Collection Home
Otto Small
Otto Large
Version A
Version B
Version C
Version D
Version E
Version F
Version G
Version H
|
|
|
| Otto Large | Otto Small |
|
|
|
|
|
| Version A | Version B | Version C | Version D |
|
|
|
|
|
| Version E | Version F | Version G | Version H |
[ Top | Otto Small | Version A | Version B | Version C | Version D | Version E | Version G | Version H | Return to Figure Eights ]
|
|
 |
| Front | Rear |
I acquired this eight from Walkhigh Mountaineering in 2007.
The C.A.M.P. 548.00/01 (Otto Large) is forged from aluminum alloy and then hard anodized. Mine is 146 mm. tall, 76 mm. wide, and 16 mm. thick. The rope hole is 51 mm. high and 51 mm. wide. The top center thickness is 12 mm. The shaft length and width are 45 mm. and 26 mm., respectively. The eye measures 26 mm. by 26 mm. My eight weighs 123 g.
The front of the shaft is etched with "CAMP." The other side has "kN30" in raised characters. The top front is also etched with "2L."
The C.A.M.P. Otto Large is a typical example of a full-sized, forged, aluminum figure eight. These are by far the most common figure eights. Everybody, their sisters, and their brothers seem to make one, and half the world's population and businesses have issued a custom version with their own name on it. I certainly have not acquired and tested every version madel, but I show the following eights as examples:
Some of these eights are made in Europe, and some in Asia. Some are obviously rebranded eights, a good example being the Trillium Health + Fitness eight.
The S.E.Peak is larger than the others, an outlier. Each of the remaining eights is 145±2 mm. tall and 76±2 mm. wide, and has a weight in the 126±12 g. range. These variations have no practical significance.
Although similar, these eights are not identical, and close inspection will reveal some minor differences in their shapes. For example, the Fusion Tiny 8, Version A and Lucky Ecos are noticeably wider for their height than the others. None of these affect their performance to any noticeable degree.
The AMP Tiny 8, C.A.M.P. 548.00/01 (Otto Large), Fusion Tiny 8, Version A, Hugh Banner, Version D and SUT appear to have harder anodizing than the others, and may wear better. My experience with the high-quality hard anodizing on the similar CMI eights is that hard anodizing provides considerable protection on clean ropes, but the protection provided against cave mud is limited. In bad conditions the anodizing soon breaks through, and the protection is lost. For this reason, I don't place a lot of value on hard over soft anodizing for caving use, but I prefer hard anodizing for climbing applications.
None of these eights have slots for sticht-type belaying, and their round eyes are not really designed for that purpose. Some people will belay with an eight rigged for rappelling, but I don't like that practice since it does not provide the automatic locking assist and additional friction that a sticht plate or belay tube does.
Some caver friends refuse to use figure eights because they twist the rope. Eights are short drop devices, and rope twist concerns are absurd for short drops.
Many climbers think that eights are outdated, and prefer to rappel on belay tubes. I prefer belay tubes for belaying, but belay tubes get very hot when used for rappelling. Eights run much cooler. I would rather use an eight, but that may require carrying an extra device. On any given day, I make my choice about carrying a separate rappel device by considering several factors, and it is not unusual for me to carry an eight if I expect to be rappelling more than a very short distance.
 |
 |
[ Top | Otto Large | Version A | Version B | Version C | Version D | Version E | Version F | Version G | Version H | Return to Figure Eights ]
|
|
 |
| Front | Rear |
I acquired this eight from Walkhigh Mountaineering in 2007.
The C.A.M.P. 928.00/01 (Otto Small) is forged from aluminum alloy and then hard anodized. Mine is 131 mm. tall, 74 mm. wide, and 13 mm. thick. The rope hole is 48 mm. high and 48 mm. wide. The top center thickness is 11 mm. The shaft length and width are 44 mm. and 25 mm., respectively. The eye measures 18 mm. by 24 mm. My eight weighs 102 g.
One side is stamped with "CAMP." The other side is stamped "kN25" in raised characters. The top rear is also marked "0201."
The C.A.M.P. Otto Small is a "midi" size, forged, aluminum eight sharing one of the most common designs of this type. The following eights are quite similar, except for their markings:
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Some of these eights are made in Europe, and some in Asia. Some are rebranded eights made by one manufacturer for outside customers and labeled accordingly.
Each of these eights is 131±1 mm. tall and 74±1 mm. wide. Their weights fall in the 105±4 g. range. These are normal manufacturing variations that have no practical significance. Although similar, these eights are not identical, and close inspection will reveal some minor differences in their shapes. None of these affect their performance to any noticeable degree.
The AustriAlpin and C.A.M.P. 928.00/01 appear to have harder anodizing than the others, and may wear better. My experience with the high-quality hard anodizing on CMI eights is that hard anodizing provides considerable protection on clean ropes, but the protection provided against cave mud is limited. In bad conditions the anodizing soon breaks through, and the protection is lost. For this reason, I don't place a lot of value on hard over soft anodizing for caving use, but I prefer hard anodizing for climbing applications.
The rope hole is shorter than normal, so it may provide too much friction on stiff or muddy ropes. Cavers should consider this possibility.
Some caver friends refuse to use figure eights because they twist the rope. I think that concern is absurd for short drops, and eights are short drop devices.
Many climbers think that eights are outdated, and prefer to rappel on belay tubes. I prefer belay tubes for belaying, but belay tubes get very hot when used for rappelling. Eights run much cooler. On any given day, I make my choice about carrying a separate rappel device by considering several factors, and it is not unusual for me to carry an eight if I expect to be rappelling more than a very short distance.
None of these eights have slots for sticht-type belaying, and their oval eyes are not really designed for that purpose. They can be used for "Sticht" belaying on 9 mm. rope, but the eye is a bit short for optimum use on 11 mm. rope. Some people will belay with an eight rigged for rappelling, but I don't like that practice since it does not provide the automatic lock and the friction that a sticht does.
Most of these eights have strength markings of 25 or 30 kN. To put this in perspective, the value required by EN 15151-2:2012 is only 7 kn. The excess provides margin for wear.
|
|
[ Top | Otto Small | Otto Large | Version B | Version C | Version D | Version F | Version G | Version H | Return to Figure Eights ]
|
|
 |
| Front | Rear |
I acquired this eight on eBay from Ron H. Clementi in 2020.
This version is forged from aluminum alloy and then soft anodized. Mine is 113 mm. tall, 68 mm. wide, and 15 mm. thick. The rope hole is 40 mm. high and 46 mm. wide. The top center thickness is 12 mm. The shaft length and width are 34 mm. and 21 mm., respectively. The eye measures 19 mm. by 24 mm. My eight weighs 96 g.
The front of the shaft is stamped with "CAMP." The rear is stamped with "2500 dan."
The C.A.M.P., Version A is one of several nearly identical "mini"-size forged aluminum eights. I have the following ones in my collection:
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Each of these eights is 114±1 mm. tall and 68 mm. wide. These are normal manufacturing variations that have no practical significance. Except for the 86 g. SMK, Version C, their weights fall in the 99±3 g. range. Although similar, these eights are not identical, and close inspection will reveal some minor differences in their shapes. None of these affect their performance to any noticeable degree.
These eights are smaller and lighter than most eights. While the advantages are manifest, there are two practical disadvantages:
For these reasons, I rarely use "mini-size" eights.
[ Top | Otto Small | Otto Large | Version B | Version C | Version D | Version F | Version G | Version H | Return to Figure Eights ]
|
|
 |
| Front | Rear |
I acquired this eight from Michael Adams in 2004.
This version is forged from aluminum alloy and then soft anodized. Mine is 114 mm. tall, 68 mm. wide, and 15 mm. thick. The rope hole is 40 mm. high and 46 mm. wide. The top center thickness is 12 mm. The shaft length and width are 34 mm. and 21 mm., respectively. The eye measures 19 mm. by 24 mm. My eight weighs 97 g.
The front of the shaft is stamped with "CAMP" and "ITALY." The rear is stamped with "2500 dan." The top rear of the upper loop is stamped "0394."
This version is similar to the previous version, but has different stamped markings.
The C.A.M.P., Version B is one of several nearly identical "mini"-size forged aluminum eights. I have the following ones in my collection:
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Each of these eights is 114±1 mm. tall and 68 mm. wide. These are normal manufacturing variations that have no practical significance. Except for the 86 g. SMK, Version C, their weights fall in the 99±3 g. range. Although similar, these eights are not identical, and close inspection will reveal some minor differences in their shapes. None of these affect their performance to any noticeable degree.
These eights are smaller and lighter than most eights. While the advantages are manifest, there are two practical disadvantages:
For these reasons, I rarely use "mini-size" eights.
[ Top | Otto Small | Otto Large | Version A | Version C | Version D | Version F | Version G | Version H | Return to Figure Eights ]
|
|
 |
| Front | Rear |
I acquired this eight from Mandatory Gear in 2007.
This version is forged from 6082-T6 aluminum alloy. Mine is 131 mm. tall, 74 mm. wide, and 13 mm. thick. The rope hole is 48 mm. high and 48 mm. wide. The top center thickness is 11 mm. The shaft length and width are 44 mm. and 25 mm., respectively. The eye measures 19 mm. by 25 mm. My eight weighs 102 g.
One side is etched with "CAMP." The other side has "kN25" in raised characters. The top rear is also marked "0605."
The C.A.M.P., Version C is a "midi" size, forged, aluminum eight sharing one of the most common designs of this type. The following eights are quite similar, except for their markings:
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Some of these eights are made in Europe, and some in Asia. Some are rebranded eights made by one manufacturer for outside customers and labeled accordingly.
Each of these eights is 131±1 mm. tall and 74±1 mm. wide. Their weights fall in the 105±4 g. range. These are normal manufacturing variations that have no practical significance. Although similar, these eights are not identical, and close inspection will reveal some minor differences in their shapes. None of these affect their performance to any noticeable degree.
The AustriAlpin and C.A.M.P. 928.00/01 appear to have harder anodizing than the others, and may wear better. My experience with the high-quality hard anodizing on CMI eights is that hard anodizing provides considerable protection on clean ropes, but the protection provided against cave mud is limited. In bad conditions the anodizing soon breaks through, and the protection is lost. For this reason, I don't place a lot of value on hard over soft anodizing for caving use, but I prefer hard anodizing for climbing applications.
The rope hole is shorter than normal, so it may provide too much friction on stiff or muddy ropes. Cavers should consider this possibility.
Some caver friends refuse to use figure eights because they twist the rope. I think that concern is absurd for short drops, and eights are short drop devices.
Many climbers think that eights are outdated, and prefer to rappel on belay tubes. I prefer belay tubes for belaying, but belay tubes get very hot when used for rappelling. Eights run much cooler. On any given day, I make my choice about carrying a separate rappel device by considering several factors, and it is not unusual for me to carry an eight if I expect to be rappelling more than a very short distance.
None of these eights have slots for sticht-type belaying, and their oval eyes are not really designed for that purpose. They can be used for "Sticht" belaying on 9 mm. rope, but the eye is a bit short for optimum use on 11 mm. rope. Some people will belay with an eight rigged for rappelling, but I don't like that practice since it does not provide the automatic lock and the friction that a sticht does.
Most of these eights have strength markings of 25 or 30 kN. To put this in perspective, the value required by EN 15151-2:2012 is only 7 kn. The excess provides margin for wear.
[ Top | Otto Small | Otto Large | Version A | Version B | Version C | Version E | Version F | Version G | Version H | Return to Figure Eights ]
|
|
 |
| Front | Rear |
I acquired this eight from Kendall Chun in 2007.
This version is forged from aluminum alloy. Mine is 132 mm. tall, 74 mm. wide, and 13 mm. thick. The rope hole is 48 mm. high and 48 mm. wide. The top center thickness is 11 mm. The shaft length and width are 43 mm. and 25 mm., respectively. The eye measures 19 mm. by 25 mm. My eight weighs 105 g.
The front of this eight is stamped "CAMP ITALY," and the rear is stamped "KG. 2500."
The C.A.M.P., Version D is a "midi" size, forged, aluminum eight sharing one of the most common designs of this type. The following eights are quite similar, except for their markings:
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Some of these eights are made in Europe, and some in Asia. Some are rebranded eights made by one manufacturer for outside customers and labeled accordingly.
Each of these eights is 131±1 mm. tall and 74±1 mm. wide. Their weights fall in the 105±4 g. range. These are normal manufacturing variations that have no practical significance. Although similar, these eights are not identical, and close inspection will reveal some minor differences in their shapes. None of these affect their performance to any noticeable degree.
The AustriAlpin and C.A.M.P. 928.00/01 appear to have harder anodizing than the others, and may wear better. My experience with the high-quality hard anodizing on CMI eights is that hard anodizing provides considerable protection on clean ropes, but the protection provided against cave mud is limited. In bad conditions the anodizing soon breaks through, and the protection is lost. For this reason, I don't place a lot of value on hard over soft anodizing for caving use, but I prefer hard anodizing for climbing applications.
The rope hole is shorter than normal, so it may provide too much friction on stiff or muddy ropes. Cavers should consider this possibility.
Some caver friends refuse to use figure eights because they twist the rope. I think that concern is absurd for short drops, and eights are short drop devices.
Many climbers think that eights are outdated, and prefer to rappel on belay tubes. I prefer belay tubes for belaying, but belay tubes get very hot when used for rappelling. Eights run much cooler. On any given day, I make my choice about carrying a separate rappel device by considering several factors, and it is not unusual for me to carry an eight if I expect to be rappelling more than a very short distance.
None of these eights have slots for sticht-type belaying, and their oval eyes are not really designed for that purpose. They can be used for "Sticht" belaying on 9 mm. rope, but the eye is a bit short for optimum use on 11 mm. rope. Some people will belay with an eight rigged for rappelling, but I don't like that practice since it does not provide the automatic lock and the friction that a sticht does.
Most of these eights have strength markings of 25 or 30 kN. To put this in perspective, the value required by EN 15151-2:2012 is only 7 kn. The excess provides margin for wear.
[ Top | Otto Small | Otto Large | Version A | Version B | Version C | Version D | Version F | Version G | Version H | Return to Figure Eights ]
|
|
 |
| Front | Rear |
I acquired my C.A.M.P., Version E on eBay from James Morton in 2021.
This version is forged from aluminum alloy. Mine is 132 mm. tall, 75 mm. wide, and 13 mm. thick. The rope hole is 49 mm. high and 49 mm. wide. The top center thickness is 11 mm. The shaft length and width are 42 mm. and 24 mm., respectively. The eye measures 19 mm. by 24 mm. My eight weighs 104 g.
The front of this eight is stamped "CAMP ITALY," and the rear is stamped "KG. 2500."
This eight is identical to Version D except it has depressed arcs below the rope hole on each side. I do not know what these are and I have not seen similar arcs on any other eights. They might be wear warning indicators, but they seem to be rather shallow for that purpose.
The C.A.M.P., Version E is a "midi" size, forged, aluminum eight sharing one of the most common designs of this type. The following eights are quite similar, except for their markings:
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Some of these eights are made in Europe, and some in Asia. Some are rebranded eights made by one manufacturer for outside customers and labeled accordingly.
Each of these eights is 131±1 mm. tall and 74±1 mm. wide. Their weights fall in the 105±4 g. range. These are normal manufacturing variations that have no practical significance. Although similar, these eights are not identical, and close inspection will reveal some minor differences in their shapes. None of these affect their performance to any noticeable degree.
The AustriAlpin and C.A.M.P. 928.00/01 appear to have harder anodizing than the others, and may wear better. My experience with the high-quality hard anodizing on CMI eights is that hard anodizing provides considerable protection on clean ropes, but the protection provided against cave mud is limited. In bad conditions the anodizing soon breaks through, and the protection is lost. For this reason, I don't place a lot of value on hard over soft anodizing for caving use, but I prefer hard anodizing for climbing applications.
The rope hole is shorter than normal, so it may provide too much friction on stiff or muddy ropes. Cavers should consider this possibility.
Some caver friends refuse to use figure eights because they twist the rope. I think that concern is absurd for short drops, and eights are short drop devices.
Many climbers think that eights are outdated, and prefer to rappel on belay tubes. I prefer belay tubes for belaying, but belay tubes get very hot when used for rappelling. Eights run much cooler. On any given day, I make my choice about carrying a separate rappel device by considering several factors, and it is not unusual for me to carry an eight if I expect to be rappelling more than a very short distance.
None of these eights have slots for sticht-type belaying, and their oval eyes are not really designed for that purpose. They can be used for "Sticht" belaying on 9 mm. rope, but the eye is a bit short for optimum use on 11 mm. rope. Some people will belay with an eight rigged for rappelling, but I don't like that practice since it does not provide the automatic lock and the friction that a sticht does.
Most of these eights have strength markings of 25 or 30 kN. To put this in perspective, the value required by EN 15151-2:2012 is only 7 kn. The excess provides margin for wear.
[ Top | Otto Small | Otto Large | Version A | Version B | Version C | Version D | Version E | Version G | Version H | Return to Figure Eights ]
|
|
 |
| Front | Rear |
I acquired this eight from Kendall Chun in 2007.
This version is forged from aluminum alloy. Mine is 132 mm. tall, 75 mm. wide, and 13 mm. thick. The rope hole is 49 mm. high and 49 mm. wide. The top center thickness is 11 mm. The shaft length and width are 43 mm. and 24 mm., respectively. The eye measures 19 mm. by 25 mm. My eight weighs 106 g.
The front of this eight is stamped "CAMP ITALY," and the rear is stamped "KG. 2500."
This version is identical to Version D except the stamped text on each side runs downward instead of upward.
The C.A.M.P., Version F is a "midi" size, forged, aluminum eight sharing one of the most common designs of this type. The following eights are quite similar, except for their markings:
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Some of these eights are made in Europe, and some in Asia. Some are rebranded eights made by one manufacturer for outside customers and labeled accordingly.
Each of these eights is 131±1 mm. tall and 74±1 mm. wide. Their weights fall in the 105±4 g. range. These are normal manufacturing variations that have no practical significance. Although similar, these eights are not identical, and close inspection will reveal some minor differences in their shapes. None of these affect their performance to any noticeable degree.
The AustriAlpin and C.A.M.P. 928.00/01 appear to have harder anodizing than the others, and may wear better. My experience with the high-quality hard anodizing on CMI eights is that hard anodizing provides considerable protection on clean ropes, but the protection provided against cave mud is limited. In bad conditions the anodizing soon breaks through, and the protection is lost. For this reason, I don't place a lot of value on hard over soft anodizing for caving use, but I prefer hard anodizing for climbing applications.
The rope hole is shorter than normal, so it may provide too much friction on stiff or muddy ropes. Cavers should consider this possibility.
Some caver friends refuse to use figure eights because they twist the rope. I think that concern is absurd for short drops, and eights are short drop devices.
Many climbers think that eights are outdated, and prefer to rappel on belay tubes. I prefer belay tubes for belaying, but belay tubes get very hot when used for rappelling. Eights run much cooler. On any given day, I make my choice about carrying a separate rappel device by considering several factors, and it is not unusual for me to carry an eight if I expect to be rappelling more than a very short distance.
None of these eights have slots for sticht-type belaying, and their oval eyes are not really designed for that purpose. They can be used for "Sticht" belaying on 9 mm. rope, but the eye is a bit short for optimum use on 11 mm. rope. Some people will belay with an eight rigged for rappelling, but I don't like that practice since it does not provide the automatic lock and the friction that a sticht does.
Most of these eights have strength markings of 25 or 30 kN. To put this in perspective, the value required by EN 15151-2:2012 is only 7 kn. The excess provides margin for wear.
[ Top | Otto Small | Otto Large | Version A | Version B | Version C | Version D | Version E | Version F | Version H | Version H | Return to Figure Eights ]
|
|
 |
| Front | Rear |
I acquired this eight on eBay from Billy Martin in 2023.
This version is forged from aluminum alloy and then soft anodized. It is 143 mm. tall, 74 mm. wide, and 15 mm. thick. The rope hole is 50 mm. high and 50 mm. wide. The top center thickness is 12 mm. The shaft length and width are 45 mm. and 26 mm., respectively. The eye measures 26 mm. by 26 mm. My eight weighs 128 g.
The front of this eight is stamped "CAMP" inside a raised rounded bar. The rear has "KG 3000" in raised forged letters.
The C.A.M.P., Version G is a full-sized, forged, aluminum eight with a rounded shaft. The following eights of this type are similar to each other, but vary in color and markings:
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Each of these eights is 139±3 mm. tall and 75±1 mm. wide. Their weights fall in the 137±9 g. range. These are normal manufacturing variations that have no practical significance. They are slightly heavier than Standard, Full Size, Forged Eights, but the difference is only 6 g. on average and their ranges overlap.
The shafts on these eights are rather fat and well-rounded, so the rope tends to run smoothly. They provide excellent contact for dissipating heat. Their soft finishes wear faster than a hard-anodized finish would, but the fat shafts have more than adequate margin for accomodating reasonable wear. These eights may sometimes grab a bit when one first stars to move, but this is not a big problem for competent users.
Although similar, these eights are not identical, and close inspection will reveal some minor differences in their shapes. None of these affect their performance to any noticeable degree.
None of these eights have slots for sticht-type belaying, and their round eyes are not designed for that purpose.
[ Top | Otto Small | Otto Large | Version A | Version B | Version C | Version D | Version E | Version F | Version H | Version G | Return to Figure Eights ]
|
|
 |
| Front | Rear |
I acquired this C.A.M.P., Version H on eBay from Allan Weller in 2023. It is 126 mm. tall, 92 mm. wide, 13 mm. thick, and weighs 94 g.
This version is forged from aluminum alloy and then soft anodized. It is 126 mm. tall, 92 mm. wide, and 13 mm. thick. The rope hole is 40 mm. high and 62 mm. wide. There is a small projection on one side with a 4.5 mm. hole for a keeper cord. The top center thickness is 10 mm. The shaft length and width are 40 mm. and 26 mm., respectively. The eye measures 24 mm. by 23 mm. My eight weighs 94 g.
The front of this eight has mountain logo with "CAMP" above and "Italy" below. The rear has "Kg2000" in raised letters.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The keeper hole allows attaching a keeper cord that can be connected to the harness to reduce the rik of dropping the eight. A drawback is that the keeper can easily get entangled with the main line. You may think that the keeper holes on these eights are not in a good placebut where else could it be? If it were on the shank or eye, then the keeper would prevent rigging the eight while the keeper was attached to the user. I recommend simply not dropping your descender, but if yuo have a real concern about dropping the eight, perhaps it would be better to switch to a different kind of descender.
The Midi-sized eights have a compact design that causes the rope to make sharper bends, providing more friction on stiff ropes than a standard-size eight. They also weigh less than most eights. The standard-size Rock House provides less friction than the Midi-sized eights. The Fungo has a bend that allows it to be rigged two ways with differing amounts of friction. The C.A.M.P., Version H is a flat Fungo-equivalent that lacks the two friction arrangements.
This eight is lighter than most figure eights. The rope path is well laid out so this eight runs smoother than one might expect.
The eye is too narrow to accept two full size locking carabiners.
[ Top | Otto Small | Otto Large | Version A | Version B | Version C | Version D | Version E | Version F | Version G | Version H ]
For far more content, use a larger monitor and a full-width window.
Hundreds of cell phone users complained and asked me to for a simpler, mobile friendly site. In particular, they wanted me to limit each page to a small number of pictures and minimize my use of text. This new site provides what they asked for.
