Replace hexes with Tricams on your rack?

anotherclimber wrote:

Interesting. My understanding is that with a Tricam you are not as limited as a nut in terms of having full contact on both sides when placed in passive mode. Sure it would be more ideal if you can get it. With my smaller Tricams this has certainly been the case. I would have thought that this would have allowed some flexibility in what size and sort of constrictions you can place it in passively.

Why do you think tricam's don't need as much surface area? I've always been under the impression that you need good surface area on all passive pieces: nuts, hexes, tricams etc.... 

At some level isn't the best passive piece the one that fits the constriction the best, so you're choosing between a sharp V shape with a tricam, a slower taper with a nut, or a pod/curve in the crack with a hex.

I use .25-1.5. They are great pieces for building anchors after you have used up your same-sized cams on the route.  I also like them for pockets.  I have used a number 6 and felt it very unstable, especially compared to a hex.

Alex James wrote:

Why do you think tricam's don't need as much surface area? I've always been under the impression that you need good surface area on all passive pieces: nuts, hexes, tricams etc.... 

At some level isn't the best passive piece the one that fits the constriction the best, so you're choosing between a sharp V shape with a tricam, a slower taper with a nut, or a pod/curve in the crack with a hex.

Alex,

I do agree with your logic about full surface area contact for nuts and hexes,  but for some reason Tricams seem to forego this wisdom. Do some ground placement and bounce testing and you'll see that in passive mode it doesn't need to be an exact fit. Even the manual shows a passive placement that is not an exact fit. All you need is to snag the fulcrum or cam rails on a constriction. This opens up a lot more placement options. And yes, I do agree, what fits best is what should be placed, but I suspect that you are under utilizing your Tricams. 

Pete Spri wrote:

I use .25-1.5. They are great pieces for building anchors after you have used up your same-sized cams on the route.  I also like them for pockets.  I have used a number 6 and felt it very unstable, especially compared to a hex.

Thanks for your comment Pete. Unstable in active or passive mode? I'd be using the larger ones primarily in passive mode. 

Yes, it was in active mode.  I don't see a lot of reason to do a passive placement (unless an Evo placement).  Active is stronger.  In smaller tricams, active is also more secure once set).  If you use the big tricams only in passive, why not just use hexes?

Pete Spri wrote:

Yes, it was in active mode.  I don't see a lot of reason to do a passive placement (unless an Evo placement).  Active is stronger.  In smaller tricams, active is also more secure once set).  If you use the big tricams only in passive, why not just use hexes?

Pete,

Thanks for continuing to post here. The reason to use the large Tricams in passive mode is to replace the function of hexes that I use for inward flaring cracks where cams are not appropriate, and vertical V cracks that are too large for nuts and inappropriate for cams. Tricams weigh less than hexes. And the potential to use them in rare instances in their active mode making them, more versatile pieces of rock pro to be carrying. 

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you that active is stronger and more secure in the smaller Tricams. The Tricam EVO's I use are rated the same strength for each position. And once we are at the size 2.0 violet and larger, they are all rated over 10kN, so in my own humble opinion, it hardly matters that the #3 dark blue is rated 11kN for passive and 16kN for active. All the other large sizes are rated the same for active and passive positions. In addition, it has been my own personal experience that a Tricam in it's passive position (I currently use sizes 0.25 to 2.0), well placed and set is far more secure in it's passive position and much less likely to be rattled loose from side to side movement. They still regardless get an alpine draw on them. I suppose it's possible to place a Tricam in it's passive position where it doesn't set, but most people wouldn't accept that as a good placement any more than a nut or hex that doesn't set well. 

anotherclimber wrote:

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you that active is stronger and more secure in the smaller Tricams.

This may say more about the rock we climb on than the tricams themselves, but I'm going to add another vote to the "active is stronger and more secure" side.

According to the rating, active placements fail at a higher load than passive placements in a test jig. Failure is destructive and (I'm pretty sure) occurs at the pin. But conventional wisdom tells us that, in almost all case, the piece will rip out of the placement before it sees destructive loads. Whether an active or passive placement will rip out first, we don't know.

I suspect the answer is ultimately "it depends" based on several factors including the geometry, topography, and strength of the rock, and probably other factors we don't forsee.

In my opinion, the most secure placement would be a passive placement with a downward and outward constriction, which would require a perfectly aligned upward pull to extract. 

anotherclimber wrote:

Pete,

Thanks for continuing to post here. The reason to use the large Tricams in passive mode is to replace the function of hexes that I use for inward flaring cracks where cams are not appropriate, and vertical V cracks that are too large for nuts and inappropriate for cams. Tricams weigh less than hexes. And the potential to use them in rare instances in their active mode making them, more versatile pieces of rock pro to be carrying. 

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you that active is stronger and more secure in the smaller Tricams. The Tricam EVO's I use are rated the same strength for each position. And once we are at the size 2.0 violet and larger, they are all rated over 10kN, so in my own humble opinion, it hardly matters that the #3 dark blue is rated 11kN for passive and 16kN for active. All the other large sizes are rated the same for active and passive positions. In addition, it has been my own personal experience that a Tricam in it's passive position (I currently use sizes 0.25 to 2.0), well placed and set is far more secure in it's passive position and much less likely to be rattled loose from side to side movement. They still regardless get an alpine draw on them. I suppose it's possible to place a Tricam in it's passive position where it doesn't set, but most people wouldn't accept that as a good placement any more than a nut or hex that doesn't set well. 

Hey Another, couple insights after your post and thought they would be worth mentioning!  Good points and I am looking to take this conversation a little longer as I love my tricams and have had them on my rack for about 20 years at this point.

1. Regarding passive stinger placements (ie, non-Evo / non-width) in inward flares.  I see what you are doing here, and although I have tried this to some success in pure horizontal lipped cracks, I have some concerns based on these type of inward flares that have caused me to steer clear of them in these types of cracks.  For any inward flare/hollow-lipped cracks, I have found that nuts in opposition is the best way to protect them.  Sure, if you are only dealing with a true horizontal you can make a number of things work, though even then security is not ideal.  The is partly because you are using the rockered side of the tricam and the stinger to get a constriction.... but they are not primarily engineered for a wedging placement and do not wedge as securely and are far easier to jiggle lose than a tapered nut or hex.  In my opinion, it is far better to place nuts (or hexes) at diagonals in opposition to each other to protect this type of crack.  I'm going to encourage you to try this.  It took me a while to come to this conclusion on these lipped inward flared cracks, so I think it is worth sharing.  I have had too many issues with nuts and even passive tricams in these types of cracks that were less than horizontal moving out due to a downward pull dislodging the placements.  Opposition is the best answer to keep placements secure; clove hitch them together with a sling FTW!  

2. Regarding Security:  I do not feel that tricams in the larger sizes have more placements than large hexes.  This is because active large tricams that are near their max extension range can walk out very very easily, making me place them in a more cammed position to maintain security.  They are also less stable for a side pull or diagonal pull because the large sizes are not very wide; they are much easier to make spin and capsize as well as tip on the side in less than parallel cracks.  In general, I tend to place tricams pretty well cammed in active mode.  In this type of placement, motion on the sling tends to pull them more secure, not wiggle them out.  Even with smaller tricams, if you are at the bigger end of the range, motion on the sling tends to work them lose.  Tighter placements are more secure, in my experience and motion tends to set and cam them tighter, not wiggle them lose.

3.  Strength.  This is actually not as big a deal as I remember, and I think part of this is Camp's improvement so thanks for your post on this.  The Evo's have better ratings than the original numbers that I remember.  Evos: .5= 8kn all directions 1=10kn all directions; 1.5= 14kn all directions.  However, the old non evo's are different: .5= 9kn active vs 7 passive; 1=10kn active vs 8 passive; 1.5 = 14kn all.  The .125 Evo is also 3kn vs 2kn active vs passive.  For me, the strength difference in the old nylon ones that I have a mix of has always been better to have 9 vs 7 and 10 vs 8.  Maybe it is time to update my rack because all of the evos are stronger than the old nylon style!  I learned something here; thanks for sharing! :D

All said, I love my tricams.  They really do go where other stuff wont, and I carry .25-1.5 on every route.  Literally, every route; they live on my harness with my nut tool and prussik.  When going light and alpine, tricams are my go to, not cams because of weight and the ability to bail off of them (far superior to bailing off a cam; you can test them to security, unlike a cam which can blow or pop unexpectedly...).  When I am taking a double rack of cams on climbs near my limit, I still take my tricams for anchors or as a triple size on long, uniform cracks.

For me, there are too many reasons to keep .25-1.5 tricams on my rack than there are to take them off.  I know that there are a majority of people on this site that would rather just have cams and nuts for simplicity sake, but I have found them too useful to get rid of.

Hexes never seem to get placed when I bring them.   They seem to be good for "alpine" type routes, like big corners and blocky features.  They seem like gear for mountaineering.  

Tricams on the other hand... are sweet and versatile.

eli poss wrote:

According to the rating, active placements fail at a higher load than passive placements in a test jig. Failure is destructive and (I'm pretty sure) occurs at the pin. But conventional wisdom tells us that, in almost all case, the piece will rip out of the placement before it sees destructive loads. Whether an active or passive placement will rip out first, we don't know.

I suspect the answer is ultimately "it depends" based on several factors including the geometry, topography, and strength of the rock, and probably other factors we don't forsee.

In my opinion, the most secure placement would be a passive placement with a downward and outward constriction, which would require a perfectly aligned upward pull to extract. 

Eli,

Look at the Tricam EVO page on Camp's web site specifically. They are rated strength wise all the same in each of the three positions. It's the older no-EVO Tricams that are stronger in their active position. 

Pete Spri wrote:

Hey Another, couple insights after your post and thought they would be worth mentioning!  Good points and I am looking to take this conversation a little longer as I love my tricams and have had them on my rack for about 20 years at this point.

1. Regarding passive stinger placements (ie, non-Evo / non-width) in inward flares.  I see what you are doing here, and although I have tried this to some success in pure horizontal lipped cracks, I have some concerns based on these type of inward flares that have caused me to steer clear of them in these types of cracks.  For any inward flare/hollow-lipped cracks, I have found that nuts in opposition is the best way to protect them.  Sure, if you are only dealing with a true horizontal you can make a number of things work, though even then security is not ideal.  The is partly because you are using the rockered side of the tricam and the stinger to get a constriction.... but they are not primarily engineered for a wedging placement and do not wedge as securely and are far easier to jiggle lose than a tapered nut or hex.  In my opinion, it is far better to place nuts (or hexes) at diagonals in opposition to each other to protect this type of crack.  I'm going to encourage you to try this.  It took me a while to come to this conclusion on these lipped inward flared cracks, so I think it is worth sharing.  I have had too many issues with nuts and even passive tricams in these types of cracks that were less than horizontal moving out due to a downward pull dislodging the placements.  Opposition is the best answer to keep placements secure; clove hitch them together with a sling FTW!  

2. Regarding Security:  I do not feel that tricams in the larger sizes have more placements than large hexes.  This is because active large tricams that are near their max extension range can walk out very very easily, making me place them in a more cammed position to maintain security.  They are also less stable for a side pull or diagonal pull because the large sizes are not very wide; they are much easier to make spin and capsize as well as tip on the side in less than parallel cracks.  In general, I tend to place tricams pretty well cammed in active mode.  In this type of placement, motion on the sling tends to pull them more secure, not wiggle them out.  Even with smaller tricams, if you are at the bigger end of the range, motion on the sling tends to work them lose.  Tighter placements are more secure, in my experience and motion tends to set and cam them tighter, not wiggle them lose.

3.  Strength.  This is actually not as big a deal as I remember, and I think part of this is Camp's improvement so thanks for your post on this.  The Evo's have better ratings than the original numbers that I remember.  Evos: .5= 8kn all directions 1=10kn all directions; 1.5= 14kn all directions.  However, the old non evo's are different: .5= 9kn active vs 7 passive; 1=10kn active vs 8 passive; 1.5 = 14kn all.  The .125 Evo is also 3kn vs 2kn active vs passive.  For me, the strength difference in the old nylon ones that I have a mix of has always been better to have 9 vs 7 and 10 vs 8.  Maybe it is time to update my rack because all of the evos are stronger than the old nylon style!  I learned something here; thanks for sharing! :D

All said, I love my tricams.  They really do go where other stuff wont, and I carry .25-1.5 on every route.  Literally, every route; they live on my harness with my nut tool and prussik.  When going light and alpine, tricams are my go to, not cams because of weight and the ability to bail off of them (far superior to bailing off a cam; you can test them to security, unlike a cam which can blow or pop unexpectedly...).  When I am taking a double rack of cams on climbs near my limit, I still take my tricams for anchors or as a triple size on long, uniform cracks.

For me, there are too many reasons to keep .25-1.5 tricams on my rack than there are to take them off.  I know that there are a majority of people on this site that would rather just have cams and nuts for simplicity sake, but I have found them too useful to get rid of.

Pete, again thanks for all of this good information and experience you are sharing. It's much appreciated.

1. I can see what you are saying about inward flaring cracks that are not horizontal, that the direction of pull could be in the wrong direction. I will take this into account and consideration. 

2. This is making me think to just keep a few large size hexes on my rack instead and drop the smaller sizes. 

3. Not a problem. I'm not sure that everyone knows this either. Since the EVO's have not been around as long. 

And yes, I agree that the Tricams fit where nothing else does. And for myself too, in a lot of places they are on my rack. 

anotherclimber wrote:

Alex,

I do agree with your logic about full surface area contact for nuts and hexes,  but for some reason Tricams seem to forego this wisdom. Do some ground placement and bounce testing and you'll see that in passive mode it doesn't need to be an exact fit. Even the manual shows a passive placement that is not an exact fit. All you need is to snag the fulcrum or cam rails on a constriction. This opens up a lot more placement options. And yes, I do agree, what fits best is what should be placed, but I suspect that you are under utilizing your Tricams. 

Alex, 

I wanted to make a correction here just so nobody has an accident. While the picture in the manual for the passive placement is not terribly accurate making it look like the fulcrum is not engaged, it actually says right next to it:

Always make certain that both cam rails are contacting the rock, as well as the fulcrum point do that a true tripod is achieved. 

Source: http://doc.camp.it/Manuali/TRICAM_MANUALE38%20r7.pdf

So no constrictions without the fulcrum for passive mode. My point though in the prior comment was that there are passive placements of the Tricam where you won't have full contact in the fulcrum relief cut and fulcrum cut, say like you would with a vertical crack where the wall on one side stops and becomes rounded over on the top. A lot of times passive placements will be cam rails and fulcrum, and maybe in addition, the stingers up against the constriction. 

Russ Keane wrote:

Hexes never seem to get placed when I bring them.   They seem to be good for "alpine" type routes, like big corners and blocky features.  They seem like gear for mountaineering.  

Tricams on the other hand... are sweet and versatile.

Russ,

Do you feel this way about Tricam sizes larger than 1.5 or 2.0? 

Yes, as in replace both of them. 

As in get both of those off your rack.

"Do you feel this way about Tricam sizes larger than 1.5 or 2.0?"

Actually, yes.  I have a 3.0 and never use it.  It would be grouped with the hexes, to be used on very specific style routes, like mountaineering and the like.

Hey again, Another, to answer your question on 2.  Yes, i have found that it is worth carrying small tricams, then switching to hexes completely, dropping the smallest ones.  I carry .25-1.5 tricam and then 6,8,10 metolius hexes.  That plus a full set of cams and nuts and you can pull off a ton of routes.

It occurred to me while I was typing a comment on the other recent Tricam thread that this idea and question I had in this thread is not very practical or safe. I say this because in the manual it states that Tricams in passive mode are only more stable than a nut if you have an irregularity, bump or rugosity that the parallel cam rails can straddle. This keeps it from pulling sideways. The problem being that if I'm wanting to use larger size Tricams in their passive position to protect inward flaring cracks in place of hexes, then they will only be stable and good placements if there happens to be a feature for the parallel cam rails to straddle. Otherwise they will be no more stable than a single nut in a horizontal crack, which most trad leaders should already know is not a good practice or placement unless it happens to be a keyhole pocket. And I don't think it is realistic to think that I will always find a placement where the parallel cam rails will always straddle a feature.

So this is a no go. Looks like I'll be losing my hexes that overlap the sizes of my nuts and keeping the larger ones.

Tricams >>>>>>>>>>>>> hexes. I have a full rack of tricams I bought used off craigslist. Cams are obviously way better, but anywhere a cam can go, a tricam can go. 

Replace th tri cams and hexes on your rack with  SLCDs. There.  Fixed that for you.