Planned obsolescence in the climbing world.

        We are all aware that products in today’s world are not made as they were in our grandparents day when it comes to the quality and life expectancy of the product. This is due to planned obsolescence; a company’s greedy way to get consumers to buy their shit! Electronics are made to fail after a couple years, toys are made of cheap plastic, new models of cars come out every year with just a couple minor tweaks.  
        I’m curious as to what you guys have seen in the climbing world that relates to planned obsolescence, and what we as climbers can do to combat this garbage of an ideology. 

I would hope nothing....or else there will be a lot of gear related deaths

I don't agree with the premise of your idea. Many things in climbing are made to be lighter, which can limit durability.  An 8 oz. foam helmet does not have the longevity of a 14 oz. hard shell helmet, but the trade-off is worth it, to me.

I don't think corporations and manufacturers plan on their items failing or falling apart to boost sales.

Do you have examples of climbing gear that has "planned obsolescence"?

Ultralight C4s with a life span of 10 years due to replacing steel cable with fibers. If you’ve got the money for a new expensive rack every 10 years great, but I wonder how many people buy them not knowing this. I wouldn’t say it’s planned obsolescence but they should do a better job making this known when you buy them.

FrankPS. You just asked what he asked.

Ultralights have a reason for that though; It's not planned obsolescence. The burden is on the consumer when it comes to knowing what it is they are buying and what the products limits/advantages are. 

Ky Dame wrote: FrankPS. You just asked what he asked. 

Darn it!

Adidas shoes.

I am still using 20 yr. old lockers with less wear than the ones I bought just two years ago.  This may indicate that not all metals/materials are created equal.  Perhaps due to weight.  Still, I carry my older heaver rack with out having to replace components very often and have done so for 40 years.  Most likely continue for a few more years.

lightweight Carabiners wear out quick, I don't use them or own any.

Jeffrey Constine wrote: lightweight Carabiners wear out quick, I don't use them or own any.

What brand is best to invest in?

Anonymous wrote: BD is planning on making replaceable cams lobes that are easily swamped out for fresh ones. Think of it like disposable razors that you have to buy every month.

Note: this isn't true. I was only thinking what planned obsolescence might look like if C4s were made by Gillette. 

Wearing out via normal use, as in razor blades, is not planned obsolescence.

Of course gear will wear out over time due to normal use and lighter gear will wear out faster, but this is not planned obsolescence. As I am sure you know, all climber gear must meet certain strength ratings to be sold as climbing gear. However, all of these companies need to make money and to do that need us to keep buying their products. In the climbing and other gear related industries, it is usually referred to as "dynamic obsolescence." Companies come out with fresh, lighter, and shinier new gear every few years that convinces us to replace older gear that looks worn out or isn't as light even if the gear we currently own is still perfectly capable of still doing its job safely. 

I’m not so sure everything can be blamed on planned obsolescence. People, in general, have a disposable mindset.

Don't get me started on the climbing rope - you take a few whippers perhaps around 100, and it is time for a new one. I blame that stupid kermantle construction and synthetics. Back in the day, real climbers used real natural fibers, they didn't have to get a new rope almost every year.

Oh, and don't get me started on climbing shoes either...

Nick Scott wrote: Of course gear will wear out over time due to normal use and lighter gear will wear out faster, but this is not planned obsolescence. As I am sure you know, all climber gear must meet certain strength ratings to be sold as climbing gear. However, all of these companies need to make money and to do that need us to keep buying their products. In the climbing and other gear related industries, it is usually referred to as "dynamic obsolescence." Companies come out with fresh, lighter, and shinier new gear every few years that convinces us to replace older gear that looks worn out or isn't as light even if the gear we currently own is still perfectly capable of still doing its job safely. 

I agree to a point.  But we all tend to want to be gear heads with the best of the new best.  I think we need to rethink this.  Older functional gear, re-slung gear, and yes heavier gear, all can get us up most of our challenges and was most likely put up with that or older gear.  The climbers smaller carbon footprint maybe? Anyway, not saying I do not buy new gear.  Sometimes a climb I want to do requires something I do not have or do not have enough of, eg. Big Bros, off sets, enough # 1s to do this consistent spliter, but if the gear is sound, you are familiar with it, and its history, why toss it? Why not save money and resources and just climb with that stuff?

amarius wrote: Don't get me started on the climbing rope - you take a few whipper, perhaps around 100, and it is time for the new one. I blame that stupid kermantle construction and synthetics. Back in the day, real climbers used real natural fibers, they didn't have to get a new rope almost every year.

They also didn't fall nearly as much. And the top end of difficulty was 5.9, or before that, F9.

Bananas. Talk about planned obsolescence. Then some people get upset when you toss the wrapper at the base of the crag or on the trail.

WTF? Capitalism would not exist without planned obsolescence. Deal with it or move to upper Mongolia ;) Can't even get away from it there.

No confusion at all. Define capitalism as you wish but it still contains planned obsolescence. Even the guy selling you chives at the local farmers market is hoping you come back for more. The shepherd in Mongolia is capitalizing off of his sheep. Even if it is just for a full belly.
At it's root has nothing to do with greed. Not all corporations are greedy, but all are capitalists. No one has EVER sold you a product they thought would last forever.

22re Toyota is basically infinite

Roy Suggett wrote: I am still using 20 yr. old lockers with less wear than the ones I bought just two years ago.  This may indicate that not all metals/materials are created equal.  Perhaps due to weight.  Still, I carry my older heaver rack with out having to replace components very often and have done so for 40 years.  Most likely continue for a few more years.

I couldn't agree more.  For example, I still use some Omega Jakes I've had for 15 years, but purchased the exact same carabiners a few years back which wore significantly more, with less use, than the old ones. 

The Raven wrote: No confusion at all. Define capitalism as you wish but it still contains planned obsolescence. Even the guy selling you chives at the local farmers market is hoping you come back for more. The shepherd in Mongolia is capitalizing off of his sheep. Even if it is just for a full belly.
At it's root has nothing to do with greed. Not all corporations are greedy, but all are capitalists. No one has EVER sold you a product they thought would last forever.

Dude you really don’t get it. Let’s use your phone for a quick example. Planned Obsolescence is the lack of a head phone jack, so now you need to buy an adapter for head phones, or buy new head phones. It’s a software update every 2 years that slows down your perfectly good phone so you’ll want to buy a new one. It’s a product that is designed to fail, not last. 

You seem like a troll. Maybe go back under your bridge?