Broken Cam thread

Chris NH wrote: I'm wondering if the X4s are more fragile than the Mastercam small cams or is this thread just bringing people out of the woodwork?

I was thinking the same thing...why haven't we seen similar threads about the master cams or C3s breaking if all these X4 failures are just user error?

aaron hope wrote: ...why haven't we seen similar threads about the master cams or C3s breaking if all these X4 failures are just user error?

+1. This seems to be a much more frequent problem with the BD X4's than other small cams.

We do seem to hear a lot about X4 issues as well as Aliens...

I've taken a couple small whipper on a #0 and a #00 Metolius TCUs, one held, one pulled and one snapped off a flake (I was already on a PG route!), as well as repeated falls on #1 and #2 Mastercams while working a route. All cams were still fully serviceable after and I've used them for 6+ years before selling most of them for $20 a piece.

The desire for smaller heads have made the clearance between components smaller and smaller, once you start dinging the aluminum, there goes the tolerances and nothing works anymore. It's a choice between weight/width/price/durability.

Aliens have just as many if not more stories of catastrophic failures like nuts coming off, or wear and tear like the spring slot closing over the spring even after a body placement, trigger strings ripping...

aaron hope wrote: I was thinking the same thing...why haven't we seen similar threads about the master cams or C3s breaking if all these X4 failures are just user error?

My guess that is because BD is the biggest and most visible climbing gear company, and they now make small cams, more people are buying small cams than before, mostly X4s.

Where it used to be only specialized wall climbers with a rack of aliens or hard trad climbers with sets of C3s, now everyone and their grandma has climbing shoes, a harness, some draws and some X4s that were on sale at REI and they just plug em in and expect them to hold as reliably as a bolt at the gym.

After reviewing all the different "X4 Failure" threads, I am not convinced there are any manufacturing or design defects with X4s, and most of the "failures" were probably the result of poor placements, which are simply harder to identify with small cams.

I trust that Black Diamond would identify any possible defects and issue a recall if such issues were found.

Many small cams have issues ...

Aliens, likely the X4s IMO, and even metolius

Heres an example

coolclimbing.com/rockgearbr…

We can dig up the old threads if were bored

I will say that one cam that doesnt seem to have to many issues is the C3s ... Quite a few folks have them around here ... But they also tend to be rated a bit higher for the same size

My zeros seem not to have too many issues either, but they are a much rarer cam ... The positive is that they are passively rated so they wont umbrella

When possible go big or go nutz ...

;)

khammer wrote: Yeah fell at the crux. Damn it is so fun. Thanks for the beta. To Chris NH: Looks like a busted umbrella so I'd say yes. I couldn't comment on their relative durability though as these are my first small cams.

Definitely looks umbrella'd. X4s may be less durable in other aspects, but this would've happened with a mastercam, C3, or alien as well. Wild Country and DMM are the only companies (that I'm aware of anyways) that make microcams with fully rated cam-stops, which might've held your fall and most certainly would've left you with a working cam afterwards.

Cheers,
Dan

mtnmandan wrote: Definitely looks umbrella'd. X4s may be less durable in other aspects, but this would've happened with a mastercam, C3, or alien as well. Wild Country and DMM are the only companies (that I'm aware of anyways) that make microcams with fully rated cam-stops, which might've held your fall and most certainly would've left you with a working cam afterwards. Cheers, Dan

I asked BD about it a few years ago and they said "unofficially" that the larger c3s cam stops are pretty strong

However they wont "rate them" because in the smaller sizes there isnt much metal on em for them to be fully rated

The c3s are exceptionally strong cams ... The red/yellow is even stronger than the equivalent blue c4

Take that as you will

;)

bearbreeder wrote: The c3s are exceptionally strong cams ...

Consider I've rarely heard properly built (i.e. not recalled aliens) cams fail at a load bearing part (stem, axle, etc), I don't place much stock in "strong" cams. The c3s trigger mechanism is notoriously finicky, pinch the plastic housing & it binds, deforms the lobe a bit where the trigger wire go thru & it binds... practical durability is much more important than lab test strength, IMO.

reboot wrote: Consider I've rarely heard properly built (i.e. not recalled aliens) cams fail at a load bearing part (stem, axle, etc), I don't place much stock in "strong" cams. The c3s trigger mechanism is notoriously finicky, pinch the plastic housing & it binds, deforms the lobe a bit where the trigger wire go thru & it binds... practical durability is much more important than lab test strength, IMO.

I bent an axle on a purple TCU with my phat AZN azz

The link i posted where a 00 blew apart, metolius simply states that one can exceed the loading of the cam even in normal short falls

While it is obvious that the rated strength of the unit was exceeded in the first reported incident, the seemingly low load reported in the second incident initially had us perplexed. After inspecting the failed unit and conducting the exhaustive testing detailed above, we have come to the conclusion that a load of greater than 5 kN was generated in the reported fall.

We believe that the unit was loaded out of alignment with its stem, which caused it to fail at a lower load than its potential maximum strength. However, our testing shows that, while an off-axis placement will fail at a lower load than an aligned placement, it will still not fail below the rated strength.

It is critical to understand the limitations of your equipment. It is impossible to make tiny cams as strong as large cams. The same is true for nuts or any other piece of gear. 5 kN is simply not strong enough to withstand the loads that are often generated in a leader fall. However, micro cams and other small pieces can be an important part of a system of protection as long as their limitations are understood and respected. Whenever you are placing small gear, try to place multiple pieces and equalize them. Always make sure you have stronger gear placed below the small gear that will eventually arrest your fall if the small gear fails. Never trust your life to any single gear placement, especially small gear.

For example the purple metolius is rated to 5kn, the green c3 to 7kn .... Ive seen that size c3s hold quite decent whippers

How much does that theoretical extra 2 kn make?

Thats up to MPers

As to practical durability .... Nothing beats something with camstops for that

For MPers entertainment heres someone whipping on a 000 c3

vimeo.com/24894498

;)

Those marks on those lobes look fairly deep from the photos. That indicates the cam held in its cammed position for a significant load before failing via umbrellaing. When it was loaded it was likely very undercammed and then deformed allowing it to umbrella.

It should be noted that larger camming angle, X4s have the potential to have initial grip in flares where master cams may simple fall out. I say "initial grip" as it wouldn't take much deformation for it to umbrella and then fail.

bearbreeder wrote:For example the purple metolius is rated to 5kn, the green c3 to 7kn .... Ive seen that size c3s hold quite decent whippers How much does that theoretical extra 2 kn make?

As you know there are very few failures in the strength of pieces where they haven't been compromised by placement. The 00 you linked is one of the few examples.

A bigger concern I would worry about is the holding strength of cams. There is a significant difference between Metolius and BD here. (Though the types of rock you climb on plays a significant role here.)

reboot wrote: Consider I've rarely heard properly built (i.e. not recalled aliens) cams fail at a load bearing part (stem, axle, etc), I don't place much stock in "strong" cams. The c3s trigger mechanism is notoriously finicky, pinch the plastic housing & it binds, deforms the lobe a bit where the trigger wire go thru & it binds... practical durability is much more important than lab test strength, IMO.

Mine have been very durable in practice. I replaced a trigger wire on one, that's about it. No problems with the "finicky" trigger mechanism. Frankly, I never heard they were notorious for such problems. I've owned C3s since early days in their manufacture, so they have been well used.

I've taken multiple whips on the "00", no problems. The yellow C3 is one of my all-time favorite cams.

Such is the nature of such arguments though, there's always going to be some anecdotal evidence and random opinions either way, mine included.

I still think X4s are some of the worst cams to clean out of placements that are straightforward, and that's a big negative given the kind of climbing where you place small cams isn't usually terrain you want to be screwing with clean up.

It's pretty sweet there are so many small cam options though and that we can get all biased about this one or that one.

Colonel Mustard wrote:I still think X4s are some of the worst cams to clean out of placements that are straightforward, and that's a big negative given the kind of climbing where you place small cams isn't usually terrain you want to be screwing with clean up.

Can you explain that further? Do you know why they are hard to clean? Given their large expansion range you should probably expect that they would be easier to clean.

Personally I love my MasterCams and like my Zero #2 too, because nothing but Zeros go that small. (Totems FTW in the sizes that they are available in.)

patto wrote: Can you explain that further? Do you know why they are hard to clean? Given their large expansion range you should probably expect that they would be easier to clean.

It seems like they just "stick". The lobe ridges somehow hang them up more and you're looking at a placement an alien-style cam would easily slot in and out of and you are wailing on the cam to get it out. Maybe I didn't find my rhythm with them but I'm not brand new to getting a wide variety of cams out of rock.

Again, the question has been asked for the umpteenth time..."why do we see all these posts on climber forums regarding destroying or sticking x4 cams vs other cams"...the numbers behind such a thought are not as simple as saying that C3's or any other cam is any better at placing or any more durable. Rather, the market for X4's was unique in that they were long anticipated by self admitted gear whores and were at a price point that more experienced trad climbers could not afford short of a pro deal or sponsorship with BD. For obvious reasons, less experienced trad leaders can afford the most expensive cam ever brought to market more than the experienced trad leader (who might spend more time climbing then working). So the large urban markets (SLC, DEN, SF) sucked up this long anticipated BD revolution to their C4 and went out and immediately got them stuck, mis-directed for falls, etc.....and we are seeing the results of same. If I did not see so many bad placements and lack of directional extension in the field among supposedly experienced trad leaders, I prob would not continue to point out that the X4, if used properly, is no less safe or durable than any other cam on the market today. I see way more X4's racked up on urban climbers than I do on Zion locals for example, although they are just now starting to bleed into the more veteran climbing community as well.

Dow Williams wrote:Again, the question has been asked for the umpteenth time..."why do we see all these posts on climber forums regarding destroying or sticking x4 cams vs other cams"...the numbers behind such a thought are not as simple as saying that C3's or any other cam is any better at placing or any more durable. Rather, the market for X4's was unique in that they were long anticipated by self admitted gear whores and were at a price point that more experienced trad climbers could not afford short of a pro deal or sponsorship with BD. For obvious reasons, less experienced trad leaders can afford the most expensive cam ever brought to market more than the experienced trad leader (who might spend more time climbing then working). So the large urban markets (SLC, DEN, SF) sucked up this long anticipated BD revolution to their C4 and went out and immediately got them stuck, mis-directed for falls, etc.....and we are seeing the results of same. If I did not see so many bad placements and lack of directional extension in the field among supposedly experienced trad leaders, I prob would not continue to point out that the X4, if used properly, is no less safe or durable than any other cam on the market today. I see way more X4's racked up on urban climbers than I do on Zion locals for example, although they are just now starting to bleed into the more veteran climbing community as well.

I think this is probably more or less spot on, except I doubt it's really the price point that is prohibitive - they aren't much more than equivalent cams, and if you look around, you can get deals of $50/cam (i picked up .1 - .4 brand new for this price). It's probably more that veteran climbers already had their racks filled out and weren't buying much new gear (also makes sense they are will be adopted slowly over time).

I've fallen on the little ones, they are great. Had a 15fter (quite a bit of rope out though, maybe 60ft) on the .1 with two lobes solid, 2 a little tipped out, held like a champ, no damage.

^What in the all hell kind of arrogant garbage is that? The Socio-economic Theory of New Cam Failure.

Inexperienced trad climbers > wealthier > buy new cams > break due to poor placements/extensions.

Experienced climbers > poor > old cams > great mechanics > no issues. Ever.

Obviously, an anomalous high reporting of structural failures are related to our socio-economic status, not a flaw in the design.

One totally sees a disproportionate amount of x4s in the hands of gumbies- this is not myth.

Ryan Marsters wrote:^What in the all hell kind of arrogant garbage is that? The Socio-economic Theory of New Cam Failure. Inexperienced trad climbers > wealthier > buy new cams > break due to poor placements/extensions. Experienced climbers > poor > old cams > great mechanics > no issues. Ever. Obviously, an anomalous high reporting of structural failures are related to our socio-economic status, not a flaw in the design.

Dow thinks punk rock died when the Sex Pistols broke up

Did somebody give Dow's balls the bullhorn again?

Buh-jeebles, Dow, you might want to knock some of the crust of the tip too when the turtle comes out his shell.

Ryan Marsters wrote:^What in the all hell kind of arrogant garbage is that? The Socio-economic Theory of New Cam Failure. Inexperienced trad climbers > wealthier > buy new cams > break due to poor placements/extensions. Experienced climbers > poor > old cams > great mechanics > no issues. Ever. Obviously, an anomalous high reporting of structural failures are related to our socio-economic status, not a flaw in the design.

You talking all fancy just proves you're a noob, you city boy coming in here with your balls all shiny.