This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
I took a leader fall yesterday onto an Omega Pacific link cam, the small purple one, #.5. It failed. On one of the lobes the smallest component of the lobe, the one closest to the axle, sheared where the pin joining it the the next piece of the is located.
This was not a big fall, I think I was 1.5-2 metres above the cam, on half ropes and a piece of gear that ripped must have taken some of the strain. On the other hand, given the climb and the condition of the cam after the fall I think there was a sideways strain which Omega Pacific warn against (see below.
However, I am very concerned that a reasonably straightforward fall can lead to such a failure. I plan to send details to the BMC technical committee and will also contact Omega Pacific direct. in the mean time, if you have one of these cams please be very, very careful in your placements.
Thankfully I sustained no injuries, the trusty red BD Camalot, which was next in line, held perfectly.
"link Cams in particular should be placed so that the stem is aimed directly toward the ground and, when loaded, the position of the axle does not rotate during a fall or when bounce-testing. Although Link Cams’ flexible stems can help “correct” a less-than-ideal placement, it is still important that the initial placement be made in proper alignment with anticipated load"
This was not a big fall, I think I was 1.5-2 metres above the cam, on half ropes and a piece of gear that ripped must have taken some of the strain. On the other hand, given the climb and the condition of the cam after the fall I think there was a sideways strain which Omega Pacific warn against (see below.
However, I am very concerned that a reasonably straightforward fall can lead to such a failure. I plan to send details to the BMC technical committee and will also contact Omega Pacific direct. in the mean time, if you have one of these cams please be very, very careful in your placements.
Thankfully I sustained no injuries, the trusty red BD Camalot, which was next in line, held perfectly.
"link Cams in particular should be placed so that the stem is aimed directly toward the ground and, when loaded, the position of the axle does not rotate during a fall or when bounce-testing. Although Link Cams’ flexible stems can help “correct” a less-than-ideal placement, it is still important that the initial placement be made in proper alignment with anticipated load"
In reply to Slarti B:
Another reason not to buy them on top of the fact that you could buy 3 DMM 4CUs for the price of one of them and that they are obviously quite easy to get stuck considering the number that I've seen stuck in cracks.
I'm quite sure I've seen a report detailing a similar failure.
Another reason not to buy them on top of the fact that you could buy 3 DMM 4CUs for the price of one of them and that they are obviously quite easy to get stuck considering the number that I've seen stuck in cracks.
I'm quite sure I've seen a report detailing a similar failure.
In reply to Slarti B:
good info.
makes them sound like gear thats great in the workshop but not really adaptable enough to the realities of much climbing.
how often do you get to place a cam as perfectly as youd like too?
can you recall which of the 3 articulating lobes were in contact when you placed it?
be interesting to know if the small one that f u cked out was the initial loading one or not (ie did it shear from both load and twist, or did the next lobe up take the load and lever the small one out, if you know what i mean).
good info.
makes them sound like gear thats great in the workshop but not really adaptable enough to the realities of much climbing.
how often do you get to place a cam as perfectly as youd like too?
can you recall which of the 3 articulating lobes were in contact when you placed it?
be interesting to know if the small one that f u cked out was the initial loading one or not (ie did it shear from both load and twist, or did the next lobe up take the load and lever the small one out, if you know what i mean).
In reply to ice.solo:
Not exactly, I was doing an undercling hand traverse and just wacked it in because I was getting pumped. But I am pretty sure it was one of the 2 smaller lobes that was in most contact, though with the link cams it can sometimes be difficult to tell.
It looks as though the mid lobe, which is undamaged, twisted and levered the pin which then sheared the fixing on the smallest lobe. The metal that has sheared is probably 2 mm square so not substantial. I will take a photo this evening.
The climb was Tensor II and you can see the overhang about a third of the way down in this photo http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=179188 It is not large so, although I swung a bit, it was not massive.
> can you recall which of the 3 articulating lobes were in contact when you placed it?
Not exactly, I was doing an undercling hand traverse and just wacked it in because I was getting pumped. But I am pretty sure it was one of the 2 smaller lobes that was in most contact, though with the link cams it can sometimes be difficult to tell.
> be interesting to know if the small one that f u cked out was the initial loading one or not (ie did it shear from both load and twist, or did the next lobe up take the load and lever the small one out, if you know what i mean).
It looks as though the mid lobe, which is undamaged, twisted and levered the pin which then sheared the fixing on the smallest lobe. The metal that has sheared is probably 2 mm square so not substantial. I will take a photo this evening.
The climb was Tensor II and you can see the overhang about a third of the way down in this photo http://www.ukclimbing.com/images/dbpage.php?id=179188 It is not large so, although I swung a bit, it was not massive.
In reply to Slarti B: Great pic of the Route, any chance of a pic of the Offending Cam????
In reply to Slarti B:
This is true of all cams and it seems ridiculous that a cam that has passed relevant tests and standards should fail in the way you describe. glad you weren't injured as I am sure it could have been a lot worse!
hope there is a positive outcome
>
> "link Cams in particular should be placed so that the stem is aimed directly toward the ground and, when loaded, the position of the axle does not rotate during a fall or when bounce-testing. Although Link Cams’ flexible stems can help “correct” a less-than-ideal placement, it is still important that the initial placement be made in proper alignment with anticipated load"
> "link Cams in particular should be placed so that the stem is aimed directly toward the ground and, when loaded, the position of the axle does not rotate during a fall or when bounce-testing. Although Link Cams’ flexible stems can help “correct” a less-than-ideal placement, it is still important that the initial placement be made in proper alignment with anticipated load"
This is true of all cams and it seems ridiculous that a cam that has passed relevant tests and standards should fail in the way you describe. glad you weren't injured as I am sure it could have been a lot worse!
hope there is a positive outcome
In reply to Slarti B:
This isn't uncommon and has been covered at some length on a Supertopo thread - in which one wag describes them as 'the widow maker'!
They are often reffered to by owners as a good 'panic piece', which doesn't sit well given the care that's needed with their placement. The last thing you want to be is 'panicking' when you're placing something that has an inherent, and not nessecarily obvious fragility.
Regards,
Steve
This isn't uncommon and has been covered at some length on a Supertopo thread - in which one wag describes them as 'the widow maker'!
They are often reffered to by owners as a good 'panic piece', which doesn't sit well given the care that's needed with their placement. The last thing you want to be is 'panicking' when you're placing something that has an inherent, and not nessecarily obvious fragility.
Regards,
Steve
In reply to Slarti B: This thread is making me happy as my link cam is now insitu near the top of the jorasses where my partner got it stuck at a belay! I dont miss it so much now!
In reply to Slarti B: can you upload a pic of the damaged cam please? All sounds very concerning - the fall you describe is hardly a demanding one.
In reply to Slarti B: Found this a while back
http://crabdev.blogspot.com/2009/09/omega-pacific-link-cam-failure-in-field...
James
http://crabdev.blogspot.com/2009/09/omega-pacific-link-cam-failure-in-field...
James
In reply to Slarti B: linked cams are not very good when they can move.
also to be fair the BD cam has more rope out when you landed on it. so less force unlike the linked cam above it. dont know about the ripped gear.
also to be fair the BD cam has more rope out when you landed on it. so less force unlike the linked cam above it. dont know about the ripped gear.
In reply to itsThere:
it doesn't really work like that, the lower cam would have had a higher fall factor associated with the fall so a greater peak force.
> (In reply to Slarti B) linked cams are not very good when they can move.
> also to be fair the BD cam has more rope out when you landed on it. so less force unlike the linked cam above it. dont know about the ripped gear.
> also to be fair the BD cam has more rope out when you landed on it. so less force unlike the linked cam above it. dont know about the ripped gear.
it doesn't really work like that, the lower cam would have had a higher fall factor associated with the fall so a greater peak force.
In reply to ice.solo:
Link to pictures attached
http://tinyurl.com/5w9rmuq
Re your last question, my guess is that the middle lobe took the load and then sheared the smallest lobe when the stem was twisted.
In response to other comments about the link cams. I have(had) 2, the big yellow and this small purple. Both bought in US for about the price of a dragon cam, certainly wouldn't pay UK prices!
Have had the big yellow for 3 years and use it:
1) when no other cam will fit, typically a crack that widens inside or an irregular flaring crack
2) for building a belay when it is easy to whack in, unlikely to suffer a high force and is not the only piece of gear
3) as a "panic piece", ie quickly get in something that will fit.
It is very definitely not a first choice cam and is used only for special placements, maybe because i have some lingering concern about robustness. So should I continue using the yellow one for eg option 1 above? Is a potentially weak piece of gear better than none at all?
More generally, if the limited twisting in a relatively mild fall can cause this failure how practical are these cams for real climbing (as others have pointed out) where you cannot guarantee a fall directly in line with the stem. It seems to me the operating poarameters may be too tight for real life.
Link to pictures attached
http://tinyurl.com/5w9rmuq
Re your last question, my guess is that the middle lobe took the load and then sheared the smallest lobe when the stem was twisted.
In response to other comments about the link cams. I have(had) 2, the big yellow and this small purple. Both bought in US for about the price of a dragon cam, certainly wouldn't pay UK prices!
Have had the big yellow for 3 years and use it:
1) when no other cam will fit, typically a crack that widens inside or an irregular flaring crack
2) for building a belay when it is easy to whack in, unlikely to suffer a high force and is not the only piece of gear
3) as a "panic piece", ie quickly get in something that will fit.
It is very definitely not a first choice cam and is used only for special placements, maybe because i have some lingering concern about robustness. So should I continue using the yellow one for eg option 1 above? Is a potentially weak piece of gear better than none at all?
More generally, if the limited twisting in a relatively mild fall can cause this failure how practical are these cams for real climbing (as others have pointed out) where you cannot guarantee a fall directly in line with the stem. It seems to me the operating poarameters may be too tight for real life.
In reply to Slarti B:
whoa. thats heavier than i thought. i got it wrong - thought the pin had shear - the actual lobe has broken.
makes me wonder if its a casting issue but i know nothing about such things.
a bit worrying really.
good pics by the way.
whoa. thats heavier than i thought. i got it wrong - thought the pin had shear - the actual lobe has broken.
makes me wonder if its a casting issue but i know nothing about such things.
a bit worrying really.
good pics by the way.
In reply to Slarti B: It does make you wonder about the product testing. See photos of my failure about two years ago. You can see that the nylon (I presume)'lobe' connecting the pins had sheared. The design was changed so that the pin became contiguous and I've always spoken highly of them since, however, metal castings failing makes me feel very differently.
Let me know if the link below fails and I'll put them on another forum.
http://www4.snapfish.co.uk/snapfishuk/thumbnailshare/AlbumID=4546397018/a=9...
Let me know if the link below fails and I'll put them on another forum.
http://www4.snapfish.co.uk/snapfishuk/thumbnailshare/AlbumID=4546397018/a=9...
In reply to Slarti B:
Have you heard anything back from the manufacturers or BMC yet? In the unlikley even't they don't take the cam off your hands I know an engineer with some experience of broken kit who might be interested.
It's probably too late for this advice, but avoid touching the broken surface. After a metal part breaks the microscopic surface structure can be quite useful for determining why, but it's quite fragile.
Have you heard anything back from the manufacturers or BMC yet? In the unlikley even't they don't take the cam off your hands I know an engineer with some experience of broken kit who might be interested.
It's probably too late for this advice, but avoid touching the broken surface. After a metal part breaks the microscopic surface structure can be quite useful for determining why, but it's quite fragile.
In reply to Slarti B:
Greetings … I’m the sales director for Omega Pacific and, after our UK distributor notified me of this thread, I wanted to add some remarks.
First off, we are glad to hear that the incident produced no injuries and that Slarti B is in good shape. We take reports of this sort very seriously and we want to do everything possible to fully address any concerns about our gear.
I’ve read the remarks in this thread and appreciate all the comments. I invite Slarti B to contact me so that we can arrange to get the cam back so we can inspect it for any defects in manufacturing or materials that might be to blame for the incident. My email address is [email protected] … please contact me so we can retrieve the damaged unit.
Since we launched Link Cams in early 2006, we’ve seen some returns with similar damage and, after extensive investigation, determined that each failure was the result of a sideways force being placed on the lobes at the hinge points of the individual links. Whether in real-world testing or in the laboratory, we’ve never seen a Link Cam fail below rating when it was loaded without force being applied to the sides of the lobe assemblies.
That discovery has led Omega to do a few things to address concerns about the safety of Link Cams.
We have re-written our Instructions For Usage and strengthened the message that these units need to be placed very deliberately in the direction of anticipated pull and that the cam not be permitted to rotate, shift or move after it’s been placed. This requires that cams be placed so that the stems point directly to the ground; may require use of slings to prevent rope drag from moving the unit as you climb above it (or to the side as in a traverse) and, if a Link Cam can’t be placed in this manner, another piece should be used. Naturally, this is always proper practice, no matter what kind of protection is being used, but it is particularly important when placing Link Cams. In testing, we’ve seen other cams fail and become damaged, too, but thanks to a traditional cam’s solid, single-piece lobes, they tolerate more “abuse” than Link Cams might. Subsequently, we believe that Link Cams should only be used by climbers that have experience and a keen ability to assess proper placements.
Simultaneously, we also worked to strengthen the units at the manufacturing level. In-line upgrades to the dimensions of the cams and their linkages have been made to make them more robust. Most recently—this past spring, in fact—we also began utilizing a new form of heat-treatment that renders those links stronger and more ductile, so that, should forces be introduced from the side, the cams are less likely to fracture; with the new process, cams may still become damaged if side loading occurs, but the material will tend to deform and warp instead of fracturing, thereby holding in place much better than before. We’re pleased to note that there haven’t been any reports of broken cams that feature this new heat treating process. When we receive Slarti B’s cam, we can determine if his was built prior to the change or not.
At the end of the day, we believe in Link Cams and we’re confident that they can be a valuable addition to a climber’s rack; we have thousands of climbers all over the world who use Link Cams reliably and confidently and make a point to let us know how much they value them. Link Cams are not appropriate for every placement, however, and definitely require a more critical eye and more experience to use safely and reliably. Some climbers may not feel that this is a fair tradeoff for the increased range they provide, though, and we respect that position, too.
In this particular case, we can’t make any assumptions or claims until we can inspect the damaged cam, of course, but when we do, we’ll share whatever we find with Slarti B. Again, please contact me so that we can arrange to have the cam returned to us here in the States and can start the inspection process. In the meantime, if anyone else has concerns or questions, please feel free to contact me by email.
Cheers!
________________
Michael Lane
Sales & Marketing Director
Omega Pacific
[email protected]
Greetings … I’m the sales director for Omega Pacific and, after our UK distributor notified me of this thread, I wanted to add some remarks.
First off, we are glad to hear that the incident produced no injuries and that Slarti B is in good shape. We take reports of this sort very seriously and we want to do everything possible to fully address any concerns about our gear.
I’ve read the remarks in this thread and appreciate all the comments. I invite Slarti B to contact me so that we can arrange to get the cam back so we can inspect it for any defects in manufacturing or materials that might be to blame for the incident. My email address is [email protected] … please contact me so we can retrieve the damaged unit.
Since we launched Link Cams in early 2006, we’ve seen some returns with similar damage and, after extensive investigation, determined that each failure was the result of a sideways force being placed on the lobes at the hinge points of the individual links. Whether in real-world testing or in the laboratory, we’ve never seen a Link Cam fail below rating when it was loaded without force being applied to the sides of the lobe assemblies.
That discovery has led Omega to do a few things to address concerns about the safety of Link Cams.
We have re-written our Instructions For Usage and strengthened the message that these units need to be placed very deliberately in the direction of anticipated pull and that the cam not be permitted to rotate, shift or move after it’s been placed. This requires that cams be placed so that the stems point directly to the ground; may require use of slings to prevent rope drag from moving the unit as you climb above it (or to the side as in a traverse) and, if a Link Cam can’t be placed in this manner, another piece should be used. Naturally, this is always proper practice, no matter what kind of protection is being used, but it is particularly important when placing Link Cams. In testing, we’ve seen other cams fail and become damaged, too, but thanks to a traditional cam’s solid, single-piece lobes, they tolerate more “abuse” than Link Cams might. Subsequently, we believe that Link Cams should only be used by climbers that have experience and a keen ability to assess proper placements.
Simultaneously, we also worked to strengthen the units at the manufacturing level. In-line upgrades to the dimensions of the cams and their linkages have been made to make them more robust. Most recently—this past spring, in fact—we also began utilizing a new form of heat-treatment that renders those links stronger and more ductile, so that, should forces be introduced from the side, the cams are less likely to fracture; with the new process, cams may still become damaged if side loading occurs, but the material will tend to deform and warp instead of fracturing, thereby holding in place much better than before. We’re pleased to note that there haven’t been any reports of broken cams that feature this new heat treating process. When we receive Slarti B’s cam, we can determine if his was built prior to the change or not.
At the end of the day, we believe in Link Cams and we’re confident that they can be a valuable addition to a climber’s rack; we have thousands of climbers all over the world who use Link Cams reliably and confidently and make a point to let us know how much they value them. Link Cams are not appropriate for every placement, however, and definitely require a more critical eye and more experience to use safely and reliably. Some climbers may not feel that this is a fair tradeoff for the increased range they provide, though, and we respect that position, too.
In this particular case, we can’t make any assumptions or claims until we can inspect the damaged cam, of course, but when we do, we’ll share whatever we find with Slarti B. Again, please contact me so that we can arrange to have the cam returned to us here in the States and can start the inspection process. In the meantime, if anyone else has concerns or questions, please feel free to contact me by email.
Cheers!
________________
Michael Lane
Sales & Marketing Director
Omega Pacific
[email protected]
In reply to michaellane:
Apologies for not contacting you earlier, I have been busy and then on holiday. I will email you with specific details and concerns but thought I should respond to a couple of your points in public.
This is probably the case with my failure, it does look like there was a sideways force
My cam was purchased a year ago so is probably the old sort
I think this is very very important for users of Link Cams out there to take note of.
Michael, thanks for your reply, I will be in touch
> (In reply to Slarti B)
>
> Greetings … I’m the sales director for Omega Pacific and, after our UK distributor notified me of this thread, I wanted to add some remarks. I invite Slarti B to contact me so that we can arrange to get the cam back so we can inspect it for any defects in manufacturing or materials that might be to blame for the incident. My email address is [email protected] … please contact me so we can retrieve the damaged unit.
>
> Greetings … I’m the sales director for Omega Pacific and, after our UK distributor notified me of this thread, I wanted to add some remarks. I invite Slarti B to contact me so that we can arrange to get the cam back so we can inspect it for any defects in manufacturing or materials that might be to blame for the incident. My email address is [email protected] … please contact me so we can retrieve the damaged unit.
Apologies for not contacting you earlier, I have been busy and then on holiday. I will email you with specific details and concerns but thought I should respond to a couple of your points in public.
> we’ve seen some returns with similar damage and, after extensive investigation, determined that each failure was the result of a sideways force being placed on the lobes at the hinge points of the individual links.
This is probably the case with my failure, it does look like there was a sideways force
> That discovery has led Omega to do a few things to address concerns about the safety of Link Cams....Most recently—this past spring, in fact—we also began utilizing a new form of heat-treatment that renders those links stronger and more ductile, so that, should forces be introduced from the side, the cams are less likely to fracture;
My cam was purchased a year ago so is probably the old sort
> We have re-written our Instructions For Usage and strengthened the message that these units need to be placed very deliberately in the direction of anticipated pull and that the cam not be permitted to rotate, shift or move after it’s been placed...if a Link Cam can’t be placed in this manner, another piece should be used.
I think this is very very important for users of Link Cams out there to take note of.
Michael, thanks for your reply, I will be in touch
In reply to Slarti B:
hope you don't mind the quick hijack but I've been waiting for you to relpy, I've a couple of questions for michael myself and thought it only polite for you to reply first!
Michael, I have contacted Omega via the website several times but never had a relpy. I asked about trigger wire repair. This seems to be a real weak point on what is otherwise a great bit of kit <when used correctly> I have resorted to self repairing and have now done about 5 cams, each time 'my' repair outlasting the remaining factory fitted trigger wires. No easy to bodge up, had to resort to so thinking outside the box to come up with a solution. It came to me that Omega have missed a trick in after sales as a repair kit would have been welcome for users. Is there a technical reason why the trigger wire keeper pegs on the cam lobes are not a machine screw instead? Had they been so repacement wires would have been easy and quick for users to repair them at home.
I use a pair of linkers on long/easy mountain days and perhaps chuck one on the rack for a 'get you out of the shit' winter piece, in both cases leaving all conventional cams in the cupboard at home. I find them great for this kind of use. I am aware of the placement orientation dos and don't. Never fallen on one BTW but lowered off without issue.
Looking forward to your reply.
hope you don't mind the quick hijack but I've been waiting for you to relpy, I've a couple of questions for michael myself and thought it only polite for you to reply first!
Michael, I have contacted Omega via the website several times but never had a relpy. I asked about trigger wire repair. This seems to be a real weak point on what is otherwise a great bit of kit <when used correctly> I have resorted to self repairing and have now done about 5 cams, each time 'my' repair outlasting the remaining factory fitted trigger wires. No easy to bodge up, had to resort to so thinking outside the box to come up with a solution. It came to me that Omega have missed a trick in after sales as a repair kit would have been welcome for users. Is there a technical reason why the trigger wire keeper pegs on the cam lobes are not a machine screw instead? Had they been so repacement wires would have been easy and quick for users to repair them at home.
I use a pair of linkers on long/easy mountain days and perhaps chuck one on the rack for a 'get you out of the shit' winter piece, in both cases leaving all conventional cams in the cupboard at home. I find them great for this kind of use. I am aware of the placement orientation dos and don't. Never fallen on one BTW but lowered off without issue.
Looking forward to your reply.
In reply to blanchie14c & slartiB:
Slarti ... Thanks for your respone! I'll look forward to hearing from you so we can conduct investigation on that cam.
Blanchie ... I appreciate your remarks. I'm disappointed we don't seem to have gotten your email via the website! We respond to every email that comes through, so I'll have our webmaster confirm that there aren't any broken links to our in-box.
As for the repair kit ... kind of a long story. Suffice to say that I agree with you.
The background on that is, we had originally designed Link Cams to be self-repairable if the cables wore out. However, shortly after their launch, a defect in how some of the triggers and trigger-wire posts mated was discovered which required a two-stage fix: first, we immediately began replacing the posts with screws and, as quickly as we could, changed the entire trigger/cable design to the current style which is much stronger and more reliable. Both fixes rendered our plan for home trigger-wire repair seriously challenged as it would then require different versions of the cables and that the customer know exactly which version they needed. And, most significantly, the upgrade changed the swage parts at the ends of the cable which require a particular tool to properly attach them to the lobes.
In the end, we chose to fix a bigger issue at the expense of ease-of-replacement of the cables.
We repair cables in-house—usually for free, as long as it’s not obviously an excessive-abuse kind of situation—but that is, admittedly, inconvenient for overseas customers. If you’d like us to repair yours back to factory standard, please get in touch with us and we’ll be happy to work it out for you. In the meantime, I’d be interested in seeing your DIY fix! Send me photos, if you can, to my email address.
For the future … we are currently working on a Generation 2 version of all Link Cam sizes that will include as many of the most-common recommendations we’ve received from users over the years. The cable issue is among the changes. No date for release of the new cams has been published, but we’re working hard to get them done as quickly as possible.
Thanks again for the candid feedback … we really do appreciate it!
--Lane
____________________
Michael Lane
Omega Pacific
Slarti ... Thanks for your respone! I'll look forward to hearing from you so we can conduct investigation on that cam.
Blanchie ... I appreciate your remarks. I'm disappointed we don't seem to have gotten your email via the website! We respond to every email that comes through, so I'll have our webmaster confirm that there aren't any broken links to our in-box.
As for the repair kit ... kind of a long story. Suffice to say that I agree with you.
The background on that is, we had originally designed Link Cams to be self-repairable if the cables wore out. However, shortly after their launch, a defect in how some of the triggers and trigger-wire posts mated was discovered which required a two-stage fix: first, we immediately began replacing the posts with screws and, as quickly as we could, changed the entire trigger/cable design to the current style which is much stronger and more reliable. Both fixes rendered our plan for home trigger-wire repair seriously challenged as it would then require different versions of the cables and that the customer know exactly which version they needed. And, most significantly, the upgrade changed the swage parts at the ends of the cable which require a particular tool to properly attach them to the lobes.
In the end, we chose to fix a bigger issue at the expense of ease-of-replacement of the cables.
We repair cables in-house—usually for free, as long as it’s not obviously an excessive-abuse kind of situation—but that is, admittedly, inconvenient for overseas customers. If you’d like us to repair yours back to factory standard, please get in touch with us and we’ll be happy to work it out for you. In the meantime, I’d be interested in seeing your DIY fix! Send me photos, if you can, to my email address.
For the future … we are currently working on a Generation 2 version of all Link Cam sizes that will include as many of the most-common recommendations we’ve received from users over the years. The cable issue is among the changes. No date for release of the new cams has been published, but we’re working hard to get them done as quickly as possible.
Thanks again for the candid feedback … we really do appreciate it!
--Lane
____________________
Michael Lane
Omega Pacific
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...