egg_uk Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 pete, i asked about the blob 50 when that was up and that was $200, so could be $250 for the 60. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
odin Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 I think this is a great idea.My original response was make them wider, but I realize now that it would probably make it very difficult for them to get sold to the smaller handed population. I will buy whatever gets made, as long as one of the dimensions is bigger. I do not think it would be good to make a blob60 the exact same size as the blob50, just with lead inside. I can already kill a blob50 plus ten pounds. Thanks Gordon. I think it could go up to about 70 lbs based on some conversion rates I looked at (I believe the ratio was 1.46-1 or 1.47-1 heavier for the same area of metal) if there was only a thin metal coating put over a mostly lead Blob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twig Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 pete, i asked about the blob 50 when that was up and that was $200, so could be $250 for the 60. We could get a bulk rate on shipping if we all buy togetheer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egg_uk Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 pete, i asked about the blob 50 when that was up and that was $200, so could be $250 for the 60. We could get a bulk rate on shipping if we all buy togetheer have to get it sent over on a pallet, think we would have to buy quite a few to make it worth while, id want a blob50 as well if we were gonna do that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pdfk20 Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 pete, i asked about the blob 50 when that was up and that was $200, so could be $250 for the 60. We could get a bulk rate on shipping if we all buy togetheer pete, i asked about the blob 50 when that was up and that was $200, so could be $250 for the 60. We could get a bulk rate on shipping if we all buy togetheer have to get it sent over on a pallet, think we would have to buy quite a few to make it worth while, id want a blob50 as well if we were gonna do that Cool, sounds like a good plan guys, im sure we could convince a few other guys from the uk to do that too, i would want a blob50 as well as the blob 60. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 Any idea on what the width would be if existing blob ratios were used? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonV Posted December 28, 2007 Author Share Posted December 28, 2007 It would be very difficult to cast a metal with a low melting point (lead) inside something with a high melting point (cast iron). As the hot iron is poured into the sand mold it would very quickly melt the lead and cause problems with the casting. You'd be better off buying a blobette and filling it with melted lead if you wanted to increase weight that way. Otherwise you could make a Blob out of lead and have it chromed. It would be very slick but look super cool, I think pexter was doing some chroming a while back maybe he could chime in. As far as the current ratio i'd have to check. I scoured the archives but couldn't find the posting that listed the BLOB sizes so I can't even state for certain how much wider a #40 is than the #50. I have had a couple thoughts though. It would be possible to do a couple things to increase the flexibility of the implement. The casting for the BLOB50 invloved pressing the pattern into two boxes filled with sand (one for the top one for the bottom) putting the boxes together and pouring the molten iron through a hole in the boxes to fill the void in the sand. It would potentially be possible to create a blob where the top and bottom are two different sizes. There would be a step in the middle where the seam was located but that could be tapered to minimize the sharp edge. Picture a blob with a Blob50 top and a Blob40 bottom (weight probably around 45#). It would also be possible to have a one inch steel bar placed in the sand mold so that when it was cast you would have six inches or so of bar sticking out of each side to add weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARKR Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 (edited) pete, i asked about the blob 50 when that was up and that was $200, so could be $250 for the 60. I bit the bullet and ordered one a few weeks back, ive wanted one for a while so thought what they hell.It cost if i remember right £165 all in to the UK .The service i got from Gordon was great it was sent with a tracking number through paypal and only took 5 days Mark Edited December 28, 2007 by MARKR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knyaz Posted December 28, 2007 Share Posted December 28, 2007 Its a great idea you got Gordon, I think a Blob 55 would sell very well, also a Blob 40 would be a good idea too I think I would get both if you have them made by spring Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twig Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 Any idea on what the width would be if existing blob ratios were used? I'm quite drunk right now, but to my addled brain width would slope from 4" to 6 7/8", and diameter of the face would be 8 1/16" I'll write a program tomorrow which'll predict the probable dimensions of any blob for a given weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sybersnott Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 I'm quite drunk right now Watch out - dangerous territory that we're in right now... but to my addled brain Look out.... width would slope from 4" to 6 7/8", and diameter of the face would be 8 1/16" So you're not as think as you drunk you are! I'll write a program tomorrow which'll predict the probable dimensions of any blob for a given weight. Depending on how much you've had to drink, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twig Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 Math is what I do! My degree is in Physics and astronomical physics! I program when I'm sober. G'night. Sleep tight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAN PRAYDIS Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 gordon if you get any blems freaks oddballs blacksheep like last time i might get one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MalachiMcMullen Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 It would be very difficult... That's a great idea Gordon!!! From a recent project I can tell you that 6" is alot of loading space when it comes to the kinds of weights people will be using here and would some of the larger handed individuals have to change their positioning a bit? 6" with my plates(1" loaders also) is enough for 6 10's or 6 5's and no lock collar. 4" would "look" less "dangerous" and still be usable for any human. Sorry to pick and pry at your idea, just trying to help On a more important note if you could make a 40, 50 or 60lb blob with different tops and bottoms OR one with loadable sides I would be even more likely to get one that just a Blob50 or 60 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porkchop Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 As far as the current ratio i'd have to check. I scoured the archives but couldn't find the posting that listed the BLOB sizes so I can't even state for certain how much wider a #40 is than the #50. Maybe this will help... http://www.gripboard.com/index.php?showtopic=2616 I'd be interested in both the 55 and 60 depending on cost. I agree with the previous replies... #3 on the original post. pc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lone Wolf Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 It would potentially be possible to create a blob where the top and bottom are two different sizes. There would be a step in the middle where the seam was located but that could be tapered to minimize the sharp edge. Picture a blob with a Blob50 top and a Blob40 bottom (weight probably around 45#). It would also be possible to have a one inch steel bar placed in the sand mold so that when it was cast you would have six inches or so of bar sticking out of each side to add weight. The 45 lb. blob would be something I would to get. The 1 inch bar sounds good too. Keep the blobs coming Gorden Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
menace3000 Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 I am for blob60 also....or perhaps blob40-50 with different top and bottom and/or with 1" loadable handles... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ox3782 Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 I would be interested in a 60lber. Brendan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dthor Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 Excellent idea. I would like a 60#. 3. The increased iron distributed over both the diameter and the width but maintaining the existing Blob ratios. I vote for option 3. Gordon can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Blob50 was patterned after the newer York Blobs that were a bit narrower and/or had a bit less slope. Either way, I'll buy one. Thanks to Gordon for all his hard work on this and the Blob50. On a side note, it would be intersting to see if anyone could do much with a 60# with the width of Richard Sorin's old York Blob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAN PRAYDIS Posted January 2, 2008 Share Posted January 2, 2008 (edited) just a rough count but 21 yes and 3 maybe so far how many is needed first before you decide to make them gordon work up a price Edited January 2, 2008 by DAN PRAYDIS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knyaz Posted January 3, 2008 Share Posted January 3, 2008 Gordon a 45 would probably be a great idea too, in the long run youll be able to sell those especially if you have the bar that can help you work your way up attached to the 45 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonV Posted January 7, 2008 Author Share Posted January 7, 2008 Sorry for not being more on top of this thread, between the holidays and work I have just not had any time to focus on moving the BLOB60 project forward. It seems like there is enough interest to get this off the ground so as soon as we resolve a couple points I can get the foundry to start prototyping. Great call out on making the bar shorter for the Dual Width Blob 45 6” out each side is too much bar 3” or 4” would be much more realistic (Thanks Zach). Anybody have a catchy name for the Dual Width Blob? (i.e. DWBLOB45 or BLOBX) the name should be short enough to fit in the window on the top, probably not more than 8 characters. Something dawned on me as I walked past my BLOB50 over the weekend. I have been thinking too simplistically about the BLOB60 dimensions. With the BLOB50 project it was easy, I just handed the York Blob to the foundry and told them to make one just like it. I didn’t have to think about how the Blob was put together geometrically. If we deconstruct the Blob it is composed of primarily two shapes, the first is a cylinder with a flat spot on the bottom and the second is an arc segment from a much larger circle. It is not enough to just discuss diameter and width of the cylinder we also need to decide the radius of the large circle because as Mr. Sorin very astutely pointed out on prior occasion, the variation in York DB’s over time has an impact on difficulty that cannot be underestimated. I’ve attached a BMP to illustrate the issue for those who are more visually driven. My problem is the mathematical implications of this exceed my ADHD limitations. Mucho thanks to Greg for finding the FAQ post for me. Based on BC’s FAQ post (I’ve converted to decimals) on blob sizes the progression looks as follows: D = Diameter W= Width at the top F= Flare or width at the apex of the arc segment (widest point) 30# D-6.375 W-3.25 F-4.375 35# D-6.5 W-3.5625 F-5 40# D-6.8125 W-3.75 F-5.25 45# D-6.9375 W-3.8125 F-5.5 50# D-7.4375 W3.875 F-5.5 It would appear from the BC’s FAQ measurements that while the diameter increased by .5” from the 45 to the 50 the width increase was minimal and there was no increase in the Flare. The variation in the numbers makes the determination of a “BLOB Constant” or ratio very difficult. The constant for grey iron is 0.260 lbs per cubic inch. Perhaps someone with better math skills than I can take a crack at this problem The reason I bring this up is I have been thinking about the impact of going with option #1. If we only increase D but leave W and F the same in moving from BLOB50 to BLOB60 we may end up flattening the arc segment that determines F to the point where a BLOB60 becomes nearly as easy as the BLOB50. I would go so far as to venture that a BLOB60 with only an increased D would actually be easier than a BLOB50 with a 10# plate taped to it. Maybe I am over thinking this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 I agree the blob should be increased in all the ways and not just some. I chose #1 at first but it should be this way for sure after thinking about it more The increased iron distributed over both the diameter and the width but maintaining the existing Blob ratios. Do it like that so it would be exactly how a 60 would have been also make sure to not make it to slick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAN PRAYDIS Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 SOME MACHINE SHOPS COULD PUT THAT IN A VIRTUAL MACHINE AND SCAN IT. THEN TAKE THE VOLUME DIVIDED BY 50LB AND FIND THE SUB WEIGHT THEN ADD THE PERCENTAGE THAT WAS FOUND TO MAKE A 60LB BLOB AND GIVE YOU A MEASURMENT TO GO BY BUT IM GUESSING BUT THEY DO HAVE A DEVICE TO MEASURE LIKE THAT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MalachiMcMullen Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 Well, going by the 45 it looks like 7.25ish% of the weight is in the rounded sides or about 3.2625lbs per side. So if the new 60 is going to be as sloped as a 45 wouldn't the 60 need to have about 7.25% of it's volume in the rounded sides? I'm just kind of guessing wildly here So the 60 would have to have rounded sides that amount to about 4.35lbs per side. That means that the other 85.5% of the weight, 51.3lbs, would be in the cylinder. If anyone wants to figure that one out go ahead, I'm going to bed 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.