UKC

Would be interested to hear peoples thoughts on which brand/models of cams perform best on slate and limestone? Totems are rated on limestone but does anyone have experience using them on slate? Thanks.

In reply to Ben87:

I've placed a few totems on slate but haven't fallen on them so can only half help They certainly feel more solid than my comparable sized dmm and wc cams.

In reply to Ben87:

For limestone... tricams?!

In reply to humptydumpty:

Sure, tricams have their place on limestone and I have been on a route where a pink tricam was the only piece of pro. I maybe should have been more specific that it's SLCD's I'm keen to hear peoples opinions and experience on, any slate heads want to jump in here?

In reply to Ben87:

some slate and limestone cams slide right out, some are bomber - you have to judge your placement more

The fancy totems have a very high holding power but I haven't used them

In reply to Ben87:

http://www.coldmountainkit.com/knowledge/reviews/330-totem-cam-review

In reply to ashtond6:

It's in these poor low friction placements that I'm trying to decide what cams give the best chance of holding a fall, it's better placing something rather than nothing at times. The totems seem like the top candidate but would be good to hear first hand how they perform on slate, they are not cheap after all and also don't go down to micro sizes.

In reply to Ben87:
I climb limestone all the time and any cam will do provided it's placed properly.
I guess you don't have as many options as you would on grit for example but then everything sticks to grit !

In reply to Ben87:


Yes they do. Google Totem Basics. There're wonderful. Can't speak for their performance on limestone but if anything will stick, it's them.

In reply to BnB:

its not the totem basics with the extra high holding power, its the totem cam

In reply to afshapes:

Of course you always want a good placement. There is a limestone crag I climb that is known to be particularly bad with cams, they look bomber in good placements but fall on them and there's a good chance they will rip out. Each Cam manufacturer and model has different specs from camming angle to alloy used and will perform differently however slightly that is. But If you were in the ground fall zone and found a placement for a cam however good or bad that placement is (local crag placements can look good but spits out cams) is there a particular model that you would trust to hold over another? Obviously after having seated the cam as best as possible.

In reply to Ben87:

I like camalots. ..more surface area.
My mate uses dragons and another uses 4cus.
I climb the wye which is a bit more slippery, gower and Pembroke. .The sea cliff stuff is much coarser but I haven't heard of any ripping in falls. We also have hard sandstone and recently whilst messing about I clipped a c3 that was placed in a flake, to a sling larks footed to my harness and took a leap backwards, the rock exploded and I got tw*tted in the head with a c3 !!!

In reply to afshapes:

Ha, that's one way to test your gear! The c3's look like a lovely bit of kit, I recently had a play with them in the shop, they look great for their narrow head width and getting into little pockets on limestone, I thought they were a bit stiff though and may be prone to walking, they seem to have strong springs though. I like how the wires are protected unlike Zero's.

In reply to Ben87:
Metolius Fat Cams have wider cams for (in theory) extra holding power due to more metal being in contact with the rock, & I think the cam angle is 13.25 compared to 13.75 of Wild Country and DMM cams.

What difference it would make I've no idea, though.

In reply to Timmd:

It would be really useful if someone with access to test kit would test the most popular cams and once and for all find out which holds best. You would have thought if one manufacturer were convinced their model was best (Totem? the brand new Dragons mark 2?) they'd put a nice video together of competitor's models pulling out from slippy/flared slots and their model staying in place... or are the tests not repeatable enough?

In reply to Ben87:

C3s are brilliant I must say. ...I haven't had any experience of them walking at all. .I always clip an extender. They are very stable and are great in horizontal breaks. The narrow head is great too. I feel the alien/totem are a bit too flexible. ...my mate took a wanger on one and it got smashed, they replaced it but it took ages. ...I reckon they would be great for aid climbing though.

In reply to David Barlow:

I've no idea if they are repeatable enough, but you're right it would be useful.

In reply to Timmd:

The theory behind the fat cams is they spread the load more when you are concenred about the strength of the rock (e.g. some soft desert sandstone in the US)

With hard rock it is purely the camming angle and co-efficient of friction that will determine whether it holds or not, regardless of surface area. I know it sounds counter-intuitive but that's what physics says.

In reply to Jimbo C:

That's interesting, you would think a larger surface area would create more friction with the rock.

In reply to Jimbo C:

That makes sense.

In reply to Timmd:

The cam lobes of the Metolius Fat Cams are made of a softer aluminium alloy (6061-T6 instead of 7075-T6 aluminium) than other Metolius camming devices. At the origin they were mainly designed for soft-rock as sandstone.