Rating Grippers

[Pedro06]

Hello, i don't understand how calculated the rating grippers.

This morning I made a calibrated (like the same of dave morton), I tried on the HG100 and I had to hang 22.5kgs so that it closes, what's the rating of this hg100?

I ask this for the grip of iron contest that I organize.

Thank.

[Cannon]

There's probably an easier way to do this, but here's how I get the calibration. First, you need to know that 150lbs was picked as the standard for a 3.0 rating. So the formula would be:

[(Your Calibration)/150]*3

Or in this case, assuming 22.5kg is 49.6lbs:

(49.6/150)*3 = 0.99 rating.

I hope that's right because that's how I've been doing it

[vikingsrule92]

There's probably an easier way to do this, but here's how I get the calibration. First, you need to know that 150lbs was picked as the standard for a 3.0 rating. So the formula would be:

[(Your Calibration)/150]*3

Or in this case, assuming 22.5kg is 49.6lbs:

(49.6/150)*3 = 0.99 rating.

I hope that's right because that's how I've been doing it

That seems REALLY high for a HG100, mines WAY easier than my Trainer, a little harder than a sporting goods store gripper. But that could be because mine's pretty seasoned.

[foxyj75]

That's 150 lbs. for the HG 100 right? If so, WOW!!!! Mine's about like Derek's is; slightly harder than a common sporting good store plastic jobber. Maybe the wrong handle markings on it??

[vikingsrule92]

That's 150 lbs. for the HG 100 right? If so, WOW!!!! Mine's about like Derek's is; slightly harder than a common sporting good store plastic jobber. Maybe the wrong handle markings on it??

The 150 is for the average #3. it doesn't have the wrong handle markings on it, either this guys has a REALLY hard HG100, he's caling them wrong, or Matt's calculations are wrong. No offense to anyone, just stating the possibilities.

Pedro, just to be sure, are you 100% positive your cal setup is the same as the RGC?

Oh and to Pedro, you really don't need to cal grippers under a #3, it's completely unnecessary since that small of grippers doesn't count for records or anything.

Edited January 20, 2008 by vikingsrule92

[foxyj75]

That's 150 lbs. for the HG 100 right? If so, WOW!!!! Mine's about like Derek's is; slightly harder than a common sporting good store plastic jobber. Maybe the wrong handle markings on it??

The 150 is for the average #3. it doesn't have the wrong handle markings on it, either this guys has a REALLY hard HG100, he's caling them wrong, or Matt's calculations are wrong. No offense to anyone, just stating the possibilities.

Pedro, just to be sure, are you 100% positive your cal setup is the same as the RGC?

Oh and to Pedro, you really don't need to cal grippers under a #3, it's completely unnecessary since that small of grippers doesn't count for records or anything.

I knew the 150 was for an average #3, but I just wanted to be sure it was the lbs. the HG100 supposedly cal'ed at. Still, WOW!!

I knew the HG's varied alot, but thats ridiculous!!! BTW, Derek, do you have a HG350? If so, does it feel like a brick wall? Just curious!!! Later :D

[acorn]

I dont think there is anyway to determine with any sureness a rating for a gripper that light. the main reason for that is the ratios are based on the difference between a (average) #3, and (#average) #4 based on bulk testing. there is no known basis for an (average) #2, #1, or Trainer to create ratios from and I doubt the average constant that was determined for the #3-#4 of 59# would hold up exactly much below a #3. IMHO anything below about a #2.7 would be a guess. Anything below a #2 would be a random guess if you try to base it on the #3-#4 ratios. As a result I think the calibration method used by Greg & Dave's RGC is only accurate from just under a #3 to a #4 unless some standard calibration for a #2, #1, and #T is derived.

- Aaron

[vikingsrule92]

That's 150 lbs. for the HG 100 right? If so, WOW!!!! Mine's about like Derek's is; slightly harder than a common sporting good store plastic jobber. Maybe the wrong handle markings on it??

The 150 is for the average #3. it doesn't have the wrong handle markings on it, either this guys has a REALLY hard HG100, he's caling them wrong, or Matt's calculations are wrong. No offense to anyone, just stating the possibilities.

Pedro, just to be sure, are you 100% positive your cal setup is the same as the RGC?

Oh and to Pedro, you really don't need to cal grippers under a #3, it's completely unnecessary since that small of grippers doesn't count for records or anything.

I knew the 150 was for an average #3, but I just wanted to be sure it was the lbs. the HG100 supposedly cal'ed at. Still, WOW!!

I knew the HG's varied alot, but thats ridiculous!!! BTW, Derek, do you have a HG350? If so, does it feel like a brick wall? Just curious!!! Later :D

No the HG100 cal'd at 49.6 lbs, not 150. The .99 means about a #1. Or did you know that and I'm just really confused? Hahaha

Yeah I ahve one and it feels like a brick wall but as Aaron will testify, it's not as hard as it feels. The HGs have a PSYCHOTIC sweep but don't load up. The sweep on mine feels like a 3.5, but Aaron tried it and the crush was only about a 3.0.

[dima700]

I once had an HG 150 that was as hard as my #4 Later I found out the spring was stuck and wouldn't move

[GetAGrip87]

Guys, there is no way in hell his HG100 calibrates to 150lbs

There's probably an easier way to do this, but here's how I get the calibration. First, you need to know that 150lbs was picked as the standard for a 3.0 rating. So the formula would be:

[(Your Calibration)/150]*3

Or in this case, assuming 22.5kg is 49.6lbs:

(49.6/150)*3 = 0.99 rating. DO NOT multiply by 3.

49.6/150= 0.33

I hope that's right because that's how I've been doing it

I'm not sure how to calibrate a gripper below a #3 and it doesn't really matter but... I guess an HG100 would be about a 0.33. Sounds about right.

[vikingsrule92]

Guys, there is no way in hell his HG100 calibrates to 150lbs

There's probably an easier way to do this, but here's how I get the calibration. First, you need to know that 150lbs was picked as the standard for a 3.0 rating. So the formula would be:

[(Your Calibration)/150]*3

Or in this case, assuming 22.5kg is 49.6lbs:

(49.6/150)*3 = 0.99 rating. DO NOT multiply by 3.

49.6/150= 0.33

I hope that's right because that's how I've been doing it

I'm not sure how to calibrate a gripper below a #3 and it doesn't really matter but... I guess an HG100 would be about a 0.33. Sounds about right.

No Scott I think he did it right. That means it cals at a .99 on a CoC scale, not that it cals at 150 lbs. You can just use ratios for CoC rankings. If you know and average #3 is 150 lbs then you use simple ratios. 150/3 = 49.6/X where X equals the CoC number ranking. When you cross multiply and solve out it equals .99

[GetAGrip87]

Whatever, no HG100 is going to be a #1.

[vikingsrule92]

Whatever, no HG100 is going to be a #1.

I think so too, but the ratios I did (I'm pretty sure) is a correct the way to find out CoC rank. Maybe he cal'd it wrong I don't know.

Actually, now I'm not sure. Maybe I did do it wrong because it doesn't work for the average #4 number (209 right?). But in theory those ratios should work, maybe not though.

Edited January 20, 2008 by vikingsrule92

[vikingsrule92]

I think I may have it figured out if you use the existing ratio of 209/150 of 4/3. That would mean an average #2 is ~107.6 and the average #1 is ~77.3 so this gripper would be a .642, dividing 49.6/77.3. However this very well could be wrong and I'm a complete idiot

[neilkaz]

Every HG100 that I've ever seen or tested is inbetween the IM Sport and Trainer and usually closer to the Sport.

[Pedro06]

I want to know every gripper calibrated because at the contest grip of iron there are some beginner's who cant't close more of the HG100 or hg150.

Thus how I shall make the classification of the gripper's event?

[Pedro06]

result of this morning (2 tries with every gripper to verify)

HG100 = 19.5kgs // 43lbs

HG150 = 31.25kgs // 69lbs

Coc 1 = 32.5kgs // 71.5lbs

HG200 = 37.5kgs // 82.5lbs

I think that figure are just because I found that was #1 equal in HG150 and HG200 really more hard.

I use this for made the calibrated and for rating i don't understand!!!!!

RGC

[Teemu I]

The rating for that HG 100 should be under 0,30.

This is how the ratings should really be calculated, this was told to me by Greg Amidon:

Average Difference

Guide 32 T-G 13

Sport 45 T-S 14

T 59 #1 - T 24

1 83 #2 - #1 27

2 110 #3 - #2 40

3 150 #4 - #3 59

4 209

Take the poundage you get from the calibrator, find what it is greater than or equal to, subtract it from the average value it is greater than or equal to, then divide that by the difference to the next gripper up, and add the gripper value to it. Anything higher than a 3 you use the 3 values. Trainer and below you add 0 as the gripper value at the end.

Example: 180 pounds

It is greater than a 3 average of 150.

Subtract your reading from the avearage 3 value.

180-150 = 30

Divide the result from the difference of a average 4 to a average 3

30/59 = .508

Add the gripper value of the line you used for the calculations in this case a 3

3.508

I hope this helped to clear the confusion.

[Pedro06]

Ok Temmu thank you, now I understand.

I have just finish, the result:

I will use for the contest "grip of iron" , If you have remarks or things to be modified I am opened.

HG100: 0.37

HG150: 0.87

Hold COC1: 0.92

New COC1: 1

HG200: 1.37

Hold COC2: 1.62

New COC2: 2.05

HG250: 2.12

COC2.5: 2.45

HG300: 2.8

COC3: 2.98

HG350: 3.36

COC3.5: 3.50

COC4: 4.01

Edited January 20, 2008 by Pedro06

[Teemu I]

It would help to see if you have come up with the right ratings if you posted the kilos and pounds as well. I could compare that to the data I have.

[Pedro06]

OK :

HG100: 43lbs (not sur for the rating calcul)

HG150: 56lbs (not sur for the rating cacul)

#1: 83lbs

HG200: 93lbs

#2: 112lbs

HG250: 115lbs

#2.5: 128lbs

HG300: 142lbs

#3: 149lbs

HG350: 171lbs

#3.5: 180lbs

#4 : 211lbs

[Teemu I]

Your numbers looked fine to me. I also can't be 100 % sure of the two easiest, but now they can't be that far off. Everything from #1 and up look right.