lummox Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 slothrop said: lummox said: #11 hex huh? you back on horse again cuz you acting all high and shit. who makes a #11 hex? http://www.bdel.com/gear/rock/protection.php#hexes my gawd. its a cowbell. Quote
Gary_Yngve Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 Depending on the terrain you are on, you may want more double runners. An easier terrain, you can often find trees, horns, chockstones, etc. Someone in another thread joked that with the grade 5.x, the number of pieces you take is x. There is definitely some truth to that, as in, you may need a large piece to protect a wide 5.6 move, but if you are comfortable with doing the move, you'll be fine with having a smaller piece in ten feet below. Quote
catbirdseat Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 lummox said: slothrop said: lummox said: #11 hex huh? you back on horse again cuz you acting all high and shit. who makes a #11 hex? http://www.bdel.com/gear/rock/protection.php#hexes my gawd. its a cowbell. That's what people call 'em. The poor man's #4 Camalot. Quote
Bug Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 catbirdseat said: Bug said: ...my drilled hexes are noticably lighter than similar size cams. I still prefer the cams for their versitile size range and flare protection. Are these custom drilled or were they commercially available at one time? If custom, how does one know whether strength is compromised? I do know that many structures can have material removed with almost no compromise on strength. One example is aluminum booms on sailboats. An aerospace engineer friend cut out panels from the side of the boom on his San Juan 30 and claimed it was actually stronger. I had to take his word for it. They were factory drilled. At the time, you could get a template for the drill holes but I didn't trust myself to do it right. I still have a solid 11 hex. Don't cross me. Quote
catbirdseat Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 I'd do it with a template, but not otherwise. I suppose one could make a template from an old BD drilled hex. I can see why they are no longer sold. It's terribly labor intensive to drill holes. The price would be greater than what people would be willing to pay. Quote
Gary_Yngve Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 catbirdseat said: I'd do it with a template, but not otherwise. I suppose one could make a template from an old BD drilled hex. I can see why they are no longer sold. It's terribly labor intensive to drill holes. The price would be greater than what people would be willing to pay. What BD needs then is the hole-drilling robot! Quote
Rodchester Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 That's what people call 'em. The poor man's #4 Camalot. Are Hexes lighter than Camalots? #11 Hex - range 2.56/3.91 - weight 206 gms/7.27 ozs #4 Camalot - range 2.9-4.9 - weight 349 gms/12.3 ozs #3.5 Camlot - range 2.4-4.1 - weight 302 gms/10.8 ozs Of course the "range" of a Hex is static, basically two sizes. So it seems that the larger BD Hexes made now-a-days are lighter than the modern Camlots. I think the weight difference increases as the sizes get smaller. I do like to carry along a large Hex or two (#10 & #11) when there is some need for a larger piece at one or two points on a alpine route. I don't own the small and medium hexes. Quote
catbirdseat Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 It's too bad that there aren't any climbers who know shit about robots. Quote
Ursa_Eagle Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 Design of Automatic Machinery was one of my favorite classes. I'd jump at the opportunity to design robots. (mind you, that doesn't mean I know anything about them right now...) Quote
Gary_Yngve Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 catbirdseat said: It's too bad that there aren't any climbers who know shit about robots. Making the robots drill would be pretty easy. The hard part would be sorting the hexes, that is, getting the hexes aligned and placed in a fixed position to be drilled blindly. Usually some clever mechanical contraptions can sort without any active control necessary. Quote
lummox Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 catbirdseat said: It's too bad that there aren't any climbers who know shit about robots. robots shit? Quote
Ursa_Eagle Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 Gary_Yngve said: Making the robots drill would be pretty easy. The hard part would be sorting the hexes, that is, getting the hexes aligned and placed in a fixed position to be drilled blindly. Usually some clever mechanical contraptions can sort without any active control necessary. Assuming that the different sizes of hexes have yet to be mixed together, that wouldn't be hard. Also, don't they already have to drill the holes in the hexes for the wires? Quote
boatskiclimbsail Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 If you consider a CNC mill a robot (which it is by definition) then BD makes all their gear with robots... Also I've met lots of climbers (myself included) in the control/automation field. Quote
Bronco Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 Rodchester said: Of course the "range" of a Hex is static, basically two sizes. Actually a single hex has three different options for sizes. Dryad, an "alpine rack" is considered the lightest, smallest most minimalistic rack you and your pard are willing to lead a particular alpine route on. It varies quite a bit depending on the climber and route. Quote
lummox Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 Bronco said: Actually a single hex has three different options for sizes. four. Quote
Bronco Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 I stand corrected on my correction, thanks. Quote
Al_Pine Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 Yeah, I'd like to see that fourth placement option, where the side that the sling runs through is in contact with the rock. How many "sizes" does a wired hexcentric have then? Quote
Rodchester Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 lummox said: Bronco said: Actually a single hex has three different options for sizes. four. That's why I used the word "basically." There are two sides thus two sizes. However, it is correct to say that they can be placed four ways (that I can recall right now), but the size stays the same. Semantics, I know. Quote
mattp Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 Actually, aren't they designed to be placed three different ways, Rod? I believe they have different widths for both of the different tilts to the normal orientation, and then a larger dimension if placed end-to-end. Quote
Dru Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 Rodchester said: lummox said: Bronco said: Actually a single hex has three different options for sizes. four. That's why I used the word "basically." There are two sides thus two sizes. However, it is correct to say that they can be placed four ways (that I can recall right now), but the size stays the same. Semantics, I know. two sides of diff widths plus sideways is 3 ways..... Quote
Rodchester Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 (edited) mattp said: Actually, aren't they designed to be placed three different ways, Rod? I believe they have different widths for both of the different tilts to the normal orientation, and then a larger dimension if placed end-to-end. MattP: I agree...but you can also place it as a huge anchor, or umm. Hmmm, hard to describe here. I have on more than a few occasions placed it from behind two or more large boulders where the sides of the large Hex don't even touch, but the load is on the face of the Hex with the drilled holes with the wire or cord. This is not camming in any way. I've used it this way in belay anchors, not on lead. Not sure if I've communicated that very effectively. So I count this as number four method. noncamming each side long and short, are two and three. And number one is camming mode. Right? Edited October 27, 2003 by Rodchester Quote
Al_Pine Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 Wow Lummox sure reeled 'em in with a single word troll! This hex thing is such a brainteaser ! Quote
mattp Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 On the BD website I saw that it said they had four different configurations. Maybe that is where Lummox got the idea: Because the asymmetric hexagonal design allows one Hexentric to fit four different crack configurations, the Hex has a range similar to that of a comparably sized SLCD at a considerably reduced weight and expense. Because of their versatility and economy, every climber should have at least a small size run hanging off their rack. Quote
boatskiclimbsail Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 I don't think you can really quantify the number of ways to place a particular piece of gear... Do you also count the "there is a hole the size of the wire/sling in the rock so it doesn't matter what size the pice is" placement, or those fun alpine placements where you need to stack two pieces you have? In the case of the latter, we should add another 4*13=52 placements where the hex is placed next to each nut size. What about the one where you use it as a shim to make a small piton fit an angle-worthy crack? This argument is like specifying how many ways there are to fit a #3WC cam into a crack from 1"-2", it is as infinite as you are imaginative! Quote
Al_Pine Posted October 27, 2003 Posted October 27, 2003 five ? How many ways can you sling a blueberry bush? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.