jwidm
 |
This discussion is regarding: Climbing Chalk Test
The gear testing you guys are providing now are fantastic. Thanks so much. I'm wondering how Frank Endo block chaulk compares to the competition. ?????
|
philchai
|
So the Metolius chalk I've been using is substandard to Bison chalk? I guess it must be a placebo because I FEEL like I climb better with gritty chalk. I've personally never been a fan of the silky feeling chalk. Regardless, thanks for conducting this research and posting this information for everyone. I'm sure that people/climbers are now better informed on making decisions when purchasing chalk.
|
marks
 | Posted: December 9th, 2008 Edited: December 11th, 2008 | Quote, Reply |
Thanks for the feedback Jwidm and Philchai.
Frank Endo Block Chalk - Is this chalk commonly available? The only online retailer I could find it at was REI. The reason why we test "popular" gear (5+ stores) is because the most annoying thing we can do is come out and say "this product is the best but you can't buy it!". Though if I'm wrong I'd be glad to add it to the test. Where do you buy it from?
Philchai - Strictly for absorption, yes Metolius chalk is on average 21% less absorbent than Bison's Chalk. It's an interesting discussion about how important texture is in chalk. Most climbers do some form of a "french blow" (or rub their hand on their pants etc) though to get the chalk off their hands after they are dry. If climbers are just trying to get their hands dry then remove the majority of the chalk, is texture a factor? This is obviously a big debatable question though.
|
Troy
 |
|
marks said:
Philchai - Strictly for absorption, yes Metolius chalk is on average 21% less absorbent than Bison's Chalk. It's an interesting discussion about how important texture is in chalk. Most climbers do some form of a "french blow" (or rub their hand on their pants etc) though to get the chalk off their hands after they are dry. If climbers are just trying to get their hands dry than remove the majority of the chalk, is texture a factor? This is obviously a big debatable question though. |
A smaller, finer grain chalk will always do better at absorbing moisture then a more rough, grainier chalk (of the same composition) because if the chalk particles are smaller it has an increased surface area, and is able to absorb more water faster.
This is the reason I made sure to grind up everything into a nice fine grain.
|
jwidm
|
|
marks said:
Thanks for the feedback Jwidm and Philchai.
Frank Endo Block Chalk - Is this chalk commonly available? The only online retailer I could find it at was REI. The reason why we test "popular" gear (5+ stores) is because the most annoying thing we can do is come out and say "this product is the best but you can't buy it!". Though if I'm wrong I'd be glad to add it to the test. Where do you buy it from? |
I get it from REI. I see your point about it not being readily available. Thanks anyway.
|
livextreme41
 | Posted: December 17th, 2008 Edited: December 17th, 2008 | Quote, Reply |
Fantastic testing. You guys are doing some great work. Keep it up! I think the difference between the gritty and fine chalk is a matter of preference. I'm from Longmont and have always used Bison Chalk, so this is great to see. But almost all of my climbing partners use Metolious and wouldn't use my Bison chalk unless they had to. For those of you who like fine chalk, Bison is the way to go. For the rest of you..... It's all chalk, you're just missing out!
|
marks
|
|
livextreme41 said:
Fantastic testing. You guys are doing some great work. Keep it up! I think the difference between the gritty and fine chalk is a matter of preference. I'm from Longmont and have always used Bison Chalk, so this is great to see. But almost all of my climbing partners use Metolious and wouldn't use my Bison chalk unless they had to. For those of you who like fine chalk, Bison is the way to go. For the rest of you..... It's all chalk, you're just missing out! |
Thanks! Hows climbing in Japan btw (I saw that in your profile)?
|
livextreme41
|
Japan is better than i expected. Many sea cliffs and a few jungle walls. Lots of bouldering on coral, if you have the tape and the pain tolerance. The rock is mostly limestone mixed with something we still don't know what it is. I dig it.
 |
marks
|
|
livextreme41 said:
Japan is better than i expected. Many sea cliffs and a few jungle walls. Lots of bouldering on coral, if you have the tape and the pain tolerance. The rock is mostly limestone mixed with something we still don't know what it is. I dig it. |
Sounds cool. You really don't hear about it all that much hence why I was wondering. That bouldering looks nice and pumpy though.
|
extremist
 |
Forgive the picture but it was taken in responce to heckling for using Chalk. Notice the stratigically placed chalk bag? There was a time when Chalk was banned in almost every climbing area in the US. Fights, flat tires, rocks dropped on you from above and slanderous name calling and public shame was all incited by the use of the horrific chalk. It was the bane of all climbers to mark up the rock forever and to forever have to climb dot to white dot. I used dirt myself for many years trying to keep my hands dry, hence my nickname "Dirtbag."
While guiding in Telluride, for Royal Robbins, (who never used chalk in his entire career,) a guy name Chris Vandeveer forced me to try chalk on an overhanging boulder. It was raining my dirt bag had turned to slippery mud. I sent the route first try with chalk and have never looked back. (I did hide from Royal though.)
I do have a question about this test, sweat is not pure water. It is salt, body oils and other chemicals that leach out of our pores. I have noticed that when I use a chalk ball I can squeeze the hell out of it and really dry my hands. When I use Endo block Chalk (one of the oldest known chalks there is) I get a bit of the dryness by smashing up the pieces with my sweating fingers. But for me the ball has been the answer to really humid hot days on the baking Arizona rocks. This is a tough one. I believe your test is accurate but is water absorbition really the only criteria. I have had to degrease routes on slick rock before from so much oil from people hands. I also go out in rain storms and wash all the chalk off the walls I can with a brush and bucket of mild Dawn soap. So, is not oil just as important to deter as moisture? Does the lighter chalk suck up more oil also? Just asking I am a vacuum on this point.-- ghd
 |
marks
|
Yep. Lots of fair points and wow what a pic. One point too is that absorption (for climber's purposes) must occur in a few seconds or less (before you blow the chalk off your hands) to be relevant. Obviously this test doesn't measure that well either.
|
techclimber
|
I really like to see people doing actual testing on gear and other products. This can help us find out what really works, instead of what people, including those considered experts, think works. However, scientific and engineering tests are very dependent on the assumptions and methods used for testing. I'd suggest that you focus your tests to reflect the actual intended use of the gear, even if other tests are easier to do. You don't want to end up like the guy who was looking for his car keys under the streetlight, because the light was better there, not because that's where he lost them.
In the chalk test, you assumed that the primary attribute for chalk is water absorption. Let's go with that, although the effect that different chalk preparations might have on the coefficient of friction between fingers and stone might also be as important and feed into your assumption model. In addition to drying your tips, chalk might also be a lubricant. One study found a lower coefficient of friction with chalk than without, which is why I stopped using chalk at the gym and started doing more scrubbing to get the slippery gack others leave behind off the holds. Anyway...
The main error in your test is that you are measuring the water absorption capacity between full saturation and an arbitrary 550 degree desorption temperature. The real "quality attribute" would be the absoprtion between product as delivered and some state of saturation. Do a simple thought experiment: what if chalk A was half saturated when you got it, while chalk B was water free? They could both give exactly the same result in your test, but chalk B would be very likely much better at absorbing water off your hands. Since chalk, typically magnesium carbonate can come in various forms from anhydrous to a pentahydrate, the initial state of hydration of the chalk might be more relevant than the test result. Sorry for the technical language.
Keep up the interesting testing pro
|
|
