Nathan Say Posted July 1, 2002 Share Posted July 1, 2002 In what way did the replica Henry lifted feel different? Is it the only one that feels that way? Has the foundry that made it, made any others before? I still have a hard time accepting that THAT replica is exactly the same as the original with all the questions people are asking & without taking measurements. I only read on maybe the DPF (can't remember where) that Dr Ken said that some Inch db replicas are as much as 20lbs light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roark Posted July 1, 2002 Author Share Posted July 1, 2002 Nathan, Some of the lighter Inch replicas have been cast, and those lighter ones owned by Kim Wood are, he says, very difficult to distinguish from the 172 replicas, even when they are placed side by side. But John picked up the bell that Mark put overhead and confirms that it was a 172 (at least it was not at light as one of the lighter ones his dad owns). The bell may weigh 173 etc; that's why I was hoping for the weight to be reported, which Richard Sorin has informed us he will report when he weighs it. Mark has made lifting history and should be credited with it, but his accomplishment should not be extrapolated into guessing how many reps he could have done. Let's speak only of what he did. After all he is still several hundreds reps behind Thomas Inch (that's a joke). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Piche Posted July 1, 2002 Share Posted July 1, 2002 C'mon guys, it's not like they put skateboard tape on it. HAH! Good one Popeye! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1stCoC Posted July 1, 2002 Share Posted July 1, 2002 Joe, If the original Inch bell did not have a cast handle(iron or steel then?)then, what was the 1/4" hole in the original's handle there for? It was said for a gas vent during moulding? Hmmm...also can you please restate the fact that if anything the replicas BY YOUR MEASURE are a bit(and it matters) LARGER in the handle diameter. It would have been good to have you there to "sort out the history" since you were privy to the information about the upcoming feat before I even knew about it....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sybersnott Posted July 1, 2002 Share Posted July 1, 2002 Not to throw more controversy into the fire, but.... Isn't the iron today BETTER than irons cast more than a century ago? Remember, Inch didn't ASK for the dumbbell to have a thick handle; it was cast with a thick handle because anything less would not hold up to the lifting weight of the globes. Modern technology has solved this problem. Inch found out by accident that it was the combination of both WEIGHT and THICK HANDLE that made the Inch DB as hard to lift as it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roark Posted July 2, 2002 Author Share Posted July 2, 2002 Inch DID ask for a thick handle. He wanted the balls to be made smaller but wanted the thick handle. The mistake on the thick handle was not with the 172 but with one of the earlier bells. Sometimes I wonder how Inch himself kept track of his various versions. But now, by typing in many,many,many manuscripts into a computer, searches are quicker and comparisons and discrepancies are easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roark Posted July 2, 2002 Author Share Posted July 2, 2002 Richard, The hole in the handle of the 172 original was there, in my opinion to use in connection with a studded ring to prevent the bell from rolling. I suspect when Inch's brother was involved in a practical joke in which a wire ran around his neck, under his sleeve, to the handle of the 172 that there was also use of a studded apparatus. This all backfired when the wire tightened around his neck, nearly choking him. I have asked Kim Wood to remove the 'putty' like substance in the hole and get an accurate measure of the hole diameter and depth, but Kim, in an appreciation of history, so far has not wanted to tamper with the bell. The original when I measured it, had a handle diameter of 2.38", and Kim's replica that I measured was 2.47". John Wood, whose photos appear in the gallery says that the original is easier to pick up than the replica. The difference in diameter 'feel' is obvious, and I lifted both bells the same distance, if you hear what I'm saying... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1stCoC Posted July 2, 2002 Share Posted July 2, 2002 AMEN! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terminator Posted July 2, 2002 Share Posted July 2, 2002 Guys, if the original measured 2.38", why do the replicas measure 2.47"? Is this a concession made for manufacturability purposes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnimalCage Posted July 2, 2002 Share Posted July 2, 2002 I can appreciate all the arguments for history's sake, but I believe it will soon become a moot point. Mark Henry is a monster, and will no doubt lift any Inch DB in front of him. In fact, he has shattered the mystique surrounding the legend. Few may ever achieve what he has, but the lingering questions surrounding the feat will quickly fade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roark Posted July 2, 2002 Author Share Posted July 2, 2002 Mark Henry, so long as he continues training for the one hand clean and push-press with the replica, will no doubt maintain his ability to accomplish the lift. But, as with other grip-related feats, maintanence is very important. I do not know why the replicas have a larger handle than the original, though, some incorrect reports used to assert that the handle was 2.47", so maybe this misinformation was adopted as accurate. By the way, Phil Pfister answered my inquiry as to whether he can one hand clean the bell yet as 'not yet', but check him out at the next Arnold Classic, he says! His bodyweight will be significantly lower than Mark's, so a success would 'mark' another milestone in the history of the Inch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSW Posted July 2, 2002 Share Posted July 2, 2002 What doubt ? It appears that he lifted a MORE difficult dumbell than the original Inch. Maybe he could even have performed the same feat with the Millenium dumbell. I would be very surprised if he could not at least deadlift the Millenium dumbell. Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roark Posted July 2, 2002 Author Share Posted July 2, 2002 The Millennium bell is about 31% heavier than the Inch. I suspect Mark may be able to deadlift the MB, but a clean? Mark only within the past month or so has been able to clean the Inch (the dinner was his third time), and this appeared closer to his limit than 31% away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSW Posted July 2, 2002 Share Posted July 2, 2002 Roark, Do you think the challenge dumbell (Marx's ?) that Apollon nearly cleaned was in fact the same dimensions as the Millenium dumbell, or was it a significantly lighter one ? If that dumbell was infact over 200lb than that feat dwarfs even Mark Henry's stupendous feat. Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mobsterone Posted July 2, 2002 Share Posted July 2, 2002 When Alan Radley, co-creator, gave the dimensions for the MDB he stated that he wanted it to be almost identical to the Apollon lifted bell. However, the only drawing I have seen (in D. Hornes grip course) gives the impression its more of a short but thick handled barbell. Also we allowed for a 5% deviation between copies and so I have been informed by the foundry who have just sent three to the States (should be there within 10 days) that they ought to be 100 kilos or 220 pounds where as my scales tell me mine weighs 228 pounds (within 5%). I suspect that they are probably closer to 225 than 220 and that the foundry have no real reason for accurate weighing and so did not. We shall have to see what my customer says they come out as. BTW on inspecting them I tried one and came closer to one hand deadlifting it than I ever have!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apdwler Posted July 2, 2002 Share Posted July 2, 2002 A story of science, deception and magic, or how the inch was really cleaned. I was at work the other day. I’d just finished drawing blood on the psychiatric ward. It was time to leave. I pushed on the huge metal door, and it didn’t budge. I forgot to tell the nurse I was leaving. Looking back, I signaled her to release the door. From behind bullet-proof glass, she pushed the button to release the door. Pushing the button released the electromag…. An ELECTROMAGNET inplanted in his HAND! That’s how Henry cleaned the inch! I should have discovered the secret earlier. Skateboard tape would be too visible but not an implanted electromagnet! It could easily be switched on and off from a device concealed in Henry’s shoe. The leftover magnetic field obviously would explain the slightly different feel of the replica! Clearly, in the future, we will need to x-ray all people attempting such feats! Sorry about the post. I couldn’t resist. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Browne Posted July 2, 2002 Share Posted July 2, 2002 Syber You are correct in the advances made on cast iron in our era. The higher Carbon content and added alloys such as Magnesium and Graphite, to name a few, have given Grey castiron ( Grey being the strongest) almost the same strength level of a low carbon steel. The Fatigue factor in the Inch DB is probably at a peak point. I would venture to say,it probably would crack open if dropped on a hard surface. Am I a metalurgist? No I am not... but I did stay in a Holiday Inn last night... :p Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sybersnott Posted July 3, 2002 Share Posted July 3, 2002 After the lift, Mark dropped it onto the floor (actually a rubber mat). I don't think it hurt the bell one bit! And Richard STILL hasn't answered my question about the Inch DB Mark lifted.... who has it, and is it for sale?? ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Browne Posted July 3, 2002 Share Posted July 3, 2002 Actually, I was referring to the "original" 1st edition Inch DB. 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.