Hexes: Active or Passive?

They're both "active" 

Both are trying to rotate around a fulcrum (tricams point, hex: lower edge on one face contacting the rock), and thus increase the relevant dimensions. Downward force is turned into torque.

"Relics" is the right term.

I can see how wonderful a nice #10 or #11 Hexcentric was for a crack climber back in 1980. But when, seriously, was the last time any of us relied on hexes for parallel cracks? I have some I take on alpine climbs as lightweight doubles for larger cams (DMM torque nuts, to be precise). But I'd never want to solely use them on a typical parallel hand crack. 

MattBwrote:

They're both "active" 

Both are trying to rotate around a fulcrum (tricams point, hex: lower edge on one face contacting the rock), and thus increase the relevant dimensions. Downward force is turned into torque.

Are the devices trying to though? I’d argue the energy comes from a falling climber, not the hex/tricam. 

John Clarkwrote:

Are the devices trying to though? I’d argue the energy comes from a falling climber, not the hex/tricam. 

The energy will always come from the falling climber. This is true for cams as well. 

John Clarkwrote:

Are the devices trying to though? I’d argue the energy comes from a falling climber, not the hex/tricam. 

Cams aren't really either.  Cam springs are just enough to hold the cam in place.  The energy to get the cam to hold is from the falling climber, just as with hexes.  

Looks like Nate beat me to it.

Let's be honest, it doesn't matter if they're active or passive.  What matters is that no one likes them because, once you rack up, you sound like a Christmas Tree walking around.  I'd rather carry heavier cams than listen to that.  Every time you pull a rack of hexes out of your pack, and start racking up, your partner is slowly dying on the inside.  

Truth.  If your partner shows up with these relics just tell them they are welcome to bring them but there's no way you are cleaning them.  You can also "drop" them or chuck them off the climb by "accident"  Oopsie.

Hmmmmm active or passive? Well nothing moves or is spring loaded on a hex so it is passive but you have to activate your brain a bit more to size the crack, choose the right one and place it so it doesn't fail so it is active as well.

John Clarkwrote:

Are the devices trying to though? I’d argue the energy comes from a falling climber, not the hex/tricam. 

Yes, or gravity is helping. Center of mass is on the correct side (if you include the nylon bits). the larger tricams, maybe not so much.

Eta: horizontal cracks mess this reasoning up, I reckon

Whoa, all this hexentric hate. Maybe it's from users who never learned? 

Here's some food for thought: hexentrics were introduced 1971-2. Friends became available about 1981. I can't say for sure elsewhere,  but from 1971 to 1980 in California, free climbing standards advanced from about 5.11a/b to about 5.13b. Yes, some of this advancement was by Ray Jardine with his secret weapons (friends). But there were others right there with him standard wise, who had no access to Friends and were using Hexentrics, and they were often getting it done with little to no dogging etc. This 1971 to 1980 advance in free climbing standards is just about equal to the total advancement from the entire history of sport climbing over a 40+ year time period. 

Hi Powderfinger, I wasn't trying to single anyone out. 

Whoa, all this hexentric hate. Maybe it's from users who never learned?

Whoa, I'm just fooling around.  That's a big assumption to make.  

In somewhat seriousness I have hexes (wired and on cord) and I fully understand how to place them.  I recognize hexes have an important place in climbing history.  I am 50 years old and have had numerous climbing partners 20 years my senior one of which has climbed El Cap without cams.  But guess what? None of these people use their hexes anymore. Especially the ones on wires.  In fact, the joke I made about not cleaning gear actually happened to me by a person much older than me when I had some hexes on my rack and they were not joking.

my hexes all have a C inside the diamond stamp.  onlu use them for very specific climbs that have a expanded constriction where a cam would be insecure. Last time that happened was 2015... 

Hi Powdrfinger, I wasn't trying to single anyone out. I wrote a long explanation, but already have my 3 posts. I'll rewrite it tomorrow, but my apologies. And, I do use cams. More tomorrow...........

No need for apology or long explanation.  I realize some people really enjoy talking about climbing gear and it's history.  Gear is basically just tools so going into a deep discussion of hexes is kind of like a deep discussion about screwdrivers.  It's all kind of goofy and funny.....but for some....it's very serious.  

Obviously not all, but many cams can be placed as passive protection. That seems to be solid evidence that the mode of protection rather than the exact nature of the piece of gear is what makes something a passive or an active piece. It seems to me that this is a pretty simple concept. Cams, tri cams, hexes, all can be either passive or active pro. 

Joseph W. Duttonwrote:

Obviously not all, but many cams can be placed as passive protection. That seems to be solid evidence that the mode of protection rather than the exact nature of the piece of gear is what makes something a passive or an active piece. It seems to me that this is a pretty simple concept. Cams, tri cams, hexes, all can be either passive or active pro. 

Except that in a passive cam placement, no camming action takes place upon a fall.   In a camming placement of a hex or tricam, the piece rotates as a result of a fall, becoming active.  hmmm.

Greg Dwrote:

Except that in a passive cam placement, no camming action takes place upon a fall.   In a camming placement of a hex or tricam, the piece rotates as a result of a fall, becoming active.  hmmm.

That’s exactly my point… 

It's not how you place it. It's all about what it is when you buy it. No moving parts is passive gear . Moving parts is active.  What you do with it once you get your mits on it is immaterial. 

Regardless of the semantic origins, I think the benefit of not limiting “active” to just cams is that you can describe a hex or tri placement as either active or passive mode.

Eric Craigwrote:

Here's some food for thought: hexentrics were introduced 1971-2. Friends became available about 1981. I can't say for sure elsewhere,  but from 1971 to 1980 in California, free climbing standards advanced from about 5.11a/b to about 5.13b. Yes, some of this advancement was by Ray Jardine with his secret weapons (friends). But there were others right there with him standard wise, who had no access to Friends and were using Hexentrics, and they were often getting it done with little to no dogging etc. This 1971 to 1980 advance in free climbing standards is just about equal to the total advancement from the entire history of sport climbing over a 40+ year time period. 

Seems pretty fair to say that advancement had less to do with protection of any kind and more to do with advances in shoes and just overall progression of technique. 

Eric Craigwrote:

Here's some food for thought: hexentrics were introduced 1971-2. Friends became available about 1981. 

Friends were first sold in 1977.

Andrew Ricewrote:

Seems pretty fair to say that advancement had less to do with protection of any kind and more to do with advances in shoes and just overall progression of technique. 

Sort of true. A lot of new, young talent started showing up in Yosemite Valley from the SF Bay area and southern California, many of whom were kinda taken in under the broad wings of Jim Bridwell, right at the time the new Chouinard nuts were becoming available. The new nuts were an asset, because they allowed much easier one hand placement than hammering in pitons. The combination of these two factors, plus the fact that standards had been slowly progressing for a long time,  made the place very ripe for a new wave. There were also a few other slighty older California climbers, as well as visiting non Californians, that contributed to this new wave of hard free climbing. The newly available EB's were favored by almost, but not quite, all. Sticky rubber was not a factor. It was an amazing time to be around the Valley, although I was climbing at a lower level and the  3 FA's/FFA's I participated in were insignificant. I did make a couple of somewhat early repeats though, Butterballs in 1977 (follow) and Cat Squirrel, Fish Crack, and Tips (all lead) in 1982, without sticky rubber. I was slow to adopt the new shoes. 

I'm not really an expert on this history, I was just there, and knew some of the main, and minor players.  On the subject though, I believe Pat Ament lead Supremacy Crack in Eldorado about 1967. It seems to me that was a climb well ahead of it's time. Probably done in Klettershoes, and definitely before hexes.