Tricams vs. Abalaks

I want to add some passive pro to my rack for pockets etc. - does anyone have experience with both Abalaks and (CAMP) Tricams? I'm leaning towards the Abalaks as they are way cheaper in Europe and the wire has an almost unlimited lifespan. Any (dis)advantages having a stiff wire over a soft dyneema sling?

Cheers!

The wire will transfer more rope movement to the piece and potentially dislodge it.  I vote for tricams and I resling my own (down to pink) with 9/16" webbing.  I agree, to have them reslung professionally, it seems to cost almost as much as finding a new set on sale somewhere.

The stiff wire makes “passive” placements (placing the tricam like a nut) impossible, but I have never done that anyway. Also, the abalak has a much sharper “point,” which changes the placement somewhat.

I have used both just for aid practice in horizontal and diagonal cracks to avoid putting wear on my cams. The strands of the abalaks will break sometimes and then need to be trimmed so they don’t keep poking your fingers 

Todd Jenkinswrote:

The wire will transfer more rope movement to the piece and potentially dislodge it. 

I hadn't considered that, good point.

Seems like everyone is leaning towards the good old fashioned Tricams...

I bought some originals in Czech in 1990. They work really well and the wire makes them more active than passive. The active action sans trigger can make them really hard to clean, however… much more difficult than Tricams. Because you extend them with a sling, walking and/or dislodging is not really a concern. 

Weston Swrote:

The stiff wire makes “passive” placements (placing the tricam like a nut) impossible, but I have never done that anyway. Also, the abalak has a much sharper “point,” which changes the placement somewhat.

Most nuts have stiff wire. What makes these any different?

Edit: Thanks to the responses, I didn't realize that the wire only allowed it to be in camming position.

Devan Beewrote:

Most nuts have stiff wire. What makes these any different?

The wire tensions the unit in an active camming orientation.

One thing about these that I did not mention, is that  although they are rather difficult to clean, they are actually easy to place, as you can simply just slide/push them into a placement if the feature is regular enough. 

Devan Beewrote:

Most nuts have stiff wire. What makes these any different?

Unlike a tricam, you can’t unfold it, the wire makes it “fixed” in the camming position. A regular tricam can rotate around its connection point, which is a pin that connects it to the sling.

Basically, if you were trying to place an abalak passively, you would find that the connection point does not rotate, and you’d be bending the wire badly to try to make it work.

I have a set of both.  Rarely carry the Abalaks anymore, although they are a fantastic historical artifact and conversation piece and I always get comments/questions when I bring them out! 

Abalaks take up more space on a harness and always seem to hang awkwardly (the wires keep them all pointing in the same direction against each other, whereas with Tricams they naturally dangle in a way that seems to take up less room).  As noted above, placements are slightly more difficult with Abalaks because of the stiff wire, although I actually find cleaning when using a tool slightly easier with Abalaks because the wire gives you something stiff to hold onto.  That being said, in wider cracks you can't just reach in with your fingers without a tool and pull them out as easily as with Tricams.  Overall, good Abalak placements just never seem quite as secure and confidence-inspiring as good Tricam placements to me.  I think this has to do with the shape.  Vitaly Abalakov basically cut a pulley into pieces, and that shape really hasn't evolved much.  The Tricam shape seems more suited to fit where you need it to.  Both can be bomber in the right places, but I think Tricams win out overall.

One other cool thing about Tricams: you can stack the larger sizes.  But this probably goes into the "cool to have tried it" rather than "actually practical in most climbing scenarios" category.

As most on Mountain Project will concur, the larger Tricam sizes aren't as useful.  That being said, I almost always carry the orange (#5).  That has nearly the same magic as the hallowed pink in my opinion--always seems to work when nothing else will.

Anyone use Abalaks in ice?  I don't think I've ever seen a photo of an Abalak ice placement, although I've seen several photos of Tricam ice placements.

Thx guys, i wasn´t expecting so much information about such a niche gear (at least the abalaks...)

This helps!

Cole Bellomowrote:

Abalaks go with me on every adventure. Tricky granite flares!? No problem! Wonky sandstone pockets!? Abalaks got it!

Those placements look pretty satisfying...