By Evan Sanders
From Westminster, CO
May 1, 2011
| Ryan Williams wrote: They felt like toys. I don't see them being as durable as BD's but only time will tell. How exactly did they "feel more bomber in granite" than Camalots? How did you come to that conclusion? And how could you hear a "shifting sound" in sandstone when you were falling? What kind of falls did you take on the granite and sandstone? Did you notice movement/slippage in either medium? Did they open up at all in sandstone?
I can see how they might feel like toys.
As for durability, I've used them quite a bit since I've got them, and other than the anodized color coming off the contact area on the lobes, they still perform just as they did from day 1.
The "feeling more bomber" was a personal opinion. They just felt like they could hold better. But since camalots are bomber in themselves, it's all subjective, both will hold just fine.
The shifting sound wasn't so much the cam shifting as it was sounding like the lobes were exerting so much force that it was digging into the rock. I took 5-10 foot falls, no whippers. They didn't open up at all, but in sandstone there were slight indentations after I cleaned them (not a lot, we're talking like less than a millimeter, but it was noticable). In granite I personally though it was about as solid as could be. Actually, the first placement I put the Dragons through were in granite. I test pulled with my hand fairly hard and it slipped slightly. But every time after that it was fine, my guess is that the anodization on the lobes caused there to be a significant lack of friction. It hasn't slipped since the first placement.
I think the hard to place comment is completely wrong. I've been fairly pumped before I placed a couple, and there wasn't a placement I couldn't get the dragon cams in in less than 4-5 seconds. Very easy to place. I'm considering replacing my c4s with dragons as of quite a bit more use after I wrote this review. I might be making a video if anyone cares (just for fun, I'm not a serious reviewer, but hopefully someone will take it seriously).
EDIT: Sorry for taking so long to reply Ryan. I had completely forgotten for a while to check this thread and I'm not getting any email notifications for some reason. | 
FLAG |
By Joe Manlove
May 2, 2011
| I find that the metal thumb stud is a step backwards from the coated thumb loop on most modern cams. Also it's bigger than the one on the older c4s making it that much more annoying.
Even if they changed it to a real thumb loop I still wouldn't think the price difference was justified. (I just realized the irony of my stance here, I'm advocating bd cams because they're cheaper; that's not something I ever thought would happen.)
Yes, Manlove... It was irritating in highschool, but has actually been relatively chill since. |
FLAG |
By Brian Scoggins
From Eugene, OR
May 2, 2011
| Bawls E. Climber wrote: Good point Brian. Although I do sometimes use the smaller Big Bros in larger horizontals rather then a cam.
To be clear, I'm not criticizing anybody for using the piece that best fits the placement, just stating that my core rack will be composed of pieces that are easiest to place (for me).
For me as well, the endcap is not as easy to operate as the thumbloop, but fortunately you can tell this in the shop. Mostly it comes down to getting your thumb in the right place quickly while trying to place the piece. I find that the Dragon's sling system exacerbates the problem by giving you twice as many strands you have to maneuver around (by comparision, the double sling on the DMM 4cams is pretty easy to deal with, on account of the big thumb loop).
As far as durability goes, the only Dragon cam I've really fiddled with was fished out of a crack, and I had to beat on it with a hammer to get it to go. A cam that's light enough to take free-climbing is not going to hold up well to hammer beatings. |
FLAG |
By squiddo
From Mountain View, CA
May 8, 2011
| Thanks for the review (and comments). I've stated this before somewhere but I own but 2 sets of C4's (not to mention previous versions going back to V.1) and 1 set of Dragon cams. I LOVE C4's and for the larger (.5 - 4) sizes they tend to be my go to cams. I bought a set of Dragon cams last year and have used them a fair amount both front and back country. While the weight savings is nice, it in itself isn't enough to get me to sell the C4's. The Dragons seem/act incredibly well made and I have no extra perceivable trouble placing them over a like sized C4. Having said that I think they complement the C4 well.
Were I to own 1 set it would be a C4, 2 sets I'd have no issue mixing them.
As to Customer Service, the experience I've had lately around the recalled #4 & 5 was stellar. Great communication, fast turnaround, extra "sorry for the hassle" phantom carbiners.
All is right in the world again.
marc |
FLAG |
By coldfinger
May 22, 2011
| Um, didn't DMM warn against using overhand knots with Dyneema?
Linky |
FLAG |
By J.Roatch
From Twisp, WA
May 22, 2011
| Good read. I'd like to try them both now. As someone who does not have a ton of experience trad climbing, the points brought up in this debate/investigation will lead me to pay more attention to such qualities before purchasing personal equipment. Thanks |
FLAG |
By Wayne Cheung
Jul 29, 2011
| caughtinside wrote: My #1 concern remains the durability of the thin sling. Those slings wear out faster than nylon or dyneema, and I think reslinging would be a pain.
Don't be silly. You say the slings on the cam won't last as long as dyneems/nylon slings, but they *are* dyneema slings. They'll last as long as dyneema slings last.
@Evan, nice review.
@JLP, don't know what you're on about. The finishing on my Dragon cams is excellent.
@Ryan, you can't call forging crap simply because you're used to seeing CNC. Also never had a problem with them walking on a route because the lobes are 'thinner'. Personally, I think you've concocted an imaginary negative. Also, DMM say they put in stronger springs (relative to the C4 I suppose) for a stronger hold. So, swings and roundabouts. |
FLAG |
By Wayne Cheung
Jul 29, 2011
| J.Roatch wrote: Good read. I'd like to try them both now. As someone who does not have a ton of experience trad climbing, the points brought up in this debate/investigation will lead me to pay more attention to such qualities before purchasing personal equipment. Thanks
J, what you'll notice is that lots who like BD C4s will say most things that aren't C4s are crap. Some will even go further and give you 'facts' that are anything but fact... "hot forging = rubbish" "extendable [dyneema] slings = not as durable as dyneema/nylon slings(!)" etc. Likewise, others will see differences as new, innovative and/or positive.
The major differences come down to personal preference. I prefer Dragons because I think that DMM have taken the best bits of the BD design and added improvements, I like the extendable slings, like that they're made in the UK rather than China etc. I don't have a problem with the lack of thumb loop - in fact, I like the added option of being able to palm the cam.
Anyway, the truth is that cams from any of the major manufacturers will do the job. I've climbed with C4s, Wild country friends, DMM 4CUs and own a set of DMM Dragons myself. I prefer my Dragons but am happy to climb with the others.
Just go down to the shop, play with a couple and see what ones you like best/can afford. Here in the UK, Dragons and C4s (and new WC Helium Friends) are basically the same price (think C4s are slightly pricier). In the US, it looks like C4s are much cheaper.
Climb on. |
FLAG |
By Ryan Williams
Administrator
From London (sort of)
Jul 29, 2011
| Wayne Cheung wrote: @Ryan, you can't call forging crap simply because you're used to seeing CNC. Also never had a problem with them walking on a route because the lobes are 'thinner'. Personally, I think you've concocted an imaginary negative. Also, DMM say they put in stronger springs (relative to the C4 I suppose) for a stronger hold. So, swings and roundabouts.
A lot of my comments were taken out of context or just plain misunderstood. I never said that forging was crap or that it was any worse than machining, and in fact I know quite well the benefits of a hot forge. I simply said that I'm not used to seeing forged lobes and at first glance I was thrown off. They are different than what I am used to seeing, and that's what I said.
I also never said that the lobes being thinner would be a problem. I simply disagreed with the OP, who said that they were not thinner, and posted a fuzzy picture trying to prove his claim. I'm no engineer (like I said above) and don't know exactly how the thinner lobes will impact the holding power of the cam, and I never claimed that it would.
So yea, I may have sounded negative but I never made any of the claims that you are arguing with me about. I personally love DMM, have met the owner (one of them) and think he's a great guy, and will always buy from them when I can because they are in it for the love of climbing. In this case, however, I have tried multiple times now to talk myself into getting a few of these cams and I just can't do it. I don't like the design and I don't think that they will hold up to the beating that I put on my C4's, especially the dyneema sling.
But like I said above, my actual climbing experience with the Dragons is minimal, and again like I said above, only time will tell if my guess on durability will be correct or not. |
FLAG |
By caughtinside
From Oakland CA
Jul 31, 2011
| Wayne Cheung wrote: Don't be silly. You say the slings on the cam won't last as long as dyneems/nylon slings, but they *are* dyneema slings. They'll last as long as dyneema slings last.
Those thin blends have a very short lifespan. Those mammut 8mm contact slings have been tested and found to lose about half their strength after 3 years of regular use.
Regular dyneema slings (12mm) last longer and retain their strength.
I suppose I should have been more clear, it's the sling width which I have an issue with. I climb a fair bit, and those 8mm slings do wear noticeably faster. I don't want to replace cam slings every three years, and you need specialized equipment to sew that stuff. Plus it's twice as expensive. I stopped using 8mm slings for that reason, I sure don't want them on my cams.
Where do you send those things for reslinging? Who does the work in the US? |
FLAG |
By JesseT
From Portland, OR
Aug 10, 2011
| Does anyone think it would be kosher to resling these with some kind of high tensile cord (like sterling powercord) instead of getting them reslung with 8mm webbing? Pros/cons? |
FLAG |
By doligo
Aug 10, 2011
| mxq wrote: where are the DMMs manufactured?
Wales |
FLAG |
By Brice Harris
Aug 12, 2011
| As far as thinness in lobes:
In an ideal situation, the lobes load lineally across the contact point of the rock. Rounding the edges, does effectively reduce that distance, which in turn increases the force exerted on the lobe/rock surface connection. This is fine in dense/hard rock, and not as acceptable in soft or insecure rock. Obviously, DMM designed these cams to accept whatever loads are anticipated, so structurally there is no difference, the cam just may not work as well in some sandstone or other soft rock.
Even that is debatable, the round edge would gradually spread the force across the lobe essentially radiating load into the the stone and (this is without any calculations, just thinking mechanically about the design) possibly reducing peak impact force in a way that flat lobed cams do not. In reality if you're that concerned about the quality of rock you should either a) run that shit out, or b) buy some fat cams.
However, the rounded edges provide a positive in that they are more likely to seat in a groove or between crystals. The rounded edge will push the cam to one side or the other of an unstable placement. This is not likely something that will make or break the cam though, as any trad climber knows, real-world execution is often far from theory.
This cam is probably not in any critical way different than a c4. What it comes down to is whether or not you want lighter cams, with no thumbloop, and dyneema slings, or, heavier, with thumb loops, and fatty slings. I personally find myself using the outer part of the loop on my c4's more often than the loop itself so a cam with no loop could be nice. If I see them on sale somewhere I'd probably pick up a couple for long approaches and wide cracks, both of which I love. |
FLAG |
By John Wilder
From Las Vegas, NV
Aug 12, 2011
| caughtinside wrote: Those thin blends have a very short lifespan. Where do you send those things for reslinging? Who does the work in the US?
Indeed- I use 10mm now, and I think the next go I'm going to switch over to nylon. Dyneema is nice and light and has some real strengths, but the lifespan just doesnt work for me.
As for the US option to re-sling, if anyone can do it stateside, it'll be John Yates- I'm not sure if he is doing it, but I know he has the equipment to do it if he wanted to. My suspicion is that its either him or your Dragon cams are taking a trip over the pond for re-slinging in a couple of years. |
FLAG |
By Evan Sanders
From Westminster, CO
Aug 14, 2011
| johnL wrote: I don't feel like I'm in a feisty mood today BUT The "review" reads like a veiled DMM advertisement. It's apologetic for all of the cam's faults, gives workarounds for others, and flat ignores others. Simply put, I give no credit to the OP, he's not trying to be objective, he's trying to justify the money he spent on cams. I won't come out and say what the best unit on the market is, since a single inclusive answer doesn't exist. However, I'm confident in saying that the Dragon is not it.
OR...
You could be completely wrong and that's just how I feel about the cams. A review based on opinion. What the hell do you think a review is anyway? Many of the points were objective. Sure some were subjective. But most weren't.
But I never said they were the best on the market. My vote for that goes to the Totem. |
FLAG |
By Peter Rakowitz
From Portland, OR
Aug 14, 2011
| Spri wrote: Unless it blows out the rock, I fail to see how this issue of "narrow lobes" has any bearing on the rock at all. If I was in the Fisher Towers, I *might* pick up BDs over a Dragon cam. Actually, if I was going to do that, I'd just go for the new Metolius UL Fat cams. In granite, and almost any other stone, less contact area is pretty much irrelevant. On the positive side, they have a smaller width profile as a result, right? So better for placements in pods. They are both good cams, I'd pick DMM on the "made in England" as well as lighter and more "sling-able" issues.
I'm no scientist but it is my understanding that cams use both friction and outward force when stopping a fall, so less metal in contact with rock (thinner cam lobes) would mean a less effective device, though maybe marginally so... just sayin. |
FLAG |
By Jeff Maurin
From Pittsburgh
Aug 19, 2011
| Peter Rakowitz wrote: ...less metal in contact with rock (thinner cam lobes) would mean a less effective device
Not sure about that: with the same force (of the fall) being spread over a smaller surface area, the pressure per per square inch is greater. |
FLAG |
By JesseT
From Portland, OR
Aug 19, 2011
| Jeff Maurin wrote: Not sure about that: with the same force (of the fall) being spread over a smaller surface area, the pressure per per square inch is greater.
Yep, coefficient of friction isn't dependent on surface area (in theory, real world situations are usually less clear cut). I was also thinking that with squared-off lobes (most cams) a placement in anything other than a perfectly parallel-sided crack would result in the lobes resting on the corners instead of the flat surface, in which case the rounded lobes would functionally have the better contact patch. |
FLAG |
|
RSS Feed
