pdoire Posted December 23, 2004 Author Share Posted December 23, 2004 That 291 is not even a standard size, or at least so far. It was probably typed wrong (291 instead of 281) ← OK, I have e-mailed IM and asked for all the wire sizes from them and asked why the newer models are harder in case the wire sizes are the same and within the same variances. I await their answer..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobsterone Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 The coc 3 is .281 See the list. ← Steve look at the list again. ".291 2004 COC #3…………………………………………………..312 lbs" T! ← It's wrong. Being typed doesn't make less so. There are a bunch of grippers (mostly the RB and the HG range) missing from the list - there exclusion doesn't mean they do not exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobsterone Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 Nice updates, Paul.I find it interesting that BB makes nothing between a .312 (4) and a .331 ! At this super high level of difficulty there must be a huge difference between the two. I've seen a formula someplace, but assuming the same spring depth and handle spread, and spring material, isn't gripper closing poundage related the the cube of the spring size ? ..neilkaz.. ← I'm guessing the HG500 falls in that area. Clay would know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdoire Posted December 23, 2004 Author Share Posted December 23, 2004 (edited) The coc 3 is .281 See the list. ← Steve look at the list again. ".291 2004 COC #3…………………………………………………..312 lbs" T! ← It's wrong. Being typed doesn't make less so. There are a bunch of grippers (mostly the RB and the HG range) missing from the list - there exclusion doesn't mean they do not exist. ← I have no access to the HG wire sizes and RB has said he winds them tighter for higher strength, he does not necessarily increase the wire sizes. Formula only works on wire size increases...If someone knows a better way...please be my guest and take over this project!! Edited December 23, 2004 by pdoire Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobsterone Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 The coc 3 is .281 See the list. ← Steve look at the list again. ".291 2004 COC #3…………………………………………………..312 lbs" T! ← It's wrong. Being typed doesn't make less so. There are a bunch of grippers (mostly the RB and the HG range) missing from the list - there exclusion doesn't mean they do not exist. ← I have no access to the HG wire sizes and RB has said he winds them tighter for higher strength, he does not necessarily increase the wire sizes. Formula only works on wire size increases...If someone knows a better way...please be my guest and take over this project!! ← Now, now. It needs to be done. But as we have seen the 2004 CoC 3 being .291 was wrong. You are correct in what Robert has said about RB grippers but generally speaking it was Oldguy who said long ago that all things being equal wire size is the way to go. Email RB and HG and tell them what you're up to. Bill at HG is VERY helpful and should be glad to help. If anyone else wants to put up the wire sizes (I have some of the grippers but no means of measuring them). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdoire Posted December 23, 2004 Author Share Posted December 23, 2004 (edited) The coc 3 is .281 See the list. ← Steve look at the list again. ".291 2004 COC #3…………………………………………………..312 lbs" T! ← It's wrong. Being typed doesn't make less so. There are a bunch of grippers (mostly the RB and the HG range) missing from the list - there exclusion doesn't mean they do not exist. ← I have no access to the HG wire sizes and RB has said he winds them tighter for higher strength, he does not necessarily increase the wire sizes. Formula only works on wire size increases...If someone knows a better way...please be my guest and take over this project!! ← Now, now. It needs to be done. But as we have seen the 2004 CoC 3 being .291 was wrong. You are correct in what Robert has said about RB grippers but generally speaking it was Oldguy who said long ago that all things being equal wire size is the way to go. Email RB and HG and tell them what you're up to. Bill at HG is VERY helpful and should be glad to help. If anyone else wants to put up the wire sizes (I have some of the grippers but no means of measuring them). ← I believe the HG's are a significantly different alloy than BB or IM..that is why they season so easily..don't know if wire sizes would be relevant in this case. In your eternal wisdom and experience...I now officially pass this on to you.. Edited December 23, 2004 by pdoire Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobsterone Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 Leave it 'owt'. I can't be bothered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Browne Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 The coc 3 is .281 See the list. ← Steve look at the list again. ".291 2004 COC #3…………………………………………………..312 lbs" T! ← It's wrong. Being typed doesn't make less so. There are a bunch of grippers (mostly the RB and the HG range) missing from the list - there exclusion doesn't mean they do not exist. ← I have no access to the HG wire sizes and RB has said he winds them tighter for higher strength, he does not necessarily increase the wire sizes. Formula only works on wire size increases...If someone knows a better way...please be my guest and take over this project!! ← Now, now. It needs to be done. But as we have seen the 2004 CoC 3 being .291 was wrong. You are correct in what Robert has said about RB grippers but generally speaking it was Oldguy who said long ago that all things being equal wire size is the way to go. Email RB and HG and tell them what you're up to. Bill at HG is VERY helpful and should be glad to help. If anyone else wants to put up the wire sizes (I have some of the grippers but no means of measuring them). ← I believe the HG's are a significantly different alloy than BB or IM..that is why they season so easily..don't know if wire sizes would be relevant in this case. In your eternal wisdom and experience...I now officially pass this on to you.. ← My 2004 #3 measures .284. This measurement was taken with a micrometer that I got from a professional machinist of 30 yrs., after he retired. Starrett micrometer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reubi Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 The coc 3 is .281 See the list. ← Steve look at the list again. ".291 2004 COC #3…………………………………………………..312 lbs" T! ← This measurement was obtained from a different board, someone received a new one and put mikes to it and responded with this new measurement. The 2004 #1 measurement was in fact from hear in this very post. I wonder if Strossen is raising the grippers across the board...looks like an increase in the #3 and #1. It would be great if those with these products and a mike or caliper can confirm these initial measurements!! ← Hi, it was me who reported that my 2004-coc1 has a wire size of 0.242. I just measured it again, still the same number. All my other grippers have the expected wire size, for example my coc3 from 2004 is .281. In two weeks we have a grip meeting with two other members of the board, maybe they want to bring their mikes and verify my measurement. Greetings, Gerrit Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGuy Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 "My 2004 #3 measures .284. This measurement was taken with a micrometer that I got from a professional machinist of 30 yrs., after he retired." I get .284 on all #3.s using a good digital mic. You must not tighten the mic too far or you get false readings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobsterone Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 Some of us just try to squeeze them shut you know... Like put as much effort into shutting them as measuring. I'm convinced that we should put 99% of our available effort into doing that rather than waste way too much time pratising our measuring skills. About the only time I waste on that is when (on the rare occasion I do) I need to get some more carpet. I am from the school of 'pick up and try to squeeze close'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Browne Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 "My 2004 #3 measures .284. This measurement was taken with a micrometerthat I got from a professional machinist of 30 yrs., after he retired." I get .284 on all #3.s using a good digital mic. You must not tighten the mic too far or you get false readings. ← Correcto mundo. Place the spring in the opening, turn the thimble until it makes contact with the spring leg. After contact, turn the ratchett stop until it clicks once. Tighten the clamp ring and read the measurement 2004 #3 .284 5x straight in a row Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGuy Posted December 23, 2004 Share Posted December 23, 2004 Us old Florida farts know what we are doing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Browne Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 Us old Florida farts know what we are doing! ← How do ya think we got to be old? You get to be old by being no "fool" Lots of young "wise" men, but they`re deader than hell! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 How do ya think we got to be old? Lots of young "wise" men, but they`re deader than hell! ← Yep, I was much wiser when I was 17, heck I knew everything but as I'm getting older I find I know less and less each day Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DLK Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 I dont under stand the 2004 #3 being ".291 2004 COC #3…………………………………………………..312 lbs". How is this? I just recieved my new #3 today and I hope this is a misprint or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdoire Posted December 24, 2004 Author Share Posted December 24, 2004 I dont under stand the 2004 #3 being ".291 2004 COC #3…………………………………………………..312 lbs". How is this? I just recieved my new #3 today and I hope this is a misprint or something. ← That came from a measurement from someone who said they miked theirs and came up with that .291...dunno...tired of working on this.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarytheDino Posted December 24, 2004 Share Posted December 24, 2004 Paul, Don't let it get you down. I just printed out the chart and I think it looks great. I put a little mark beside the .291 but the rest looks great as far as what we have learned of the progression up though the grippers and the weights in relation to the next step. I think that is as close as you can get it. Gary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdoire Posted December 24, 2004 Author Share Posted December 24, 2004 Paul,Don't let it get you down. I just printed out the chart and I think it looks great. I put a little mark beside the .291 but the rest looks great as far as what we have learned of the progression up though the grippers and the weights in relation to the next step. I think that is as close as you can get it. Gary ← Wow a word of gratitude!!! How unusual?? Your welcome. That one measurement came from one person miking theirs..possibly wrongly...they are tougher..maybe not from wire size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarytheDino Posted December 25, 2004 Share Posted December 25, 2004 I can confirm that mine is also the .284. The spread is 2.81. The mount is the same as 2 of my others, they are also in the 2.8 range with the exception of the 3.05 wide one which is mounted lower so that you have more leverage but that is also what makes the spread wider. The spread that wide just makes it so hard to set. The new does seem to be hard at the close where I like it. It is fairly easy to set which I guess means the sweep is easier. Keep in mind though, that this was after I tore some cards, bent and pressed so I need to play with it fresh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shism2 Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 i asked the guys from ironmind and they said the resistance hasnt changed on the COC #1 ..... its still 140 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChargerBill Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 (edited) I was looking into huying a couple of Beef Builders and thought I knew what to get, but when I went to wwfitness website the numbers they offer are completely different from the ones here...so now I'm confused. Can anyone shed some light on this? Edited January 8, 2005 by ChargerBill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Styles Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 Ignore the numbers, they were measured different ways. You can only compare the grippers relative to one another. The list here as pretty accurate, but the gripper strengths do vary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChargerBill Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 (edited) Thanks Scott...but now I should ask, how do the gripper numbers compare to dynometer readings. Can I use the dynometer readings to decide with gripper(s) to buy? Am I overthinking this? It's just that I'll be layed up for a couple of months after a total knee replacement and I'm thinking this would give me something to do...surgery next Wednesday Jan 19th, so I need to order them soon. I don't want to get something too light or too hard... Thanks for the cool chart Paul...now I just need to get a fix on MY strength...LOL... Edited January 13, 2005 by ChargerBill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gripdude Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 Thanks Scott...but now I should ask, how do the gripper numbers compare to dynometer readings. Can I use the dynometer readings to decide with gripper(s) to buy? My limited experience with people trying grippers and dynamometers has shown that they're not closely correlated. Grippers require technique and strength through a range of motion. Dynamometers are squeezed in one fixed location and technique does not play an important role. Nevertheless, what I've seen is people who close the BB Master (COC #2) generally squeeze in the 150 - 160 range on the dyno. Super Master closers are nearer 170 and Grand Master (COC #3) closers push 180+. But these results can vary widely. Also keep in mind that the gripsters I tested already had decent gripper technique. If you don't, you may want to start with an easier gripper to first develop technique and then take it from there. Good luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.