Continue with onX Maps
Sign in with Facebook
Double axle cam vs single axe cam
|
if one size of cam can be found with two axles, why buying a comparative cam with only one axle ? and with this question, why would you buy a big microfriends like a number 3 (yellow) alien cam instead of a dmm dragon II 0 ? (same size) |
|
The main trade-off that I can think of, aside from the difference in expansion range, is that a double-axle cam of a given size will, in general, be heavier than a single axle cam of that size. Furthermore, this additional weight will be in the head of the cam, so the stem will have to be more rigid in order to prevent the cam from being floppy. |
|
I was just discussing modern cams with the proprietor of well known mountaineering store. I think I need to upgrade my gear since I’m the climbing equivalent of carrying a bag phone. Anyway, there seems to be a lot of overlap not only between manufacturers but within a manufacturer’s product lines. I think the consensus is that a 2 axle cam will get you a little more range on the lobes and the head will be a wee bit stiffer, but the single axle is lighter and and the difference in lobe angle is hardly noticeable. Personally WC and Metolius Ultralights really stood out for me. |
|
Single axle can provide some advantages over double axle, particularly in shallow horizontal placements. See https://youtu.be/hp6upPAj4nQ Also totem cams, which arguably have some of the best holding ability, only come in single axle. I've placed those in some weird spots where nothing else wouldve held, including an equivalent BD or tricam |
|
Some single axle cams are less expensive than double axle ones. Sure, the double stem are generally more versatile in that they have a wider range, but it isn't like you get to use it twice on a route. If you are on a budget, buying 4 single axle cams might make more sense than 3 double axle ones. Single axle cams can also have a narrower head, so they may fit better in some placements. Also Aliens have about the same range as BDs in the smaller sizes, and I actually prefer my red Aliens to my .5 BDs. |
|
One buys the yellow alien because, after placing it repeatedly over the better part of two decades, and having grown accustomed to its habits, foibles and predilections, one understands that it is as much a companion as it a cam. When one then loses or damages it, one has a choice: a shiny new anodized double-axle offering that is potentially (theoretically) superior, or the tried and true, familiar yellow alien, which has so many times supplied warm fuzzies just when they are needed. And one realizes that this really is no choice at all. So one buys both. Or so I've heard. |
|
Pin scars and aid climbing. Single axle cams tend to have a narrower head width. This could be the difference between having a 3 lobe placement or a 4 lobe placement. I got mega gripped a few days ago and ended up placing a two lobe orange totem to take on instead of taking a pretty decent sized fall. No way in hell I would’ve been able to do that with a #2 friend racked on the other side of my harness. Diversity is the spice of life, embrace differences in your cams the same way you embrace differences in those around you |
|
Thx for all the answers ! |
|
I think my Metolius ULMCs compliment my C4s and Z4s really, really well. The single axle design of the ULMCs makes them very light, take up a lot less space on my harness when racking, and fit in strange shallow placements that the C4s do not. I also like how much more flexible they are than the C4s. They aren't great in horizontal placements though, which is where the Z4s really shine. However, don't like the .2 and below Z4s (mushy trigger/feel), so I'm still looking for the best microcams to use in horizontals. Here's my current rack:  |
John V wrote: Every time I have tried to replace my yellow aliens (I have two), I end up going back to them. I use single axle cams (Aliens) for my small ones and double axel cams (BD C4s) for my big ones. I have a couple of totems just for their wide range that I only carry sometimes. I have tried other brands and been happy with what I see but I have never been so impressed that I want to replace what I carry in my rack. The only cams I don't like are Metolius TCUs but that because I have large fingers and I feel like the twin stems get in the way. |
|
Theory is great, in theory. Then you fall a few times on it. I'd trust a single axle totem (any size) or single-axle totem basic (alien) blue-green-yellow 0.2-0.4, over its double axle equivalent in most of the rock I climb on. If you climb exclusively on perfect splitters and bomber rock, then maybe the increased range of a double axle is an advantage. But let's not forget how easy it is to explode a link cam, and those have a huge range. Do not be swayed by manufacturer's specs. |
Peter Y wrote: I was going to post that video. More people should be aware, and I think a lot of folks assume newer is always better, or something. Old school 80’s and 90’s era rigid stem single axle WC friends in horizontals all the time here in crusty North Carolina. Love ‘em. |
Nathaniel Ward wrote: Meh.... the video is rather unconvincing. A cam in aluminum is not going to act like a cam in stone. |
|
True enough, and the author of the video says as much, but he makes a good point. Mostly cams hold when the lobes are grippy, but it’s easy to take them for granted when we should not. Also falling on horizontal placements can ruin cams, which is another argument for carrying a couple of supplemental hard stems if you climb on quartzite. |
Nathaniel Ward wrote: Interesting! after all comment on the thread , i went outside and try to find if my yellow alien was working better in shalow placement than my dmm 0, and fuck yeah , i have my final answer , thx |
Nathaniel Ward wrote: agreed. i suspect a lot of accidents involving cams ripping are from small nuances like this. how are the Friends in Looking Glass eyebrows? |
Peter Y wrote: https://m.soundcloud.com/the_sharp_end/ground-fall-in-eldorado-canyon-ep-24 Sharp End podcast episode 24 at minute 13, describes a guide Jaffe Dugana (spelling?) ripping two horizontal placements he believed were bomber. The FirstPersonBeta analysis may shed light Sharp End circumstances. One data point cannot prove a theory, but the potential limitations of double axle cams in horizontals is worth considering. |
Live Perched wrote: This accident always bothered me. IIRC Accidents in N. American Mountaineering speculated that the cams knocked each other out of place during the fall even tho they were buried deep. i've wondered if "buried deep" means something entirely different for a double axle cam if it means the stem can still move enough to get the lobes to shift |
Peter Y wrote: Using a rigid carabiner to equalize the cams seems flawed, but these device are designed to work under a sudden loading. They must shift and rotate before catching frequently. I imagine (without graduate or undergraduate level training in engineering or physics) that the cams cease to oppose at the certain angle in the horizontal. The cam doubles the force and redirects the force in opposing directions when working correctly. But does the double axle cam work as well when the axles are not aligned with the opposing forces? Since seeing the FirstPersonBeta analysis, I have favored Totems in horizontal and looked harder for constrictions, pockets and dimples with cup the cam lobes. The Eldo accident is creepy. (FWIW, I have not learned of a similar situation in the Gunks so it could be the rock or the specific spot on the evictor.)  |
Peter Y wrote: I guess that depends on the placement, tricams are the piece a lot of people swear by for that kind of thing, but of course every one is different. Generally wherever a cam goes, rigid stems work as well as any, and while they are heavier, their security in shallow horizontals makes it 100% worth it. |
Nathaniel Ward wrote: Rigid stem friends are actually lighter than equivalent BD etc. Agreed that they are outstanding in shallow horizontals with a tie off. |
