kammok not safe

[Teewee]

Are you certain of this? i was under the impression that BD switched most of their quickdraw line to wiregates precisely because the wire gate is stronger (less gate flutter too i hear).

regular gates are made of aluminum, a wire gate is made of steel wire(just the gate, not the whole biner)

All climbing brands make a model with a wiregate because it makes the biner weigh less. Less weight on the belt = more energy spent climbing harder.
There is the rumored side-effect that in a rock impact, the solid gate might snap open due to its weight/momentum where a wire snapper is light enough to stay shut under the deceleration against a rock face, but nobody has ever heard of this happening. Anyway, in the end, I don't think its stronger, biners made for quickdraws are specced at ~20-25KN, anything more rugged is just unnecessary weight.

[Teewee]

Recieved the replacement carabiners today.
these look much stronger.
CE 1019 22kN stamped on the outside.

Greg also sent replacement straps and a new hammock.
The new hammock was unexpected and I think thats above and beyond. Greg didnt have to do that but I appreciate it.

I consider this handled although anyone with the old biners should get new ones imo.
My wife said she never saw me look more suprised than the moment I sat on the ground realizing what had occured. I would have not believed someone else had they told me it happend to them.

I just wrote a very long post to inform you it isn't proper CE...

[GT]

Not true. As OfftheGround stated, these were tested to higher loads and 250lbs.

The load rating of a carabiner is not equal to the breaking strength - there is a safety factor built in. In a non-climbing rated biner I would guess they target a small SF of 1.3 or so (fairly standard) to the YIELD point, NOT the breaking point. (Yeild point is where permanent deformation starts to occur, breaking point is when it actually breaks).

The failure of these biner's is most likely due to a tighter hang angle than 30* - not implying these carabiners were appropriately speced for the application however, or the setup was negligent. My point is, I fully expect these biners would hold a load of 250lbs without breaking, until they fatigued and failed (also possible in this application).

Every piece of hardware and webbing that I have is rated in WLL or SWL.
6
SECTION 2.6 DESIGN FACTOR
WARNING
Never exceed the working load limit (WLL) of any synthetic web tie down(s). The loading of any
synthetic web tie down beyond its WLL can result in severe personal injury or death. The tie down
design factor is based on destructive, laboratory controlled testing conditions, which will not be
exactly duplicated during actual loading conditions.
2.6.1
The design factor for new synthetic web tie downs with, or without hardware, shall be a min-
imum of three (3) when tested in accordance with Chapter 3 of this Standard Specification.
!
SECTION 2.7 IDENTIFICATION / MARKING REQUIREMENTS
SECTION 2.8 RATED CAPACITIES
2.7.1
2.8.1
2.8.2
2.8.3
2.7.2
2.7.3
Each synthetic web tie down shall be marked or labeled, by the manufacturer, using an
identification tag, stencil or other means with the following required information:
The working load limit (WLL) of a synthetic web tie down shall be based on one-third (1/3) of
the breaking strength of the complete assembly and not individual components.
A synthetic web tie down shall not be subjected to loads greater than the working load limit
(WLL) assigned by the manufacturer.
Each manufacturer shall retain test data to verify breaking strengths. Destructive tests shall be
conducted according to the test procedure outlined in Chapter 3 of this Standard Specification.

[mark996]

So, does this mean that a European Auditor has to be present in China or wherever the manufacturing is taking place, or is it more of a paper check to make sure that you have all of your documents in place?

My guess is, as in ISO certification in the aerospace industry, they do 6 month/annual audits sending a European Auditor to China to do the inspections so they keep their certification. But, I could be way off.

[Rocky Mountain Hanger]

****!!! I'm glad I found this link with all the information regarding carabiners. I have 4 hammocks and 1 is a Kammock brand. I think even though the Kammock I have has the updated version, I'm thinking of switching them out for some Black Diamond versions unless anyone can suggest other brands.

As for the other 3 hammocks, they're Serac brand and well, the one's they have are rather scary. Lol!! Plain black, no markings.

[Flatliner]

The test of customer service is how someone handles a problem. It appears Kammock went above and beyond here to handle the problem quickly, efficiently, and without casting undue blame on the end user. I would give them kudos for that. With that said, and from a more general sense, not specific to this brand, do others on here pick where they hang with the thought that they might end up on the ground. For me, that is always one of my considerations when it comes to site selection. There are hundreds of ways a hammock can fail, while fairly rare, none of them are unheard of. I would never EVER hang over a cliff for instance unless I was in specialty equipment designed for that task.

[P-Dub]

Camp NANO biners = 22 grams, climbing rated

[99Star]

compare the new one with previous version 23kN (4,946 lb) vs max.250 lb, wondering if both measured in same testing standard?
that's huge difference!

[Flatliner]

Admittedly this is a zombie thread (I didn't notice that on my first post) but earlier, the manufacturer stated that 250 was their rating but it had been tested to a much heavier point. I'm guessing they saw a problem and solved it by going to a significantly better commercial option that included a more standard rating and qc process. Regardless, kudos to them for dealing quickly and efficiently with the original problem (years ago).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[99Star]

Admittedly this is a zombie thread (I didn't notice that on my first post) but earlier, the manufacturer stated that 250 was their rating but it had been tested to a much heavier point. I'm guessing they saw a problem and solved it by going to a significantly better commercial option that included a more standard rating and qc process. Regardless, kudos to them for dealing quickly and efficiently with the original problem (years ago).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ha, now that you point out I noticed it was 2013.

My question is : the breaking point is the weakest link of the whole system, if the biner marked MAX 250lb (where it was tested 2500 WLL) can we safely say 750 lb (one-third) is the number we don't want to load at any moment?

Yet many tree straps marked 250 lb or 400 lb, translate same as the biner? or the strap is the component I need to worry more? Dutchware straps mention support up to 1500 lb, so I think whatever marked should be the weight rating user can load on without worry. AKA the 1 to 3 safety ratio already factored in.