Older Metolious Cams usability

 I received some older Metolious cams from my father this past year from when he was an avid climber. I’m curious on the usability of these cams still? I imagine they’re still viable even though technology has advanced since these were produced I’m guessing sometime in the 80’s-90’s? The #3 is never used in packaging the others seem to have light use.

Thanks!

N

Yer gonna die, of course… but seems like a reasonable assumption to think those will 99% keep you off the deck. Obviously you’ll use those as supplemental cams if you really want to use them (maybe the sentimental value?). Send them back to Metolius or Skot Richards (look up Skot’s Wall Gear on IG or the web, he does amazing work) and you’d get them back for about $10 a cam, with fresh new slings…I’d whip on em.

You can send them back to Metolius and they’ll lube, polish, and re-sling them - good as new.

Obviously newer cams are a little better, but these puppies look like they have plenty of life left. I’m sure your dad would be thrilled to see them back in use.

Awesome! Yeah I figured they still be good go, I just wanted to gather some proper opinions since I’m not too knowledgeable in this world. They would also be supplemental cams for the most part, I’m just getting into the thoughts of trad climbing and mostly ice climb so they would more so serve as occasional rock bro on routes. 

I've got Metolius cams of similar vintage that I've whipped on plenty. 

They're great cams. I prefer the 'bald' lobes.

I like 4 or 5 unslung TCUs carried on a single carabiner, like nuts. For me, it works well for alpine/long, easy climbs. Or ice climbs where a little rock gear might come in handy. Or as the extra-in-the-sizes in the bottom of a cragging pack. And the 40 year old ones are perfect bail pieces.

Long story short, there are reasons why modern cams have teeth or the "faces" on Aliens, but well-placed, bald TCUs will do just fine. Don't rely on teeth to catch on the rock and don't exert forces at the limit of the shear stress of aluminum...

dave custerwrote:

Long story short, there are reasons why modern cams have teeth or the "faces" on Aliens, but well-placed, bald TCUs will do just fine. Don't rely on teeth to catch on the rock and don't exert forces at the limit of the shear stress of aluminum...

Someone once told me that the teeth were just a marketing idea to make the cam seem like it would grip better, and that functionally it makes no difference at all.  It would be interesting to know the truth of the matter. I used those TCUs for years when they were the only cams in that size available.  

Eric Craig wrote:

I am certain I heard the same thing. I have a vague recollection the information came from someone in-the-know, but don't recall who that was. Possibly Dave Altman. He was a mathematician, not an engineer. But he was one of Ray Jardine's climbing partners during the development of Friends. He was sworn to secrecy during that period. Guess Ray would wear 2 t-shirts while climbing,  with the rack in between. I don't recall how Dave kept the secret weapons concealed. 

Dave was a friend of mine!  That’s probably where I heard it!

Two bonuses of teeth: 1) they can catch on big bumps; some surfaces are (can be (usefully) modeled as) gaussian and it won't make much difference; some are (can be (usefully) modeled as) fractal and the bumps at the larger, tooth scale make a difference. 2) The teeth (or Alien facets) mushroom and in doing so present a (ever-so-slightly) larger surface area, so there is a lower shear stress in the aluminum (than would be in the purely Hertzian contact of a cylinder). Luke Sosnowski's finite element work (not published) showed me that. teeth are better, but bald is bomber in a bomber placement. 

For the inquiring minds with institutional library access to journals, a nice article on the fractal nature of rock surfaces: agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley…

I have those on my rack. I use them all the time. They didn't come with slings when I bought them new.

There's  absolutely nothing wrong with them - except maybe a slight weight penalty. But, then, ultralight cams don't last as long, IMO.

I would feel fine climbing with those. 

Eric Craig wrote:

I met Dave in 1973 at Indian Rock. Dave being Dave, was very  helpful with getting started  bouldering. I think it would be fair to claim I was a regular there until about 1983. I also had the good fortune to climb with him on a few occasions in Yosemite Valley. He was a true gentleman. And an excellent climber. But you  knew those  things  already,  I  bet. Last time I saw him would've been in the '90's.

Eric there was fairly recently a good article about the whole Indian Rock bouldering scene in some Bay Area newspaper. I linked it in one of the over 50 threads. If you haven’t seen it, I’ll find it and PM it to you. On the road now, give me a couple of days.

Sorry for the thread drift…

The only thing about those first gen Metolious  the springs were prone to breakage. Otherwise put slings you prefer on them and go.