DannyGrip Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 In average RB160 is just below #2. Again there is ridiculous amount of variation. You can get looser than hard #1.5 or harder than easy #2.5. Next gripper I'm getting is the RB210N. Any information is greatly appreciated. Is the RB210N right between the #1.5 and #2? That's exactly what I'm looking for. I agree with the original design flaw of grippers having such a wide spread. Since everyone's pinky doesn't go around the handle, it definately means the handle spread is too wide. I don't think there is any advantage in strength or training with a gripper that's past 2.25" spread, as opening up wider than that distance sacrifices your pinky coming off. The regular RB's are great quality and look, but the 3+" distance between the handles is too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Force Posted July 9, 2009 Author Share Posted July 9, 2009 In my opinion normal gripper spread could be cut to half, 1,25" would be just fine. And narrow models could be parallel, 0,8" or something. And then use much bigger springs to get enough resistance. Fortunately FBBC started to sell parallel grippers with some serious sized springs! I like to use choker on grippers and just concentrate on crushing instead of setting the gripper before crushing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acorn Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 The problem is once you get above 5/16 (#4 or BBGE) wire size the increments between standard sizes start to become incredibly large. - Aaron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Force Posted July 10, 2009 Author Share Posted July 10, 2009 The problem is once you get above 5/16 (#4 or BBGE) wire size the increments between standard sizes start to become incredibly large.- Aaron Ok. It's interesting how hard those FBBC parallel models P1 .343 and P2 .375 are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IROC-Z Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I just purchased a RB 300N from Wade's store. This one feels identical to an average #3. The RB's are BEAUTIFUL grippers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lone Wolf Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 (edited) In average RB160 is just below #2. Again there is ridiculous amount of variation. You can get looser than hard #1.5 or harder than easy #2.5. Next gripper I'm getting is the RB210N. Any information is greatly appreciated. Is the RB210N right between the #1.5 and #2? That's exactly what I'm looking for. I agree with the original design flaw of grippers having such a wide spread. Since everyone's pinky doesn't go around the handle, it definately means the handle spread is too wide. I don't think there is any advantage in strength or training with a gripper that's past 2.25" spread, as opening up wider than that distance sacrifices your pinky coming off. The regular RB's are great quality and look, but the 3+" distance between the handles is too much. Here are some calibrations of my RB grippers 130 @ 83.47 160 @ 100 Brass handles 160 @ 102 brass handles 210n @ 107.5 cert gripper 180 @ 109 240n @ 139 210 @ 141 Brass handles hope this helps Edited July 24, 2009 by lone Wolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Force Posted July 24, 2009 Author Share Posted July 24, 2009 (edited) There is very big jump from 210N to 240N. 210N seems to be on average below 110lbs. When the next gripper 240N is around 140lbs. After that the jumps are on average, quite small. Edited July 24, 2009 by Force Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bullitt Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I just purchased a RB 300N from Wade's store. This one feels identical to an average #3.The RB's are BEAUTIFUL grippers! Can you close it tns bro? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Autolupus Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Got one from Theo(Dutch)...feels like a hard #3, 3.1-3.2. C'mon Theo let me know where you rank it!? quote "gripper is a tough one I must say!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IROC-Z Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I just purchased a RB 300N from Wade's store. This one feels identical to an average #3.The RB's are BEAUTIFUL grippers! Can you close it tns bro? I'm about 1/16th of an inch away. I'm hoping to have it within a couple of weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grippster Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 If RB grippers are so nice then why wouldn't he use a better quality spring material like Warren does for beef builders? I like how they look but honestly wouldn't want crazy variations like that. They're as bad if not worse than HG. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benedikt Farsmann Posted July 26, 2009 Share Posted July 26, 2009 I haven't seen any calibration data on RB's so far and can't tell how much they vary but you can't compare them with HGs... HG's are of really terrible quality. really really terrible and nowhere near RB's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyGrip Posted July 26, 2009 Share Posted July 26, 2009 I haven't seen any calibration data on RB's so far and can't tell how much they vary but you can't compare them with HGs... HG's are of really terrible quality. really really terrible and nowhere near RB's. I'd have to agree, RB's have a nice finish to them and are of much better quality than HG's. I actually like the way the RB's feel in the hand better than BB's. That's just personal choice of course - but I like how the handles are knurled on RB's and I don't think they season down like the HG's do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gio70 Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 1 IM Guide 60 lbs2 RB70 3 IM Sport 80 lbs 4 HG100 5 .225 BB Beginner 100 lbs 6 HG150 7 .225 COC T 100 lbs 8 RB130N 9 RB100 10 RB160N 11 RB130 12 RB180N 13 .235 BB Advanced 140 lbs 14 .235 COC #1 140 lbs 15 HG200 16 .241 COC 2004 #1 153 lbs 17 PDA243 18 .250 COC 2006 #1.5 168 lbs 19 .250 BB Super Advanced 173 lbs 20 GM1 cert gripper 21 RB210N 22 HG250 23 RB160 24 .260 BB Master 195 lbs 25 .260 COC #2 195 lbs 26 RB180 27 RB240N 28 PDA262 29 RB260N 30 .273 COC 2006 #2.5 238 lbs 31 HG300 32 .275 BB Super Master 255 lbs 33 GM2 cert Gripper 34 RB210 35 HG400 36 .281 BB Grand Master 280 lbs 37 .281 COC #3 280 lbs 38 .277 RB240 39 .283 COC 2005 #3 290 lbs 40 GM3 cert gripper 41 RB300N 42 HG350 43 .277 RB260 44 .295 spring, 1/4" mount, 2.75 width MMG1 * 306 lbs 45 .295 spring, 3/16" mount, 2.75 width MMG2 * 315 lbs 46 .295 BB Elite 320 lbs 47 .294 COC 2006 #3.5 323 lbs 48 RB330N 49 .306 spring, 1/4" mount, 2.75 width MMG3 * 335 lbs 50 .295 RB300 51 .306 spring, 3/16” mount, 2.75 width MMG4 * 345 lbs 52 .306 BB Super Elite 345 lbs 53 .312 BB Grand Elite 365 lbs 54 RB330 55 .312 COC #4 365 lbs 56 .353 HG500 57 RB365 58 .331 BB Pro 430 lbs 59 .345 BB World Class 470 lbs 60 .353? BB Galaxy 565 lbs 61 .362 BB Super Galaxy 62 .375 BB Grand Galaxy 63 RBWT I bought RB260N also to bridge between CoC#2 and CoC#2,5 (a bit suggested in this hierarchy as well), but it really feels heavier than my CoC#2,5. I can tell this for sure when trying severe negatives. Together I also bought RB280N, not mentioned in this list, assuming it would be slightly heavier than CoC#2,5 or midway to the CoC#3, but it feels closer to my hard 3. So they both turned out to be one step heavier than I expected, which makes them of little use for me now (apart from negatives on the RB280N instead than on the 3). I like their look, but now I guess I'll work up to the 2,5 without bridges, or I'd have to buy other lighter RBs narrow grip... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grippster Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 I haven't seen any calibration data on RB's so far and can't tell how much they vary but you can't compare them with HGs... HG's are of really terrible quality. really really terrible and nowhere near RB's. I'd have to agree, RB's have a nice finish to them and are of much better quality than HG's. I actually like the way the RB's feel in the hand better than BB's. That's just personal choice of course - but I like how the handles are knurled on RB's and I don't think they season down like the HG's do. My HG grippers seasoned but they all seasoned the same amount and they all seem nicely spread out in terms of resistance levels, just the way they were supposed to be. If RBs are a lot better than that but still season considerably more than BBs then I'm not even sure how anyone could notice the seasoning on BBs if it's that little. I'd say you can get "lemon" grippers that are just terrible (ex. 190lb HG350s or 140lb HG400s) but normal HGs aren't that bad. I wouldn't buy them again but I don't think they're brutal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benedikt Farsmann Posted July 29, 2009 Share Posted July 29, 2009 I haven't seen any calibration data on RB's so far and can't tell how much they vary but you can't compare them with HGs... HG's are of really terrible quality. really really terrible and nowhere near RB's. I'd have to agree, RB's have a nice finish to them and are of much better quality than HG's. I actually like the way the RB's feel in the hand better than BB's. That's just personal choice of course - but I like how the handles are knurled on RB's and I don't think they season down like the HG's do. My HG grippers seasoned but they all seasoned the same amount and they all seem nicely spread out in terms of resistance levels, just the way they were supposed to be. If RBs are a lot better than that but still season considerably more than BBs then I'm not even sure how anyone could notice the seasoning on BBs if it's that little. I'd say you can get "lemon" grippers that are just terrible (ex. 190lb HG350s or 140lb HG400s) but normal HGs aren't that bad. I wouldn't buy them again but I don't think they're brutal. If seasoning is the only thing that is in question - again - I can't tell you how much RB's season but in terms of production quality (handles, knurling, finish) RB's are top quality grippers and HG's are not. It seems to me that HG's are made by non-professionals as even I could build such low-quality grippers. The handles aren't even, the knurling is the worst I have ever seen on anything, they are just ugly looking -> just mass-produced non-quality goods. Of course you can still use them for training but if you like quality, don't ever buy them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DannyGrip Posted July 30, 2009 Share Posted July 30, 2009 (edited) I haven't seen any calibration data on RB's so far and can't tell how much they vary but you can't compare them with HGs... HG's are of really terrible quality. really really terrible and nowhere near RB's. I'd have to agree, RB's have a nice finish to them and are of much better quality than HG's. I actually like the way the RB's feel in the hand better than BB's. That's just personal choice of course - but I like how the handles are knurled on RB's and I don't think they season down like the HG's do. My HG grippers seasoned but they all seasoned the same amount and they all seem nicely spread out in terms of resistance levels, just the way they were supposed to be. If RBs are a lot better than that but still season considerably more than BBs then I'm not even sure how anyone could notice the seasoning on BBs if it's that little. I'd say you can get "lemon" grippers that are just terrible (ex. 190lb HG350s or 140lb HG400s) but normal HGs aren't that bad. I wouldn't buy them again but I don't think they're brutal. If seasoning is the only thing that is in question - again - I can't tell you how much RB's season but in terms of production quality (handles, knurling, finish) RB's are top quality grippers and HG's are not. It seems to me that HG's are made by non-professionals as even I could build such low-quality grippers. The handles aren't even, the knurling is the worst I have ever seen on anything, they are just ugly looking -> just mass-produced non-quality goods. Of course you can still use them for training but if you like quality, don't ever buy them. I agree on exactly what you say. But even for training, the HG's don't cut it - the close isn't smooth throughout and I remember when I had them for a short period - the handles were uneven. Knurling also seemed too smooth : very low quality grippers...not worth buying. RB's are great! Whenever you can't bridge a certain level, look for RB's to fall right in the middle of what you're looking for. Knurling, look, and feel of the RB's is top notch! I had a better time training with them than the BB's as they felt so nice on the hands. The only thing is the RB's have thicker handles which means you won't be closing the gripper as far and when you open to what your hands are accustomed to - the opening would be slightly less. This is just because the handles are slightly thicker, but overall they are still great grippers to when you're stuck in between levels. Edited July 30, 2009 by DannyGrip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbcx6pmw Posted July 30, 2009 Share Posted July 30, 2009 I bought RB260N also to bridge between CoC#2 and CoC#2,5 (a bit suggested in this hierarchy as well), but it really feels heavier than my CoC#2,5. I can tell this for sure when trying severe negatives. Together I also bought RB280N, not mentioned in this list, assuming it would be slightly heavier than CoC#2,5 or midway to the CoC#3, but it feels closer to my hard 3. So they both turned out to be one step heavier than I expected, which makes them of little use for me now (apart from negatives on the RB280N instead than on the 3). I like their look, but now I guess I'll work up to the 2,5 without bridges, or I'd have to buy other lighter RBs narrow grip... From my experience those RBs are too low in the hierachy, my RB240N and RB260N are both harder than my #2.5. There don't seem to be many grippers that sit between the #2 and #2.5, I have a pda262 that bridges the gap quite nicely though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Force Posted August 2, 2009 Author Share Posted August 2, 2009 I bought RB260N also to bridge between CoC#2 and CoC#2,5 (a bit suggested in this hierarchy as well), but it really feels heavier than my CoC#2,5. I can tell this for sure when trying severe negatives. Together I also bought RB280N, not mentioned in this list, assuming it would be slightly heavier than CoC#2,5 or midway to the CoC#3, but it feels closer to my hard 3. So they both turned out to be one step heavier than I expected, which makes them of little use for me now (apart from negatives on the RB280N instead than on the 3). I like their look, but now I guess I'll work up to the 2,5 without bridges, or I'd have to buy other lighter RBs narrow grip... From my experience those RBs are too low in the hierachy, my RB240N and RB260N are both harder than my #2.5. There don't seem to be many grippers that sit between the #2 and #2.5, I have a pda262 that bridges the gap quite nicely though. RB240N and 260N are on average tougher than #2.5. RB210N on the other hand is usually easier than #2. RB180 is on average between #2 and #2.5. Matti just calibrated my 300N and it was 144,6 lbs, rating 2.87. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Force Posted August 4, 2009 Author Share Posted August 4, 2009 It's interesting that there is 240 narrow calibrated harder than my 300N 144.6 lbs = 2.87. One RB240N is 146.8 = 2.92. There is two models between them, 260N and 280N. Talking about lottery. 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.