CCH ALIENS -- For Immediate Release

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 1 - 32 of total 32 in this topic

TGreene

Trad climber

Jonesboro, Arkansas

Topic Author's Original Post - Aug 30, 2006 - 03:55pm PT

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

The Orange CCH Alien cam that was reportedly involved in the Paradise Forks incident, has turned out to be dated 10-05, rather than the highly publicized date of early 2004. This information has been verified the by the Coconino County Sheriffs Depart both verbally and in photographic form, with Dave Waggoner of CCH, during CCH’s own internal investigation. It is however still unknown if this unit was clearly dimpled.

The window of the recall was 11-04 to 12-05, thus any Alien cams date coded during this period should be tested, dimpled or not.

CCH will tensile test customers’ Aliens, of any manufacture date at no charge, to ensure that they will withstand a fall. Testing is done to 2/3 the rated tensile strength. After testing, all cams are currently being identified with a “Tensile Tested” stamp on the main swage above the loop. We will test and return cams to our customers within 1 week of receiving them.

Please attach your complete contact information to each unit being returned for testing, to facilitate a speedy turn-around.

Dave Waggoner

Colorado Custom Hardware Inc.
115 East Lyon Street
Laramie, WY 82072 USA
(307) 721-9385

andanother

climber

Aug 30, 2006 - 04:03pm PT

The window of the recall was 11-04 to 12-05

wow. that one sentence should be enough to keep anyone from buying another Alien ever again.

Forest

Trad climber

Tucson, AZ

Aug 30, 2006 - 04:15pm PT

I have to disagree. Obviously, all the aliens made during that window are not crap or we'd have a whole lot more failures. This says to me that they are erring on the side of extra caution, which is a good thing.

Now, I've got serious issues with the way CCH has handled some issues, but it sounds like this one is being handled well at this point.

TGreene

Trad climber

Jonesboro, Arkansas

Topic Author's Reply - Aug 30, 2006 - 04:26pm PT

I've been working VERY closely with CCH in regards to the investigation and PR surrounding this reported failure, and we are only now making an official statement, because it was vital that CCH have as much verifiable information as possible.

TKingsbury

Trad climber

Aug 30, 2006 - 04:30pm PT

Just curious:

Did they (CCH) recall all aliens from that period or just the dimpled ones?

Did they (CCH) suggest the testing of all aliens from that period or just the dimpled ones?

Thanks,

Tom

TKingsbury

Trad climber

Aug 30, 2006 - 04:44pm PT

So I went and reread the original recall notice...they (CCH) do not suggest non-dimpled cams have problems or should be suspect....

from http://www.aliencamsbycch.com/recall/faq.html

1) Which CCH cams are affected by the recall?

You can identify the defective cams by looking for a small center punch dimple at the base of the round ball (where the axle goes through the cable eye). If your cam has this punch dimple, it should be returned to CCH for a replacement or repair. Mail your defective cams to: Colorado Custom Hardware Inc. ATTN: Brazing Recall 115 East Lyon Street Laramie, WY 82072

6) Have there been any reported or tested stem brazing failures of cams without the "center punch dimple?"

No, cams without the center punch dimple have not been found to have brazing issues and are not included in this recall.

so is this new info? are now all aliens from that time period suspect?

Thanks,

Tom

Forest

Trad climber

Tucson, AZ

Aug 30, 2006 - 04:46pm PT

Hmm. That's bad. I stand corrected.

TGreene

Trad climber

Jonesboro, Arkansas

Topic Author's Reply - Aug 30, 2006 - 04:52pm PT

[/me mode]

I simply can't answer that for ya... I wish I could.

The recall notice on their website does state 11-04 through 12-05 and mentions the dimpled units, but it also takes into account all units sold during that period, by mentioning "about 4,100" units.

Also, being that the recall was initiated because of a failed Orange, and this latest is also Orange and within the same date coded range.........

It's critical to note that IT IS NOT YET KNOWN IF THIS WAS DIMPLED OR NOT, yet CCH is pro-actively widening the scope of their own recall to stipulate that all cams manufactured during that period should be tensile strength tested.

climbingbuzz

Trad climber

SF, CA

Aug 30, 2006 - 05:40pm PT

Why is the above information (ALL cams made from Nov04 - Dec05 are included in the recall) not on the CCH website?

The website states:

"No, cams without the center punch dimple have not been found to have brazing issues and are not included in this recall."

Why would Waggoner not change his website before this information winds up on an Internet forum?

shogun

Trad climber

MSP, MN

Aug 30, 2006 - 05:50pm PT

cch is notorious for being slow to update their own website. seeing as tgreene posted this a few hours ago. i would treat tgreene's post as an update to the cch recall notice on their site. you can always call the number given on the post if this recall update affects you.

-=glenn=-

TGreene

Trad climber

Jonesboro, Arkansas

Topic Author's Reply - Aug 30, 2006 - 05:56pm PT

Eventually (as in whenever I get the requisite server info) I'll be redesigning their website to be as up-to-date as possible, in regards to just about every aspect of CCH and Aliens.

This too was heavily discussed this morning.

andanother

climber

Aug 30, 2006 - 06:13pm PT

It's really unfortunate that guy is still making cams, and apparently will continue doing so.

Overall, most people in the climbing community are very respectful of each other. And this guy is really taking advantage of that. It sucks.

He's making shitty produsts and putting lives at risk, just for a buck. The world is plagued by people like this, so I'm not that surprised.
But he really stands out in the climbing community as being a greedy scumbag.

I imagine the only reason this recall has been enacted is because (hopefully) someone finally threatened legal action against CCH.

up2top

Big Wall climber

Phoenix, AZ

Aug 30, 2006 - 08:25pm PT

Dave has needed a PR person to do the talking for CCH for years, now. I will continue to use any and all of my CCH cams, and will likely buy from him in the future, but he could have avoided a lot of the confusion and uncertainty the climbing public has had with CCH this past year if he recognized that he is an incompetant boob when it comes to dealing with the public. He needs a spokesperson to handle public statements and to handle the decision making process of how they deal with QC issues.

Ed

JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber

Stoney Point

Aug 30, 2006 - 08:33pm PT

Seems to me one could make a hydraulic jack to proof load their cams.

Jaybro

Social climber

The West

Aug 30, 2006 - 08:35pm PT

I don't know that 'hydraulic jacks' are what's called for.

caughtinside

Social climber

Davis, CA

Aug 30, 2006 - 08:50pm PT

Well, I picked through my rack and rechecked my aliens. All 18 of them.

2 are in the affected date range.
1 has no date at all.
15 outside the date range.

Trying to decide if I should send in 3, or if I should send in 18...

John Mac

Trad climber

Littleton, CO

Aug 30, 2006 - 10:02pm PT

Send them all in!

John Mac

Trad climber

Littleton, CO

Aug 30, 2006 - 10:02pm PT

Send them all in!

TGreene

Trad climber

Jonesboro, Arkansas

Topic Author's Reply - Aug 30, 2006 - 10:23pm PT

I agree, but I wouldn't worry about sending them in twice! ;-)

TGreene

Trad climber

Jonesboro, Arkansas

Topic Author's Reply - Aug 31, 2006 - 01:31pm PT

The original photo's and documentation as provided to CCH by the Sheriff's Department were forwarded to me this morning...

I have resized and cleaned up the images for clarity, but have also included the original images exactly as I received them, as links below. A close examination of the 2nd image would indicate the distinct possibility of it actually being a dimpled Alien.

http://www.great-river.com/cch/082606_1%20(20).JPG

http://www.great-river.com/cch/082606_1%20(31).JPG

steelmnkey

climber

Vision man...ya gotta have vision...

Aug 31, 2006 - 01:44pm PT

Tgreen...I'm curious after reading your posts...in what capacity in which you're now associated with CCH. Are you a lawyer?

Locker-style edit: I'm pretty sure the piece wasn't dimpled, regardless of whatever you're trying to extrude from the photos.

TGreene

Trad climber

Jonesboro, Arkansas

Topic Author's Reply - Aug 31, 2006 - 01:51pm PT

Not at all, I'm just a climber that cares enough to assist both CCH and the entire climbing community iun regards to getting to the bottom of things, as well as striving to see that steps are in fact being taken in regards to providing the safest gear possible from the point of the recall forward.

TGreene

Trad climber

Jonesboro, Arkansas

Topic Author's Reply - Aug 31, 2006 - 02:10pm PT

In regards to being dimpled or not, it's honestly too tough to call w/o somebody actually having this cam in their hands to verify... There is a clearly a mark of some sort that's visible in the area that would have been dimpled, but again, it's too tough to tell.

I will say that there were a number of cams sent back to CCH that had vastly different dimples on them, that ranged from being barely perceptible indentations, to some that looked like they were stamped with a die.

Dimpling is not done with a die and press, but rather is done by hand, and the degree to which it's marked would depend upon the force of strike, sharpness of tools, and whom was actually doing it at any given moment, which can easily be attested to by anyone whos ever worked around a machine shop.

Mr_T

Trad climber

Somewhere, CA

Aug 31, 2006 - 03:28pm PT

Follow up question on aliens. I placed a normal/properly brazed size green alien in a vertical, but shallow crack. The crack was real shallow, so the long axis of the cam stuck out of the wall. The small axis (with the lobes) was in the vertical direction of the crack. In the event of a fall, the bottom two lobes would push back against the back of the crack, while the upper two would torque, holding all of the fall. The long axis would be pulled at an angle, not downward. Parallel sided crack, lobes were in there good.

Anyone have an intuitive guess how big a fall this cam would hold before cam was dammaged? Before failure? I'm about 160lbs.

steelmnkey

climber

Vision man...ya gotta have vision...

Aug 31, 2006 - 03:36pm PT

You (TGreen) wrote:
"A close examination of the 2nd image would indicate the distinct possibility of it actually being a dimpled Alien."

I took this statement as somewhat of a defensive stance for CCH with regard to this cam, but now that I read it again, maybe just an observation.

You also said:
"Dimpling is not done with a die and press, but rather is done by hand, and the degree to which it's marked would depend upon the force of strike, sharpness of tools, and whom was actually doing it at any given moment, which can easily be attested to by anyone whos ever worked around a machine shop."

I know exactly what you're talking about here, especially when you're talking about hardened metals and a dull punch. The first thought that comes to mind when you say this, however, is this: If there were any doubt as to the ability of the cam owners or businesses out there to clearly identify a cam that had or did not have a dimple on it, then CCH should have extended the recall to ALL cams within the identified timeframe.

Please take this as discussion, not accusation.

Personally, I took my Aliens outside in the bright sunlight and checked 'em out for dimples under a magnifying glass. But after this happened, they're in the laundry bag for good. Life is worth more than a $60 cam. I have an orange Alien from August of 2004. Me 'n Russ are gonna test that sucka good one of these days.

TGreene

Trad climber

Jonesboro, Arkansas

Topic Author's Reply - Aug 31, 2006 - 03:44pm PT

I couldn't begin to answer your question, because I've yet to have to place any type of cam in the manner in which you described...

I just grabbed my Green Alien and tried to picture the placement that you've described, then glanced down to my Yellow Zero, and quickly realized that (soley from my perspective) you used the wrong cam for that placement.

TGreene

Trad climber

Jonesboro, Arkansas

Topic Author's Reply - Aug 31, 2006 - 03:49pm PT

Again, if there is even the slightest question SEND THEM IN FOR A TENSILE TEST...

As of about 1 month ago, every single cam that leaves CCH will have been thoroughly tested and will now be stamped to indicate as such.

climbingbuzz

Trad climber

SF, CA

Sep 5, 2006 - 01:28pm PT

TGreene, Any idea when the notice on the CCH website will be changed to indicate that ALL cams made from Nov04 through Dec05 are recalled? How else is CCH disseminating this information? Thanks.

TGreene

Trad climber

Jonesboro, Arkansas

Topic Author's Reply - Sep 5, 2006 - 01:41pm PT

In all honesty, you'll have to ask the guys that beat me down to the point that I walked away from it all...

dirtineye

Trad climber

the south

Sep 5, 2006 - 02:04pm PT

HEY Tim, DOn't let the fvcking internet buttplugs get you down man.

Cause they sure will try, and they got NOTHING better to do, or to contribute for that matter.