analysis is 'more correct', though
'more corrector still' would be to normalize on the center of the range.
But then, range measurements are very difficult to take in the first
place, though they did come from my colleagues at BD, so I guess I'm
obliged to accept them.
Maybe the expansion range should be stated as a percentage
(largest)/(smallest) and then would be independent of absolute size. (
see *** below ):
--
On 08 Jun 1999 11:45:22 -060 Ken.Cline wrote:
>The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
>that has been posted to rec.climbing as well.
>
>rata...@zdnetmail.com writes:
>
>> > Divide midpoint of the size by the advantage in inches:
>> > .13"/1.025" = 0.12682
>> >
>> > I think this means you get about a 12.7% increase in
>> > range for the BD at this range.
>>
>> That seems a really convoluted way of comparing ranges. How about
just:
>>
>> (Range of CamBrand#1)/(Range of CamBrand#2) {Use cams of similar
size}
>>
>> or, for the above example: (Camalot .5)/(WC #1)=(.52)/(.39)=1.333 or
>> Camalot .5 has a 33% wider range than the WC Friend #1.
>
>Whoa there, Jratus. Though the previous computation may seem
convoluted, I detect a distinct bias in your method of calculating
overlap: You chose to compare absolute expansion ranges for units of
about the same smallest (most compressed) size - the WC unit you picked
is actually smaller than the BD - exaggerating the computed percentage
difference between units.
>
>The way I see it, BD has just 10% greater range than WC at Camalot size
0.5. Here's why:
>
>Recall:
>
>: CO. | Size | Range (in) | OVRLAP | STR | WGT | ForgedWC
>: BD 0.5 0.78 1.30 61% 12kN 119g
>:
>: WC 1.0 0.75 1.14 71% 14kN 100g 89 gm
>: 1.25 0.82 1.29 82% 14kN 103g 94 gm
>
*** My new claimed "more better calculation":
BD .5: 1.3/.78 = 1.67
WC 1: 1.14/.75 = 1.52
WC 1.25?: 1.29/.82 = 1.57
So comparing the WC 1 to the BD .5 you can say either of many things,
depending on how you want to bias it:
BD expansion is 167%, WC is 152%, thats 15% larger.
BD expansion is 167%, WC is 152%, thats only 9.6% bigger ( 167/152 )
BD expansion is 67%, WC is 52%, thats 29% larger.
Looks like an exercise in lying with statistics to me.
What do these numbers mean? Whatever you want them to mean. The real
question is: how useful is the somewhat greater expansion range of
Camalots vs. WC - how does it work for you? Many climbers have tried
both brands. Many have chosen one way, many the other. Conclusion:
they're both good units, with their good points and bad points (that's
probably why you started this discussion in the first place).
Jratus.
*** Back to Ken's analysis:
>Now see what happens when we compare units with about the same largest
size:
>
> (Camalot .5)/(WC #1.25)=(.52)/(.47)=1.11
>
>The Camalot appears to have an 11% wider expansion range than WC Friend
1.25, the only Friend whose expansion range lies wholly within the range
of Camalot 1.
>
>However, I don't think even this is a completely fair comparison. I
believe you need to compare units with the same largest size. If we
scale up the Friend by a factor of (1.30/1.29) to create a theoretical
friend (call it 1.26) whose large size equals that of Camalot 0.5, the
Camalot's advantage becomes 10% (alternatively, WC's disadvantage is
>9%).
>
>Ken
Stefan Axelsson
<Ken....@alumni.cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
>Keith Hoffman <keithho...@foxinternet.net> writes:
>Of course, Black Diamond has shown they care - Big Time. Both of
>these companies (and others) are worthy of your support for the
>quality of their gear and their concern for our sport.
Hear, hear!
x15...@my-deja.com
Keith Hoffman <keithho...@foxinternet.net> wrote:
> 2. The "I'm going to carry lots of cams anyways" is most relevant
to a
> long-time climber who has built up a large rack and indian creek
climbers. Don't
> most of us reach for the stoppers first if possible?
Sure, at Indian Creek I will have plenty of cams to cam. But it is a
good idea to not take too long of a fall at Indian Creek. Most of the
time however, I will try not to over-load with extra weight.
Steve Gray
>6. Funny. No one has mentioned the buy U.S. factor here. BD is a US brand
>with commitments to climbing access and conservation. WC is on the other side
>of
>the pond.
This isn't us.rec.climbing, you, you, you.... merkin !
I'm never going to buy Black Diamond again. Thanks for opening my eyes,
Keith.
(Chris/Tom - joking, don't panic ;)
--
Steve Gray
Remove XXX to email me.
Steve Gray
Spiral Climbing Company <cl...@advanix.net> said...
>Sorry, but there are no such thing as "cheap Friends".
You're the first person in this thread to use the term.
T.P. wrote:
>
> I have been using some very cheap friends
Note the lower case. The word "friend" is in use among climbers as a
generic term for what *you* call cams.
jcor...@my-deja.com
Ben Craft <bcr...@rigel.oac.uci.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jun 1999, Keith Hoffman wrote:
> > 3. What is this business about .25" inches not being a big difference. That
> > can be a really big difference.
>
> hmmmmm. 1/4 is not.
> > with commitments to climbing access and conservation. WC is on the other side of
> > the pond.
>
>
>
I have been to BD's facility in Salt Lake City and took a tour. The camalots
are all hand assembled there, the only thing they do not do there is the
anodizing.
Been there, took the tour and bought the T-shirt.
Jim Cormier
Cormier Mountaineering
Keith Hoffman
> Keith Hoffman <keithho...@foxinternet.net> said...
>
> >6. Funny. No one has mentioned the buy U.S. factor here. BD is a US brand
> >with commitments to climbing access and conservation. WC is on the other side
> >of
> >the pond.
>
> This isn't us.rec.climbing, you, you, you.... merkin !
>
> I'm never going to buy Black Diamond again. Thanks for opening my eyes,
> Keith.
>
> (Chris/Tom - joking, don't panic ;)
>
> --
> Steve Gray
> Remove XXX to email me.
Hmm. Good point, Steve. Being the typical ugly american and assuming everyone I'm
talking to is a Yank. My apologies to the int'l crowd.
--
Keith Hoffman
206-764-9366
keithho...@foxinternet.net