In reply to BStar:
Stevo does have a bit of bee in his bonnet about the superlights. Full disclosure, I worked on the cams above so I guess I could be construed as biased too. I own the both the superlights and the dmm offsets and had a set of the HB alloy offsets before that and also a set of the Metolius curve nuts. So the way I see superlights is not as a real offset but as a way of giving yourself more options. The most you will see in most normal falls is less than 7kN, so for the majority of the time they will be fine. But really you just need to take them for what they are worth - they are not as strong clearly. But then do you need 14kN like DMM want you to go with? Probably not. 10kN is plenty for pretty much any placement you'll ever make. OK so superlights are not as strong as that, but 10kN is an extreme impact, a factor 2 onto a single piece. The compromise they've made here is that they have reduced wire size, maybe they shouldn't have but they are trying to appeal to a particular user which clearly is not Stevo.
Initially I was pretty unconvinced about the concept as I thought they would be inferior to the DMM product in every way, but having now used them for 3/4 of a year I feel I can say with confidence that they are at least as good. For what it's worth I thought DMM somehow managed to downgrade their nut from the original as the HB's were in my view perfect. And if I were being ruthless I would probably not bother carrying the largest sizes of the DMM Offsets because I just don't place them - I usually use up to the red size and after that I just don't feel I find the placements. So what's the difference with the superlights? The fact that the aspect ratio of the offset is different seems to somehow help them seat very well, much better than I had expected. And in the other orientation you are able to effect very shallow placements or odd shaped placements much better than any other standard nut I've used.
So you have to balance the lack of massive strength against their usability, and the fact that they are neater and lighter on your rack. For me, when I climb in the dolomites and I am climbing between pegs so want to carry many extenders and there is a lot of fixed gear, they are a great solution - rather than taking half the nuts like some people might I take a full set, have double the placements and just accept that each individual placement is going to be a little weaker. For Curly, he feels the strength is warranted and I can understand that point of view - perhaps in time WC might consider making a "prettylight" night with a stronger cable to serve that market. I feel if they did that they would be better than the DMM product in every way. But at the end of the day they have taken a risk to bring you a different and useful product.
As for the cams not shattering the earth with their amazingness, what you need to consider is that Heliums bombed. Like completely. Hence why shops were discounting them very soon after they came out. It seemed to the sales guys that the market was at double axle whether they liked it or not. Lets face it, single axle cams are more stable, they are lighter per unit, in terms of shear physics, single axle cams are a less complicated and more robust solution. so what should they do? Continue to sell what the market considers a dud or take the hit and move on?
Now whilst thy might appear to be the same as a Camalot they really aren't. We made a big effort to optimise the sizes so that there are absolutely no inconsistencies through the range - no other company has done that - DMM have literally copied the range sizes of BD but added a 13.75 degree angle. If you look at in depth there are some big gaps and some big compressions in their range. Then we also made the lobes as wide as we could (Stevo is going to disagree on this one) to help prevent the most common real world pull out which is through rock pulverisation - if you look at DMM's new offering and Metolius's new sharktook cam surface they have tried to address the same issue in a different way. So weight for weight you have more metal in contact with the rock to help reduce the surface stresses present within the rock. Then we reduced axle weight by making them hollow which means you more or less get 2 for the price of one.
The pull out sling again - it's a compromise - some people like it some don't and just want ultimate strength. What Toby says above about not needing more extenders is to some extent truth, but consider this: the dragon achieves much of it's lightness through not having a thumbloop. The cable section of the thumbloop as it's steel weighs considerably more than an aluminium pigs nostril. They have further reduced weight by shortening the stem cable as much as possible. What you lose by doing this is reach inside the crack and some 5cm in length, about the length of a small carabiner. By retaining a thumbloop you actually come back to a similar extended length to a standard loop length plus an extender. So it's a little more complex than just calling marketing. It also makes them in my view the most comfortable in your hand out of any product on the market, especially the largest silver/grey one.
So overall, we've made lots of small incremental improvements to deliver what they feel is the best set of features they can.
Now then, Ultralight BD's. To be honest having held them in my hand at tradeshows, I'm not convinced. The cam lobes are thin as hell which is NOT a good thing on double axle cams, they are not as light as they could be, the whole thing is pretty bulky and the sling is not hermetically sealed which means if you get grit and dirt ingress, it will sit there abrading the dyneema internally with no way of inspecting the sling as the plastic is black. Water and dirt trapped in a plastic tube with fibres, even dyneema fibres is not a great idea. But I guess long term usage will prove I'm wrong...
Post edited at 11:04