So is the cam angle for the Master Cams at an angle that doesn't push into the rock as well for holding the cam into the rock? Or for minimizing stress in the rock or stability of the cam? Here's an interesting site I found about cam angles and forces:
That's a lotta numbers!
One good thing to mention as well is the jargon often attached to crack-size when looking over a topo- eg. tips, fingers, ringlocks, thin hands, hands, cupped hands, fists, OW+ - and their associated cam pro.
Because I like BD cams, this is what I know:
Blue/Grey (camalot color): Painful tips/tips
Purple: Fingers
Green: Ringlocks
Red: Thin Hands (painful feet)
Gold: Perfect Hands
Blue: Cupped (read: burly) Hands
Grey: Fists to OW
Purple/Green: What are you dragging me up!?!?!
Nice observations there. I'll be getting more BD cams as I expand my rack in the smaller range, so it is nice to have some schema by which to get familiar with my gear.
That was one of the surprises I noticed from graphing the data. It also seems to apply with body mechanics and how our fingers, hands, and arms increase our size range for crack climbing.
How much more time you could have spent climbing cracks and figuring this out experientially rather than sitting inside with a tape measure and spreadsheet or whatever. Mark, if you really don't have any idea what someone is talking about when they say you need a #3, for God's sake spend a week at Index or the Creek.
"How much more time you could have spent climbing cracks and figuring this out experientially rather than sitting inside with a tape measure and spreadsheet or whatever. "
I made these graphs over the one weekend since October that I couldn't get out climbing on account of the weather/partners. I do things like this when I get bored.
"if you really don't have any idea what someone is talking about when they say you need a #3"
I'm a very visual person, so with my leading so far I'm just used to eyeballing the crack and then eyeballing the pro. I've been gradually been learning on sight what cams fit what sizes, but I'm slow to connect the actual model # to the size since I'm not really a numbers & details sort of person. This seemed like a good way to cut through that.
". . . for God's sake spend a week at Index or the Creek."
Boy I would love to, but I haven't had the opportunity. But yes, placing several cams of the same size in a row while jamming the same crack would be the ideal way to really get a feel for body sizes vs. cam size.
The usable range vs advertised range breakdown is really interesting -- I hadn't thought of measuring that before.
I've geeked out in a similar way to compare my Metolius and BD cams, with similar conclusions.
And even though placements matter more than rated strength in almost all cases, it's interesting to look at weight vs rated strength: my passive pro maxes out at 10.5 kN, but gets there at a much lower weight than cams.
Another question I have since I've got some old BD Camalots:
Did BD change some of their cam ranges over the year?
I have an old #4 (that friends hate seeing me pull out), and it seems to be larger than the 'new' #4, wasn't there a #3.5 too?
I traced the Excel graphs in Photoshop to make them more presentable, but the data should all be in here.
BD has changed their cam sizes over the years, so there are no longer any half-sizes and the actual size ranges varies between the current Camalots and the older ones.
Great article, awesome graphics as usual. I recently was deciding which size of C3 to buy, and one thing led to another, and I created the following 2 tables. Thought they would be a nice addition to your article:
Nice! I'm making a 'rack' part of my data-driven website for storing all of this (and more) and I was planning on regenerating my images dynamically with that data later, among many other uses for having such data accessible from a database with coding skills. I'll add yours to the database and when I render it on my website, I'll let you know (and add links from here).
PellucidWombat - Jan 25, 2011 6:17 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: Very niceJust sneaking a little in here and there.
So is the cam angle for the Master Cams at an angle that doesn't push into the rock as well for holding the cam into the rock? Or for minimizing stress in the rock or stability of the cam? Here's an interesting site I found about cam angles and forces:
The Cam Research Site
SKI - Jan 31, 2011 9:05 am - Voted 10/10
Comprehensive!That's a lotta numbers!
One good thing to mention as well is the jargon often attached to crack-size when looking over a topo- eg. tips, fingers, ringlocks, thin hands, hands, cupped hands, fists, OW+ - and their associated cam pro.
Because I like BD cams, this is what I know:
Blue/Grey (camalot color): Painful tips/tips
Purple: Fingers
Green: Ringlocks
Red: Thin Hands (painful feet)
Gold: Perfect Hands
Blue: Cupped (read: burly) Hands
Grey: Fists to OW
Purple/Green: What are you dragging me up!?!?!
Great article, thanks for posting.
PellucidWombat - Jan 31, 2011 3:06 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: Comprehensive!Nice observations there. I'll be getting more BD cams as I expand my rack in the smaller range, so it is nice to have some schema by which to get familiar with my gear.
PellucidWombat - Jan 31, 2011 3:08 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: It's worth noting....That was one of the surprises I noticed from graphing the data. It also seems to apply with body mechanics and how our fingers, hands, and arms increase our size range for crack climbing.
MichaelJ - Feb 1, 2011 1:07 am - Hasn't voted
Got to wonderHow much more time you could have spent climbing cracks and figuring this out experientially rather than sitting inside with a tape measure and spreadsheet or whatever. Mark, if you really don't have any idea what someone is talking about when they say you need a #3, for God's sake spend a week at Index or the Creek.
PellucidWombat - Feb 1, 2011 1:22 am - Hasn't voted
Re: Got to wonder"How much more time you could have spent climbing cracks and figuring this out experientially rather than sitting inside with a tape measure and spreadsheet or whatever. "
I made these graphs over the one weekend since October that I couldn't get out climbing on account of the weather/partners. I do things like this when I get bored.
"if you really don't have any idea what someone is talking about when they say you need a #3"
I'm a very visual person, so with my leading so far I'm just used to eyeballing the crack and then eyeballing the pro. I've been gradually been learning on sight what cams fit what sizes, but I'm slow to connect the actual model # to the size since I'm not really a numbers & details sort of person. This seemed like a good way to cut through that.
". . . for God's sake spend a week at Index or the Creek."
Boy I would love to, but I haven't had the opportunity. But yes, placing several cams of the same size in a row while jamming the same crack would be the ideal way to really get a feel for body sizes vs. cam size.
Danf - Feb 2, 2011 9:49 am - Hasn't voted
Nice work!The usable range vs advertised range breakdown is really interesting -- I hadn't thought of measuring that before.
I've geeked out in a similar way to compare my Metolius and BD cams, with similar conclusions.
And even though placements matter more than rated strength in almost all cases, it's interesting to look at weight vs rated strength: my passive pro maxes out at 10.5 kN, but gets there at a much lower weight than cams.
Luc - Feb 14, 2011 1:13 pm - Voted 10/10
Wow, nice work!Any chance to download your Excel file?
Another question I have since I've got some old BD Camalots:
Did BD change some of their cam ranges over the year?
I have an old #4 (that friends hate seeing me pull out), and it seems to be larger than the 'new' #4, wasn't there a #3.5 too?
I'll try to find an old catalog somewhere...
PellucidWombat - Feb 14, 2011 8:31 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: Wow, nice work!Hey Luc,
You should be able to download the Excel file from this link:
https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B2cQbm09AyrwMWI0Zjc0NTUtMWU4OC00NGZiLTlhZDItOTdkOTFkNDNkOGJl&hl=en
I traced the Excel graphs in Photoshop to make them more presentable, but the data should all be in here.
BD has changed their cam sizes over the years, so there are no longer any half-sizes and the actual size ranges varies between the current Camalots and the older ones.
Luc - Nov 1, 2011 12:14 pm - Voted 10/10
Re: Wow, nice work!I'm still using some of the data in those tables, added binners and weights of all my gear.
Good way to find how to loose weight.
DukeJH - Feb 14, 2011 3:16 pm - Voted 10/10
Excellent!I'm looking into building my rack and some of your insights are most welcome.
StephAbegg - Apr 5, 2018 7:43 pm - Hasn't voted
A couple more imagesGreat article, awesome graphics as usual. I recently was deciding which size of C3 to buy, and one thing led to another, and I created the following 2 tables. Thought they would be a nice addition to your article:
PellucidWombat - Apr 5, 2018 8:16 pm - Hasn't voted
Re: A couple more imagesNice! I'm making a 'rack' part of my data-driven website for storing all of this (and more) and I was planning on regenerating my images dynamically with that data later, among many other uses for having such data accessible from a database with coding skills. I'll add yours to the database and when I render it on my website, I'll let you know (and add links from here).