Fbbc Crusher ?

[yohechris]

I just got a 2.5" Crusher from FBBC. Great piece of equipment. Does anyone have an idea how it compares to a Rolling Thunder weight wise? I imagine you would pull less with the Crusher but I'm not sure how much less.

Thanks.

[Paul Knight]

I just got a 2.5" Crusher from FBBC. Great piece of equipment. Does anyone have an idea how it compares to a Rolling Thunder weight wise? I imagine you would pull less with the Crusher but I'm not sure how much less.

Thanks.

I've done around 170 on it and can pull around 185-190 on the RT depending on how seasoned it is

[acorn]

I pull less on my 2 inch crusher than my RT btw

[The Natural]

So I think the general view is this:

The Crusher is much higher quality than the RT.

However,

The RT is the standard and so if you want to compare your strength to the famous numbers of others, you need to buy a RT. This is because you can't pull nearly as much weight with a Crusher.

Aaron is right. The 2" Crusher is even harder than a RT. The 2.5" Crusher would result in an even bigger difference.

-Rex

[bencrush]

I pulled around 160 on the 2.5" Crusher when I had it and in that same time period did a 191lb RT lift.

[Cannon]

So I think the general view is this:

The Crusher is much higher quality than the RT.

However,

The RT is the standard and so if you want to compare your strength to the famous numbers of others, you need to buy a RT. This is because you can't pull nearly as much weight with a Crusher.

Aaron is right. The 2" Crusher is even harder than a RT. The 2.5" Crusher would result in an even bigger difference.

-Rex

Except I'll be darned if they didn't go and change it. Get out your asterisks I guess.

[yohechris]

Thanks for the info. I will figure twenty to thirty pounds more on the RT than Crusher which seems about right from what I pulled and what I thought I would pull. I got to 107 but ran out of plates. I probably have a bit more in me but not much. I'll have to go dig out more plates and see. So I will shoot for 130 short term which would be about 150 on the RT.

I wonder how the "new and improved" RT will compare to the old.

[vikingsrule92]

Thanks for the info. I will figure twenty to thirty pounds more on the RT than Crusher which seems about right from what I pulled and what I thought I would pull. I got to 107 but ran out of plates. I probably have a bit more in me but not much. I'll have to go dig out more plates and see. So I will shoot for 130 short term which would be about 150 on the RT.

I wonder how the "new and improved" RT will compare to the old.

The few people who have said they've tried it say it's much harder (referring to new RT here), maybe the new one is somewhat comparable to the Crusher, still probably a decent difference though.

[EricMilfeld]

I'm neck and neck with Mr. Knight on the two: close to 170 on the Crusher and at least 185 on the RT.

[Kashtan]

What weight of 2", 2,5" and 3" Crushers?

[Kashtan]

Find.

2"- sorry 

2,5" - 7-8 lbs

3" - 12,2 lbs

4" - (only 1 made) 30 lbs

[mfin77]

IF YOU WERE GOING to buy one which one will you buy. The new rt or the 2.5 crusher

[Kashtan]

IF YOU WERE GOING to buy one which one will you buy.  The new rt or the 2.5 crusher

I'm vote for Crusher. 

RT I have , and Crushers i'm order in a month. By Christmas.

[mfin77]

[

I'm vote for Crusher. 

RT I have , and Crushers i'm order in a month. By Christmas.

why?

[Kashtan]

Big diameter - 60,325 mm (RT) vs 63 mm (Crusher 2.5"), most smooth, more difficult to hold in your hand = better develops strength grip. 

[Hubgeezer]

I did a "search" for "crusher" and this seems to be the latest thread on the subject. There have been more than a handful talking about the Crusher, but not many with much in the way of actual numbers or facts. I want to make a few estimates and statements to give a little infomation, stuff that has been raised along the way in some of these threads.

I purchased a 2.5 Inch Crusher a few weeks ago. I have just been pulling a rep or two once a week. Yesterday was the first time I actually did a "workout" with it. I have had 5 Rolling Thunders over the years, and my latest is en route back to me after being shipped off for fixing/replacement. I have sold or given away the other 4.

I purchased the Crusher as a way of improving my Rolling Thunder and Axle deadlift numbers. The Crusher will never catch on to the degree of the others, so I want to use it as training tool. The difference in spinning is about the same as driving a car with inflated tires (crusher) versus driving a car with flat tires (rolling thunder). It is a completely different experience.

I used to call the Rolling Thunder "6 pounds", including all the attachments. With the new version, I call it "7 pounds". I think it is an ounce or two under 7 pounds. I am calling my crusher and rig "12 pounds", which I believe it is closer to 12 1/2 lbs. So, when I mention a weight, I mean total weight.

I think, from everything I have read, guys are downplaying the differences between the two. I think the difference is 15-25%, and probably typically more than 20%, with the 2.5 Inch Crusher producing lower numbers than the Rolling Thunder. What I am saying is, you do 200 on the Rolling Thunder, you are darn lucky if you do 160 on the Crusher.

Remember how there have been many threads where someone tries to make a correlation between lifting the Inch Dumbbell and lifting the Rolling Thunder? Every person is different, but there seems to be wide range of 190 to 230 lbs. In other words, if you can pull 230 on the Rolling Thunder, you are 99% likely to lift the Inch, and if you can pull 190 on the Rolling Thunder, you have about a 1% chance of lifting the Inch.

I say, you lift 185 on the 2.5 inch Crusher, you can deadlift the Inch Dumbbell.Heck, there are probably some that it may be a pound for pound exchange from the 2.5 inch Crusher to the Inch. But I will say 185 lbs.

My best ever Rolling Thunder on a good handle is 216 for the right hand, and about 198 for the left hand. So far, my best right hand 2.5 inch Crusher is 152 lbs for the right hand, and 128 lbs for the left hand. Right this minute, my right hand is in about 197 lbs Rolling Thunder shape and the left about Rolling Thunder 180 shape. Playing around with the Crusher, 5 or 6 times, without really working out with it, has yielded no improvements from "getting used to it".

So, FYI, to recap, my best 2.5 inch Crusher pull is 152 lbs. I don't see much on the FBBC website in offering numbers, and have not seem much here either...

[Kashtan]

Thanks!

[Guest]

On 9/4/2011 at 8:50 PM, Hubgeezer said:

I did a "search" for "crusher" and this seems to be the latest thread on the subject. There have been more than a handful talking about the Crusher, but not many with much in the way of actual numbers or facts. I want to make a few estimates and statements to give a little infomation, stuff that has been raised along the way in some of these threads.

I purchased a 2.5 Inch Crusher a few weeks ago. I have just been pulling a rep or two once a week. Yesterday was the first time I actually did a "workout" with it. I have had 5 Rolling Thunders over the years, and my latest is en route back to me after being shipped off for fixing/replacement. I have sold or given away the other 4.

I purchased the Crusher as a way of improving my Rolling Thunder and Axle deadlift numbers. The Crusher will never catch on to the degree of the others, so I want to use it as training tool. The difference in spinning is about the same as driving a car with inflated tires (crusher) versus driving a car with flat tires (rolling thunder). It is a completely different experience.

I used to call the Rolling Thunder "6 pounds", including all the attachments. With the new version, I call it "7 pounds". I think it is an ounce or two under 7 pounds. I am calling my crusher and rig "12 pounds", which I believe it is closer to 12 1/2 lbs. So, when I mention a weight, I mean total weight.

I think, from everything I have read, guys are downplaying the differences between the two. I think the difference is 15-25%, and probably typically more than 20%, with the 2.5 Inch Crusher producing lower numbers than the Rolling Thunder. What I am saying is, you do 200 on the Rolling Thunder, you are darn lucky if you do 160 on the Crusher.

Remember how there have been many threads where someone tries to make a correlation between lifting the Inch Dumbbell and lifting the Rolling Thunder? Every person is different, but there seems to be wide range of 190 to 230 lbs. In other words, if you can pull 230 on the Rolling Thunder, you are 99% likely to lift the Inch, and if you can pull 190 on the Rolling Thunder, you have about a 1% chance of lifting the Inch.

I say, you lift 185 on the 2.5 inch Crusher, you can deadlift the Inch Dumbbell.Heck, there are probably some that it may be a pound for pound exchange from the 2.5 inch Crusher to the Inch. But I will say 185 lbs.

My best ever Rolling Thunder on a good handle is 216 for the right hand, and about 198 for the left hand. So far, my best right hand 2.5 inch Crusher is 152 lbs for the right hand, and 128 lbs for the left hand. Right this minute, my right hand is in about 197 lbs Rolling Thunder shape and the left about Rolling Thunder 180 shape. Playing around with the Crusher, 5 or 6 times, without really working out with it, has yielded no improvements from "getting used to it".

So, FYI, to recap, my best 2.5 inch Crusher pull is 152 lbs. I don't see much on the FBBC website in offering numbers, and have not seem much here either...

I know this is an old thread, but I find it interesting that you have  lifted a MASSIVE 216 on an RT but can only get 152 at the time of your writing on a 2.5 inch crusher . I have done 201.5 in comp on the RT and can do 183 on a 2.5 inch crusher. I was able to lift the inch dumbbell when I was at inch dumbbell weight on the crusher. Interesting to see the difference in people’s numbers on 2 similar devices. My difference between the 2 is around 18 pounds. How are you at the 2 these days?

Edited July 21, 2018 by Guest

[wobbler]

The old model (current during the start of this thread) rolling thunder was way easier, especially after some use. For me like 125 2.5 crusher, around 150 old RT. And the difference probably increases as you go up in weight.

[Guest]

36 minutes ago, wobbler said:

The old model (current during the start of this thread) rolling thunder was way easier, especially after some use. For me like 125 2.5 crusher, around 150 old RT. And the difference probably increases as you go up in weight.

Was it really that different? I’ve only used the new one and it was at 2 comps. Only time I ever touched one

[gripmaniac]

1 hour ago, Joseph Sullivan said:

Was it really that different? I’ve only used the new one and it was at 2 comps. Only time I ever touched one

IMO, yes it was.  The reasons for this have been covered quite a bit over the years (sorry, I won't use the Search to find the threads) but for me it came down to the old handle:

• (1)  not rotating quite so well after a good deal of use, and
• (2)  the ability to deform the handle just enough (via tight squeezing) and reduce the rotation effect when lifting. 

Both the above are not really an issue with the current (better quality) RT handle, and given the design differences with the Crusher it is not possible for either issue to occur.

Factor in the slightly larger diameter of the Crusher (which equates to an extra 9.97mm of circumference) and I can see why Crusher numbers are noticeably lower.

Dave

[Climber028]

The rolling thunder is also more susceptible to debris making it easier since it's axle is thicker than the crusher. This allows any dirt to apply more torque on the handle that will prevent rotation. Only applies to old well used handles tho.

[Hubgeezer]

Okay, one of my lengthy posts from 7 years ago was unearthed. We have the benefit of elapsed time, and retrospect, etc. I don't think I analyze things as deeply as I used to, but here goes:

1. I have had MANY Rolling Thunder handles over the years. I have sold, practically given some away, and given some away. I have had them repaired by IronMind when they got sticky, and the one I have now, which is a replacement for a previously-repaired one, is the newest of the new batch. 

2. I think that despite some thinking there are only two versions, there are perhaps four, with many small variations in between, of the Rolling Thunder handle. One version, when they first changed/upgraded the material, was a disaster, the numbers were very low, and that version didn't last but a few months (I am thinking that was early 2008 or so?) The changes made right after that were definitely for the better.

3. I sold my 2 1/2 inch Crusher in 2015. I was clueless about the upcoming King Kong contest, and I had two guys wanting it within 5 minutes of posting it for sale. I had not used it in years. So in 2016, my only time in the King Kong contest, I pulled 155 on the Crusher, and it was EASY, I had more in the tank, I didn't know what was going on. 

4. I had eventually gotten up to 222 on the Rolling Thunder with my dominant hand, and the low 200s in my left hand. Usually, they were humid days, I would wash my hands before pulling, and the stars seemed to line up for a PR Day. When those Fit Expo contests were being run in San Jose, there were always 5 kgs. jumps, and I always went out in the 180s, only once pulling a 194ish one. It was always Odd Haugen's Rolling Thunder, and I blamed his chalky handle for my low numbers. 

5. In the last 8 or 9 months, having gotten that new replacement Rolling Thunder from IronMind, I am under the impression that these suckers are awfully consistent now, or more so than they ever were before,  as long as they pass the "spin test". I know that Alexey's World Record did pass the spin test, but I have seen him lift three or four times, and he was never close to 300 lbs., so I don't understand what that is about. I think I have learned that my 222 RT from years ago, and the 202 or whatever with my left hand are not comparable to the current RT version. 

6. So, all of this babble, my "new take" on this as far as comparing things:

a) In 2016, my 2 1/2 inch Crusher max was probably about 165(based on my easy 155 final lift in the King Kong).

b) My max Rolling Thunder (current version) at that time was probably about 190.

c) My 100 plus different 200 lbs. plus lifts are not comparable to the current Rolling Thunder pulls. I never had a stiff or truly defective handle, the device is just different than it used to be.

I have not trained Rolling Thunder in years, and upon getting my new super-updated handle, struggled to hit the 180s. I am thinking about entering the King Kong in a few months and would start using it again. Until then, for me, this is somewhat speculative. My speculation is saying that my spread was 25 pounds a couple of years ago,, which is down from the 60 plus pounds of 2011. Assuming I start doing thickbar again, we shall see. 

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, Hubgeezer said:

Okay, one of my lengthy posts from 7 years ago was unearthed. We have the benefit of elapsed time, and retrospect, etc. I don't think I analyze things as deeply as I used to, but here goes:

1. I have had MANY Rolling Thunder handles over the years. I have sold, practically given some away, and given some away. I have had them repaired by IronMind when they got sticky, and the one I have now, which is a replacement for a previously-repaired one, is the newest of the new batch. 

2. I think that despite some thinking there are only two versions, there are perhaps four, with many small variations in between, of the Rolling Thunder handle. One version, when they first changed/upgraded the material, was a disaster, the numbers were very low, and that version didn't last but a few months (I am thinking that was early 2008 or so?) The changes made right after that were definitely for the better.

3. I sold my 2 1/2 inch Crusher in 2015. I was clueless about the upcoming King Kong contest, and I had two guys wanting it within 5 minutes of posting it for sale. I had not used it in years. So in 2016, my only time in the King Kong contest, I pulled 155 on the Crusher, and it was EASY, I had more in the tank, I didn't know what was going on. 

4. I had eventually gotten up to 222 on the Rolling Thunder with my dominant hand, and the low 200s in my left hand. Usually, they were humid days, I would wash my hands before pulling, and the stars seemed to line up for a PR Day. When those Fit Expo contests were being run in San Jose, there were always 5 kgs. jumps, and I always went out in the 180s, only once pulling a 194ish one. It was always Odd Haugen's Rolling Thunder, and I blamed his chalky handle for my low numbers. 

5. In the last 8 or 9 months, having gotten that new replacement Rolling Thunder from IronMind, I am under the impression that these suckers are awfully consistent now, or more so than they ever were before,  as long as they pass the "spin test". I know that Alexey's World Record did pass the spin test, but I have seen him lift three or four times, and he was never close to 300 lbs., so I don't understand what that is about. I think I have learned that my 222 RT from years ago, and the 202 or whatever with my left hand are not comparable to the current RT version. 

6. So, all of this babble, my "new take" on this as far as comparing things:

a) In 2016, my 2 1/2 inch Crusher max was probably about 165(based on my easy 155 final lift in the King Kong).

b) My max Rolling Thunder (current version) at that time was probably about 190.

c) My 100 plus different 200 lbs. plus lifts are not comparable to the current Rolling Thunder pulls. I never had a stiff or truly defective handle, the device is just different than it used to be.

I have not trained Rolling Thunder in years, and upon getting my new super-updated handle, struggled to hit the 180s. I am thinking about entering the King Kong in a few months and would start using it again. Until then, for me, this is somewhat speculative. My speculation is saying that my spread was 25 pounds a couple of years ago,, which is down from the 60 plus pounds of 2011. Assuming I start doing thickbar again, we shall see. 

Nice explanation. I asked because the only time I’ve touched an RT was at the Odd comp and at Eric’s comp.... and once at Jedds the first time I touched a real griplement in 2017. I always wipe all chalk off the RT. I used a rag at Odds expo and Eric’s. Chalk is definitely counterproductive. I actually liked the RT when I tried it. The big difference I noticed is how strange it felt with the crusher weight being 8 pounds and the RT being so light. Took a little to get used to.  Thanks for explaining! 

Joe

[IROC-Z]

I've spent a lot of time training on both the RT and the 2.5" Crusher.  The biggest difference that I've noticed is that over time the RT will slowly lose some of its free spinning ability, where as the Crusher will continue to spin freely no matter how much you use it.  The newer RT's are definitely great looking, but I think it's easy to get false gains on them........in other words, you think you're getting a lot stronger, but what is actually happening is the handle is not spinning as freely as it once did.  I've always found the difference in weight I could lift on the two implements was huge.  I'm usually good for 50 pounds more on the RT than on the 2.5" Crusher.