Officially sold on Totem Cams

The hangboard tests and suggest what many users have suspected but not quantified: Totems hold better than other cams, especially when the rock is slippery or in other ways not ideal. But how much better is not clear in general, and there will be slick placements where nothing works. Other advantages are that their narrow heads fit where nothing else does, their flexibility combined with a little play at the head means the walk less than other brands, and the compound shape of the cams with the flattened top region make them the hardest of all units to overcam. They work in flares that won't take a C4 (but again how much more flared is unclear and may not be significant), and---marginally---in placements so shallow that only two cams can be loaded. For those trying to move fast or needing to cheat, the sling arrangement admits one's entire hand, making them the best French-free cam there is.

The well-known downsides are the bulk of the sling harness and the clumsier handling, which is partially because of all the sling loops at the base and partially because the distance from the thumb catch to the trigger bar is greater than in other brands---you have to open your hand up wider to grasp them for placement. Whether this is intrinsically unnatural, or simply feels clumsy because other gear has trained us to use a more compact grasp I do not know.

I thought they would wear out a lot faster than C4's, and still doubt that they will have the C4's longevity, but they take abuse quite a bit better than I thought they would, including the worst-case scenario of falls on horizontal placements.

Some of the upsides might not matter much, depending on rock type. If you climb in an area with relatively uniform cracks, the narrow heads are of no special interest. And the additional outward force provided by their design might not be a good thing for placements in softer rock.

bearbreeder wrote:now in a sideways flare does one clip the main loop, or the one nearest the load (such as when loading on 2 lobes) ?

I would definitely clip it as normal. Otherwise it will not be full strength and not engage the outer lobes.

rgold wrote:their flexibility combined with a little play at the head means the walk less than other brands, and the compound shape of the cams with the flattened top region make them the hardest of all units to overcam.

This is one of the biggest advantages for me. Totems are really great for those times where you're pumped and scared and you shove in the largest cam you can get and slap on a quickdraw when you should be using an alpine draw. Embarrassingly enough, I have done this several times. The totem never walked out of its placement and never got stuck. The low camming angle does worry me sometimes, though, as I tend to climb soft sandstone and I have a healthy affinity for choss.

Ted Pinson wrote: The only ones I've noticed a big difference on are BD C3s...the action on those is ridiculously stiff. I feel like I'm squeezing a stress ball when I place them, lol.

I remember that being a gripe on them. They do seem a little stiffer just playing with them, true, but I never notice it when I'm climbing. C3s + an alien of some breed makes me happy in those ranges. I'd love to try the Totems but just haven't gotten around to it yet.

Orange and Black finally available

Orange Totem v Gold Dragon

Black Totem v Blue CCH Alien

What store has the new ones?

Is the new orange pretty floppy or is it still stiff enough to not be annoying?

woah... black and orange totems.. that's news to me.

Trevor. wrote:Is the new orange pretty floppy or is it still stiff enough to not be annoying?

Orange is not too floppy. Feels about the same as the red.

Mountaingear.com had orange and black in stock in April and I picked up one of each, but I think they sold out very quickly.

Aid climbing Moonlight Buttress and The Titan sold me on Totems. I still haven't bought any, but my climbing partner had them and when nothing else would work in those crappy flaring pods (we had C4s, Master cams, offset Master Cams, DMM Dragons) the Totems would almost always work. *Note, some of the placements were so bad that only Tricams would work and even then, just barely. I absolutely plan on buying a set of them soon. I'm told they are just the ticket in Yosemite as well.

duncan... wrote:Orange and Black finally available Orange Totem v Gold Dragon Black Totem v Blue CCH Alien

Available WHERE?!!

I also work at a gear shop and I just performed this test on BD and DMM. Same cams, same hang board.
I highly recommend that you perform this test yourself just to see how the gear functions.
Both the BD .5 and the DMM dragon 2 size 1 held spectacularly. I'd whip on that plastic all day long.

Not sure what the difference was in that video, but the gear I tried felt great....

Maybe next we should try the armpit of a beached whale. Surely the relative performance of cams in any situation translates to another.

Ball wrote:Maybe next we should try the armpit of a beached whale. Surely the relative performance of cams in any situation translates to another. Also, I'm a douchebag.

"So your cams hold in a marginal, low friction placement when others won't huh? So what! Marginal low friction placements don't exist in nature. "

-ballsack

Don Ferris wrote: "So your cams hold in a marginal, low friction placement when others won't huh? So what! Marginal low friction placements don't exist in nature. " -ballsack

No, plastic placements "don't exist in nature".

Cams lobes are designed to interface with rock, not plastic. Rock is harder than the aluminium on the cam lobes, and so the rock bites into them.

If cam lobes were designed to work well in plastic, they would probably be knurled like the grip of a handgun in order to bite into the softer plastic. Conversely, if they were knurled, then they wouldn't work worth a crap on rock since the knurling can't bite into the harder rock, and the rock would instead shear (grind) off the knurling.

The point is that plugging a cam into a hangboard is a flawed test. As others have mentioned... If indeed Totems really do hold better in plastic, it is probably has more to do with the lack of annodization, or the numerous grooves/teeth cut into them compared to other cams.

If totems worked will in polished calcite I'd be impressed. You might have to cover them with chewed bubblegum first.

Ball wrote:If totems worked will in polished calcite I'd be impressed. You might have to cover them with chewed bubblegum first.

Heading to Castleton soon. I'll see if I can find a placement for one just to see how it does. Curious.

cyclestupor wrote: No, plastic placements "don't exist in nature". Cams lobes are designed to interface with rock, not plastic. Rock is harder than the aluminium on the cam lobes, and so the rock bites into them. If cam lobes were designed to work well in plastic, they would probably be knurled like the grip of a handgun in order to bite into the softer plastic. Conversely, if they were knurled, then they wouldn't work worth a crap on rock since the knurling can't bite into the harder rock, and the rock would instead shear (grind) off the knurling. The point is that plugging a cam into a hangboard is a flawed test. As others have mentioned... If indeed Totems really do hold better in plastic, it is probably has more to do with the lack of annodization, or the numerous grooves/teeth cut into them compared to other cams.

I don't think this makes any sense. An absolutely wrong part has to do with knurling, since Totem cams have (linearly) knurled lobes and work as well and by many accounts better than other cams on rock while also doing better in plastic.

Although "bite" plays an unspecified and I think poorly-understood role in cam performance, it is not the main feature of cam design. The calculation of appropriate cam angles for climbing loads depend on (questionable, to be sure) values for the aluminum-granite coefficient of friction. Whatever is involved in actual cam performance, cams are designed on the basis of pure frictional considerations. If a cam pops out of a plastic placement, it is mostly about the fact that the outward force exerted on the crack walls by the lobes does not result in enough frictional force to balance the load. Apparently, in some cases, Totem cams exert enough force and some other cams don't. That is evidence that Totems will also hold in other low-friction situations in real rock.

If "bite" was really the primary concern, then cam lobes would all be smooth. But designers seem to think that providing "teeth" of some sort (the most extreme example being the new DMM cams) provides opportunities for the cam to "hang up" on rock rugosities, meaning that "bite" is not even the most important secondary consideration.

By the way, you can go for more "bite", as the CCH Aliens did, by using softer lobes. But then the shear yield failure threshold is lower, so you might end up with a reduced maximum load value, even though the pieces might function a little better as aid pieces.

Bottom line: the fact that Totems hold in slippery surfaces that other cams don't hold in is significant.

Ball wrote:If totems worked will in polished calcite I'd be impressed. You might have to cover them with chewed bubblegum first.

Was up on Castleton this weekend and had great luck with the totems on Kors Ingalls and North Chimney. They certainly feel more solid than aliens or camalots in the rock and possibly most importantly you can stick them next to a fixed cam deep in a calcite crack and they won't walk in, which makes placing pro so much easier. Still wouldn't place them in a major flare on slippery rock.

rgold wrote: I don't think this makes any sense. An absolutely wrong part has to do with knurling, since Totem cams have (linearly) knurled lobes and work as well and by many accounts better than other cams on rock while also doing better in plastic. Although "bite" plays an unspecified and I think poorly-understood role in cam performance, it is not the main feature of cam design. The calculation of appropriate cam angles for climbing loads depend on (questionable, to be sure) values for the aluminum-granite coefficient of friction. Whatever is involved in actual cam performance, cams are designed on the basis of pure frictional considerations. If a cam pops out of a plastic placement, it is mostly about the fact that the outward force exerted on the crack walls by the lobes does not result in enough frictional force to balance the load. Apparently, in some cases, Totem cams exert enough force and some other cams don't. That is evidence that Totems will also hold in other low-friction situations in real rock. If "bite" was really the primary concern, then cam lobes would all be smooth. But designers seem to think that providing "teeth" of some sort (the most extreme example being the new DMM cams) provides opportunities for the cam to "hang up" on rock rugosities, meaning that "bite" is not even the most important secondary consideration. By the way, you can go for more "bite", as the CCH Aliens did, by using softer lobes. But then the shear yield failure threshold is lower, so you might end up with a reduced maximum load value, even though the pieces might function a little better as aid pieces. Bottom line: the fact that Totems hold in slippery surfaces that other cams don't hold in is significant.

Yes, Totem cams have linear knurling. I was specifically referring to the diamond pattern knurling found on handgun frips. But, perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned anything about knurling at all. I was simply trying to illustrate the difference in the interface between a cam/rock vs. cam/plastic. They are completely different situations. It is conceivable that a cam which holds great on plastic may fail miserably in rock and vice versa. Plastic is simply not a good analog of hard rock, soft rock, slick rock, alternative rock, punk rock, pop rock.

I agree with you that teeth do indeed improve the grip of a cam, but it is also well known that a smooth toothless cam will hold in most cases. So while teeth do play a role i believe that "bite" plays just as significant of a role if not more. We are also seeing manufacturers removing annodization from their cams to improve bite (aluminum oxide is very hard, so rock can't bite into it so easily).

While I do believe that Totem cams will hold in situations that other cams won't, I don't take the OPs video as proof of that. It is an interesting video, and I'm not trying to flame the OP for posting it. But take it with a grain of salt. Don't spend the extra money on Totems because of this video. Spend it because of these instead...

andy-kirkpatrick.com/blog/v…
mountainproject.com/v/totem…
totem.totemmt.netdna-cdn.co…
youtube.com/watch?v=qIAZ4DF…