Placing cams as passive pro

In the little "instruction" booklet that comes with all new BD C4's, it says that it's fine to place the cam passively. The little illustration they give shows the cam, un-retracted, resting/chocked between two edges. I've never placed a cam like this, but it just seems sketch. Has anyone done this?

not exactly, but i've placed cams where the crack widened toward the back... just pushed them in until they clicked open.

I had a friend who protected the crux of the first pitch of the north chimney on castleton with a passively placed green camalot. This was after a 20 foot runout. That is sketch! Anyways, it seems like the advantage here is if the cam walks into a place where the crack widens, you are not going to die if you fall on it.

Keeping that in mind, I am still waiting for the day for a perfect passive cam placement. I know there is one out there, and I will find it!

I've done it, never fallen on one placed that way. That stuff works so well, if placed per the instructions you'll be fine. Therein lies the rub.

I see the biggest advantage of the passive placement option being that you can place a near tipped out cam and not worry that the unit will fail.

This won't change the fact that a tipped out cam is a crappy placement, it just means the unit won't break.

I guess you could thread an eye with a cam in certain situations, or place it as shown in the manual. But, the cam will obviously not seat well and is likely to be unreliable because of the fact that there is nothing holding it in place.

Just my 2 cents.

I've slung (girth-hitched) a fixed cam. Does that count?

The key is that only double-axle cams can be used as passive pro. I've never seen a good spot to use one that way. They're bulky, and awkward to place passively, when hexes usually work much better in the same spots.

Dave Alie wrote:The key is that only double-axle cams can be used as passive pro. I've never seen a good spot to use one that way. They're bulky, and awkward to place passively, when hexes usually work much better in the same spots.

Agree re. the hexes, but IIRC the small Trangos - former Splitter 2 cam design - are also full strength when open. There's no way those cams can invert.

Dave Alie wrote:The key is that only double-axle cams can be used as passive pro. I've never seen a good spot to use one that way. They're bulky, and awkward to place passively, when hexes usually work much better in the same spots.

I remember that now from John Longs "How to Climb Rock" book. On page 103 he says, "The twin-axle Camalots are the only SLCDs that can be used as a passive chock, though a passive nut is almost always a better option."

But I'm wondering why this is the case. It might have to do with introducing a double sheer load stress onto a single axle.

Does anyone know for sure?

-Glenn

if the crack is too flaring for a typical cam placement or it is a chockstone placement, you don't have a hex, a nut is too small or you don't have the right size AND there is a great hex-like spot where you drop in the pro from above...place passively. in theory is this any different than a hex?

done it, but never fallen onto one.

For the very few times where this type of placement would seem reasonable to place, I would definitely feel nervous about it. It seems that nobody trusts this type of placement considering nobody has admitted to falling on one. I wanna hear a first hand story so that next time this seems like my only option I can trust it

Glenn Gordon wrote: I remember that now from John Longs "How to Climb Rock" book. On page 103 he says, "The twin-axle Camalots are the only SLCDs that can be used as a passive chock, though a passive nut is almost always a better option." But I'm wondering why this is the case. It might have to do with introducing a double sheer load stress onto a single axle. Does anyone know for sure? -Glenn

I do not design cams but I can tell you this: Newton's laws say that the shear load on the axles in a double-axle cam are no worse than the loads on a single-axle cam. But in a double-axle cam, each lobe is prevented from inverting by the axle about its neighbor rotates.The axles are really strong (duh).

Single-axle cams are prevented from inverting by lugs on each lobe which catch on corresponding shapes on the neighboring lobe. Considering only mechanical failure of the cam, two possibilities lead to a dangerous passive placement. Manufacturing lugs which are strong enough might be expensive or impossible, or it might be difficult to prevent the lugs from slipping sideways, then past each other, allowing the cam to invert.

Dave Alie wrote:The key is that only double-axle cams can be used as passive pro. I've never seen a good spot to use one that way. They're bulky, and awkward to place passively, when hexes usually work much better in the same spots.

Also in response to Tim and Glenn - If this is the case, then what's up with cams that have full-strength cam stops (e.g. Wild Country Friends, Metolius TCUs, Mastercams, DMM 4CUs)? DMM, on their website, actually gives a passive strength rating for their 4CUs, at 10kN.

Aaron Martinuzzi wrote: Also in response to Tim and Glenn - If this is the case, then what's up with cams that have full-strength cam stops (e.g. Wild Country Friends, Metolius TCUs, Mastercams, DMM 4CUs)? DMM, on there website, actually gives a passive strength rating for their 4CUs, at 10kN.

Perhaps the text in John Long's book is outdated. I really don't know.

-Glenn

mountainproject.com/v/new_y…

Glenn Gordon wrote: I remember that now from John Longs "How to Climb Rock" book. On page 103 he says, "The twin-axle Camalots are the only SLCDs that can be used as a passive chock, though a passive nut is almost always a better option." But I'm wondering why this is the case. It might have to do with introducing a double sheer load stress onto a single axle. Does anyone know for sure? -Glenn

I would guess that the nut will be a more secure placement. You can sink a nut into a constriction and give it a sharp tug to set it, but I can't see how you'd accomplish that with a Camalot.

Evan1984 wrote:I see the biggest advantage of the passive placement option being that you can place a near tipped out cam and not worry that the unit will fail.

A passive placement of a cam is very different from a tipped out cam. One relies on being chocked, one relies on friction resulting from a downward force being converted to an outward force. This friction is a function of the type of rock and the type of metal used in the cam. A well chocked cam can't fail unless the cam breaks or the rock breaks. A well placed "cammed" cam can fail if the friction is not adequate. Guess which one is stronger.

There are several cams on the market suited for chock placement, not just BD.

Is it me or is that a shitty placement, go to 4:30 in the video.

youtube.com/watch?v=ifBjqZb…

Does anyone else place cams this way???

cant really see how much contact the bottom left lobe has, but i've fallen on a #5 somewhat placed like that and had no problems, whipped on it a few times actually.
dunno if he was crazy pumped or what but he probably could have gotten a little better of a placement had he rotated the stem over to the right, probably could have gotten a little more lobe contact on the left had he.

Richard Fernandez wrote:Is it me or is that a shitty placement, go to 4:30 in the video. youtube.com/watch?v=ifBjqZb… Does anyone else place cams this way???

I wouldn't of wanted to chance falling on it, you see the cam move as well a tad after he placed it. He did look like he was getting pumped, but I still would have taken the time to place it a lot better and at least tugged on it a little. Who knows if it would have held or not, maybe yes maybe no, but those big ass cams seem to hold even in marginal placements.

If that #4 in the video would have walked a little up the crack it would quickly become a worthless placement. Perhaps if it did walk up far enough to become disengaged from the crack it could have fallen deeper into the crack and the climber could have possibly tested the cam in a passive position. As he left it I think it would have easily held a fall but needed to have longer draw or sling to prevent walking. Or better yet just set lower or deeper in the crack.
Outkast and trad climbing dont mix IMO.