Cassin Blade Runner Crampon Fit

I have the Blade Runners and La Sportiva Nepals and Baturas. I originally had trouble with the fit as well, and it took me about an hour of dinking around to make it work. I ended up adjusting the crampon to be one hole smaller than what was intuitive, and then adjusting the heel lock screw to make it fit. They now fit perfectly.

(For reference, my boot is 42.5 and is on notch #2.)

No trimming required!!

Here's the heel to cramping fit.

I know you all have been waiting for the latest installment in the wankeroo picture series "new crampons on boots" and it is my pleasure to present my latest variation:
The fit seems solid enough now, even if there still is space between the side of the lug and bail.

The heel is not completely flush but seems solid enough. Worse if the heel bail is moved to the rearmost holes actually.
The heel "edge" is not engaged, but otherwise seems to be cash. The heel seems decently aligned with the end of the boot too..

Seems to fill more of the heel compared to Chris & Tyler above- does it look like the #1 would be a better fit? These boots probably wont last forever and it would be nice to not replace the crampons when the boots die (probably looking at 44-44,5 sportivas next time)

Have you tried playing with the knob in the heel lever to tighten them up a bit! It looks like there is too much space between the heel and the surface of the crampon.

Chris Ccc wrote:Have you tried playing with the knob in the heel lever to tighten them up a bit! It looks like there is too much space between the heel and the surface of the crampon.

Yup- but thanks. They are quite tight ( a good snap to close). seems to be the angle of the heelpiece + the rocker/wear on the boot sole makes the contact patch mostly the front half of the heel.
Seems solid otherwise, flexes flat no problem when weighted..

I tried the heel bail in the rearmost hole to get a more downward pull on the heel bail, but it actually looked worse. And less forward pressure on the entire boot felt less bomber overall.

All thoughs welcome though, thanks all

Henrik, my advice is to move the front bail back one hole, then move the rear bail back, and then adjust the bail screw down.

Edit: you may also need to adjust the bar.

Thanks, That would be close to the config they came in out of the box:
Isnt that platform with the frontpoint attachment a bit too long here?

Also gave the slightly assymetric first hole outside, second inside a try:




Still not loving the width of the front bail.


I figure either its hammertime or i need to exchange them for a different crampon?

I would go back and try the smaller Bladerunner at the store. Especially if you can exchange them.

You don't want the secondaries protruding that much. They will make it much harder to climb.

Chris Ccc wrote:You don't want the secondaries protruding that much. They will make it much harder to climb.

Why do you think that? How do they make it harder to climb?

It seems to me that they provide a lot more range of mobility around features since the boot is more removed from contacting the wall.

Also Henrik, I agree with Tyler, the smaller size may be right for you, but that looks pretty good if you have to settle with these.

George W wrote: Why do you think that? How do they make it harder to climb? It seems to me that they provide a lot more range of mobility around features since the boot is more removed from contacting the wall. Also Henrik, I agree with Tyler, the smaller size may be right for you, but that looks pretty good if you have to settle with these.

I tested them on hard cold (-30c) vertical water ice on a few different settings. On ice like that, you don't need much placement depth to get good purchase, and having them protrude just creates more leverage on the feet and calves. The tendency is then to try to kick harder to get the secondaries in, which then is more tiring and more likely to shatter the ice. This is especially obvious when you are using your tool holes for your front points. On ice like that, realistically you don't even really need secondary points for the most part.

On softer or more stepped out ice the secondary points are very nice. But I felt that the BR secondary points are long enough without the frame protruding to get the job done very comfortably. Anything softer or more stepped out than that, you should just bolt on the horizontal points.

But hey, that's just me. I encourage people to try out all the settings they feel reasonably safe with. That's the beauty of these adjustable crampons. For the OP, he probably shouldn't lock himself into using them if they only fit with the prodtruding frame though. That totally negates the benefit of buying adjustable crampons.

Henrik H wrote:Thanks, That would be close to the config they came in out of the box: Isnt that platform with the frontpoint attachment a bit too long here? Also gave the slightly assymetric first hole outside, second inside a try: Still not loving the width of the front bail. I figure either its hammertime or i need to exchange them for a different crampon?

You wouldn't happen to be near North Conway NH? I would be happy to set them up for you. Reading this thread is giving me a headache

Chris Ccc wrote: I tested them on hard cold (-30c) vertical water ice on a few different settings. On ice like that, you don't need much placement depth to get good purchase, and having them protrude just creates more leverage on the feet and calves. The tendency is then to try to kick harder to get the secondaries in, which then is more tiring and more likely to shatter the ice. This is especially obvious when you are using your tool holes for your front points. On ice like that, realistically you don't even really need secondary points for the most part. On softer or more stepped out ice the secondary points are very nice. But I felt that the BR secondary points are long enough without the frame protruding to get the job done very comfortably. Anything softer or more stepped out than that, you should just bolt on the horizontal points. But hey, that's just me. I encourage people to try out all the settings they feel reasonably safe with. That's the beauty of these adjustable crampons. For the OP, he probably shouldn't lock himself into using them if they only fit with the prodtruding frame though. That totally negates the benefit of buying adjustable crampons.

Thanks for an explanation, Chris, you seem to know what you're talking about. I'll have to experiment next time I'm in very cold ice and see if I can feel a difference. I climbed a few days at Hyalite with the Bladerunners this past December and found happiness with the boot set back similar to Henrik's photo on very cold mornings at -20ºF over a variety of different formations whether they were picked or clean, brittle or plastic. It just makes sense to me that the boot is set as close as possible to the frame edge so they would strike at the same time (not that we want them to), thus maximizing potential for contact points out front, while also not being too far back.

I was initially motivated to set them like that because of Will Gadd's encouragement in some of his posts to keep the boot back and the front points out. He claims it to be a major mistake that a lot of climbers make. Ultimately, I can only say that these crampons are an incredible upgrade to the Sarkens I replaced.

Bill Kirby wrote: You wouldn't happen to be near North Conway NH? I would be happy to set them up for you. Reading this thread is giving me a headache

Ha, sorry no. the pictures and nagging are stopping now. (unless they shrink to fit overnight)
Thanks all, i can try the smaller size( but got these at a steal so i have to pony up $50 more for a pair of cyborgs or almost $100 for the size 1s. ) Since the smaller size has the same front piece the heel might improve a little but to me the front bail is where I see biggest issue.

On the fence about just doing some percussive tailoring and just rocking the rubber fronts if it goes bad. No ice nearby == overanalyzis.

Re: bail placement i havent kicked anything with these yet, but having the toe flush with the front of the front point "platform" looks about right for front point length, and the proper secondary points just ahead of the boot toe. I was unsure about the pseudo(?)secondary points

General blade runner thread is good for posterity, no?

George W wrote: Thanks for an explanation, Chris, you seem to know what you're talking about. I'll have to experiment next time I'm in very cold ice and see if I can feel a difference. I climbed a few days at Hyalite with the Bladerunners this past December and found happiness with the boot set back similar to Henrik's photo on very cold mornings at -20ºF over a variety of different formations whether they were picked or clean, brittle or plastic. It just makes sense to me that the boot is set as close as possible to the frame edge so they would strike at the same time (not that we want them to), thus maximizing potential for contact points out front, while also not being too far back. I was initially motivated to set them like that because of Will Gadd's encouragement in some of his posts to keep the boot back and the front points out. He claims it to be a major mistake that a lot of climbers make. Ultimately, I can only say that these crampons are an incredible upgrade to the Sarkens I replaced.

It could see that crampons with really tiny secondary points, say like the Stingers, needing to bet set forward a bit more. I wonder if Cassin tried to make their users' lives more straightforward by elongating the secondary points, but accidentally created a lot of confusion instead.

I've never tried putting them on the blade runners so I don't know how they'll fit but Black Diamond makes three different sizes of toe bails. You might be able to try the BD narrow toe bails, they're ~$10.

It looks like the OP needs to try the smaller version of the crampon. The length of the crompon's heel seems longer than the boot's heel.

Chris C. wrote: I have the Blade Runners and La Sportiva Nepals and Baturas. I originally had trouble with the fit as well, and it took me about an hour of dinking around to make it work. I ended up adjusting the crampon to be one hole smaller than what was intuitive, and then adjusting the heel lock screw to make it fit. They now fit perfectly. (For reference, my boot is 42.5 and is on notch #2.) No trimming required!

I plan to have the exact same setup as you with the 42.5 Nepal Cubes and the blade runners. Do you have the size 1 Bladerunners?

For the guys concerned with the stock toe bail fitment- here are some pics with the narrow BD bails. I'm the furthest thing from an expert, from it seems like an excellent fit on my Phantom Guides. This is the bigger size crampon on a 48 boot.

Since I'm in the front holes and still have pretty long secondary points, this may not work for some. They would definitely be too far forward if I went back a hole.

The overall width of the bails is a bit less than the Cassins, so they're a bear to get on. Also, the BD bails have very wide paddles on the ends that will not fit through the Blade Runners without modification. Hand-filing would've taken an eternity, but a Dremel makes quick work of narrowing them down.

Best part is that the bails are only $10 a pair.

edit: looking at some comments above, maybe these are still too far forward? Should the little platform with the primary point be completely covered by the sole?

Even though I'm out of holes, I can still probably move these back a hair by relaxing the bends in the side of the bail a bit.