Kalquin Cam

Jim Titt et al interested in your take on this new design. I have no affiliation whatsoever of course, just curious.

http://yosemiteclimbing.es/material-escalada/kalquin/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-L9FUhNNCo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=qOc_Tt96aEQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhlrkxYErLU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6D0F1wXUm8E

http://kalquin.com/

They look great for climbs where the only pro is a polished steel crack.

Looks like a lot of extra weight to protect against walking. And what about shallow placements?

The camming angle is chosen based off the coefficient of friction between aluminum and rock, not aluminum and smooth steel.  This doesn't show anything useful.  

kalockwood wrote:

The camming angle is chosen based off the coefficient of friction between aluminum and rock, not aluminum and smooth steel.  This doesn't show anything useful.  

I'd ask you to think about the rest of the vids a little deeper?

King Tut wrote:

Jim Titt et al interested in your take on this new design. I have no affiliation whatsoever of course, just curious.

I did a bit with cams a while back but they don´t grab me somehow, if you saw my personal rack you´d know exactly wht I mean!

r m wrote:

They look great for climbs where the only pro is a polished steel crack.

Agreed, I'm confused why they're choosing a smooth probably polished surface for their tests...  If BD cams come out that easily, mine must all be defective because they seam to hold falls just fine... I don't speak spanish, but I'm confused as to what they're trying to prove with these videos?  Can someone who speaks spanish, elaborate on what smack he's talking?

On another note, they also tested some of those cams pretty tipped out...

I think it looks good. The design is better then the Omega link cams. If it gets a UIAA certification, I would buy one 

Briggs Lazalde wrote:

Funny how people talk about smooth surface when clearly some cams are unaffected. Probably butt hurt that their camelot's and totems they Rave about failed. I own both and still like them despite this so come at me baha

Aint nothing free.

I don't know much about cams, I trust someone will correct any misunderstandings I have :)

I figure in order to hold in this low friction coefficient situation this cam must generate greater outward forces for the same pull. Given I climb on mostly sandstone, that seems a feature I don't especially want.

In other threads we have talked about Camalots and Totems "walking out" of shallow horizontal placements or simply failing to hold. They need a certain "depth" to be reliable in horizontal cracks. 

I haven't translated the Spanish but that isn't the true take home message that I see. I think the sliding in the steel "crack" is intended to magnify this issue, but the carry over to stone isn't that great.

Pros:

1. The cams have a far larger range than anything else on the market (not sure if that is worth the extra weight, reportedly 120gms).

2. They don't walk at all. This is not a make or breaker of "the deal" but it is note worthy. Most cams that get fixed get pushed deep in the crack by the rope, imo. But some do walk when you really don't want them too as well. How or if they resist getting pushed deep would be interesting.

Cons:

1. Cost

2. Weight

3. awkward sling arrangement that could be a cluster.

Ice4life wrote:

Agreed, I'm confused why they're choosing a smooth probably polished surface for their tests...  

That's how all pull tests by all manufacturers are done, no? It's really the only way to get consistent results. It's the cam equivalent of the UIAA rope tests: way worse than any real world scenario.

I'd be real curious to actually handle/place them. That twin stem looks like it might be real interesting to keep in line.

kendallt wrote:

That's how all pull tests by all manufacturers are done, no? It's really the only way to get consistent results. It's the cam equivalent of the UIAA rope tests: way worse than any real world scenario.

They use plates that are shaped like millions of teeth, not smooth surface. At least that's what I recall from seeing a cam be pull tested to failure.

Ice4life wrote:

Agreed, I'm confused why they're choosing a smooth probably polished surface for their tests...  If BD cams come out that easily, mine must all be defective because they seam to hold falls just fine... I don't speak spanish, but I'm confused as to what they're trying to prove with these videos?  Can someone who speaks spanish, elaborate on what smack he's talking?

I don't speak Spanish extremely fluently, but he's not saying anything that isn't obvious from the visual. The only thing that isn't just describing what you're seeing and calling it good or bad is that he first demonstrates walking with a C4, then shows that the Totem doesn't really walk much, then goes on to show the Totem "rocking" out of the crack entirely.

Here's a link on supertopo with some smarter people than me about pull testing.

http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/277009/Cam-testing-Friction-surface

This device is actually really clever, way better than link cams and seems as though it might edge out totem out for both best holding cam and most expensive cam (must be a Spanish thing). It's hard to tell the exact geometry, but it seems to get the good range from essentially acting in two different regimes. The first regime is the hardest one for me to really discern, maybe someone else will find some info that I don't currently see and be able to contribute more, but it seems that for the 0 to 50% or so range that the device effectively functions as a regular cam with the typical 13ish degree constant camming angle. Then at a certain point it basically switches to a spring loaded tricam. The fact that the loading axis is separate from the springs could be a pretty good way to minimize walking (though whether there's issues with rock or rope tweaking the springs as you climb and making the cam walk that way is probably still to be determined).

I'm pretty sure I'll never pay that much for a cam, but if they can get enough interest and can enter mass manufacturing the price will come down.

Mind-boggling to me that anyone would produce a mass-market climbing product with only marketing materials in Spanish. And I speak, read, write Spanish fluently. 

AndrewArroz wrote:

Mind-boggling to me that anyone would produce a mass-market climbing product with only marketing materials in Spanish. And I speak, read, write Spanish fluently. 

It's a reasonable business strategy. You can really screw up targeting a smaller market, and work out all the kinks in your design, manufacturing, etc. while in that smaller market. Then once you have a solid product, release to the English speaking market. That way the mistakes you made early on won't hurt your brand so much, because all the bad reviews are in Spanish and your main market speaks English.

It's a similar reason to why a lot of brands release their product under the Trader Joe's brand first. They get some sales with their new product, but if people decide they don't like it, it only hurts the reputation of Trader Joes' brand, not Newman's Own or SoDelicious or whatever. And Trader Joe's benefits because they get a steady stream of new products without having to spend money on R+D.

industrial application?

David Kerkeslager wrote:

It's a reasonable business strategy. You can really screw up targeting a smaller market, and work out all the kinks in your design, manufacturing, etc. while in that smaller market. Then once you have a solid product, release to the English speaking market. That way the mistakes you made early on won't hurt your brand so much, because all the bad reviews are in Spanish and your main market speaks English.

It's a similar reason to why a lot of brands release their product under the Trader Joe's brand first. They get some sales with their new product, but if people decide they don't like it, it only hurts the reputation of Trader Joes' brand, not Newman's Own or SoDelicious or whatever. And Trader Joe's benefits because they get a steady stream of new products without having to spend money on R+D.

Interesting you say that about TJ's. Because a friend of mine in the food business says that Trader Joe's business model is to test out various branded food products (like Udi's gluten free bread, for example) and then TJ's reverse engineers and clones their own version of the ones that are successful in the market.

They do indeed exist. Maybe it could double as an ice axe?

Check out @justbombergear on the gram. He’s reviewing them.