Inch Vs Rt

[deathatthegates]

After some research, I found that the inch is 1/8" thicker in the handle. I was wondering for those have lifted the inch and do RT work, wouldn't a RT lift of 172 allow someone to pick up the inch?

[acorn]

According to those that have done the inch most say that 220-225 on the RT is needed before you can pull the inch to full DL. the main reason is that on the inch the globe bells make a lot of rotational torque when you lift it and you have to counteract that. whereas the RT doesnt do that.

- Aaron

[odin]

After some research, I found that the inch is 1/8" thicker in the handle. I was wondering for those have lifted the inch and do RT work, wouldn't a RT lift of 172 allow someone to pick up the inch?

I've been researching the Inch and this topic has been beaten to death. There is no direct relationship between the two lifts that applies to all. A lot depends on your thumb and wrist strength. I think Jedd Johnson could DL the inch when he was only lifting a little over 180 on the RT. Others can lift much more on the RT, but can't do anything with the inch. Some have guessed over 230 on the RT.

A better gauge might be how much you can lift with a 2.5" DB. You'd likely need to pull 30 or 40 lbs. more if memory serves me correctly (I believe Mobster may have written something to that effect, please correct me if I'm wrong). Also, remember that the RT has a limited ROM compared to lifting a DB from the ground.

Acorn, did you get to DL the Inch at the BBB? I know it was in the medley, but it would be hard enough to do when fresh.

Edited October 16, 2007 by odin

[acorn]

After some research, I found that the inch is 1/8" thicker in the handle. I was wondering for those have lifted the inch and do RT work, wouldn't a RT lift of 172 allow someone to pick up the inch?

I've been researching the Inch and this topic has been beaten to death. There is no direct relationship between the two lifts that applies to all. A lot depends on your thumb and wrist strength. I think Jedd Johnson could DL the inch when he was only lifting a little over 180 on the RT. Others can lift much more on the RT, but can't do anything with the inch. Some have guessed over 230 on the RT.

A better gauge might be how much you can lift with a 2.5" DB. You'd likely need to pull 30 or 40 lbs. more if memory serves me correctly (I believe Mobster may have written something to that effect, please correct me if I'm wrong). Also, remember that the RT has a limited ROM compared to lifting a DB from the ground.

Acorn, did you get to DL the Inch at the BBB? I know it was in the medley, but it would be hard enough to do when fresh.

I tried a few times. I got the baby inch in warmups for the medley. But I only got the Big boy a few inches off the ground every time I tried like usual.

- Aaron

[mobsterone]

After some research, I found that the inch is 1/8" thicker in the handle. I was wondering for those have lifted the inch and do RT work, wouldn't a RT lift of 172 allow someone to pick up the inch?

I've been researching the Inch and this topic has been beaten to death. There is no direct relationship between the two lifts that applies to all. A lot depends on your thumb and wrist strength. I think Jedd Johnson could DL the inch when he was only lifting a little over 180 on the RT. Others can lift much more on the RT, but can't do anything with the inch. Some have guessed over 230 on the RT.

A better gauge might be how much you can lift with a 2.5" DB. You'd likely need to pull 30 or 40 lbs. more if memory serves me correctly (I believe Mobster may have written something to that effect, please correct me if I'm wrong). Also, remember that the RT has a limited ROM compared to lifting a DB from the ground.

Acorn, did you get to DL the Inch at the BBB? I know it was in the medley, but it would be hard enough to do when fresh.

Spot on. There is no comparison between the lifts. As for 172 on an RT...

[vegasdsm]

the inch wants to roll outta your hand as soon as it is off the floor.... rolling thunder's grip rolls on its own...

the inch is no joke.....

i got one a couple inches off the ground @ the olympia expo... rolled right outta my hand.....

cheers

[Florian Kellersmann]

One thing is for sure: you don't have to be able to pull so much weigth on the RT to lift the inch if you use an oiled RT

[deathatthegates]

Oh, so a rolling handle is essentially easier at the same diameter? Or is it that that extra 1/8 of an inch fixed handle is harder? I understand with the RT you start higher up and have less distance to lift...but lets just say you wanted to just break weight off the ground. In that scenario could fidduclty be compared easier. Forget about the inch itself, just the concept of a rolling handle on a rolling pin against a dumbell from the ground with same handle diameter.

Thanks guys, I really appreciate the replies.

[Florian Kellersmann]

Oh, so a rolling handle is essentially easier at the same diameter? Or is it that that extra 1/8 of an inch fixed handle is harder? I understand with the RT you start higher up and have less distance to lift...but lets just say you wanted to just break weight off the ground. In that scenario could fidduclty be compared easier. Forget about the inch itself, just the concept of a rolling handle on a rolling pin against a dumbell from the ground with same handle diameter.

Thanks guys, I really appreciate the replies.

A rolling thunder handle with the same diameter and ball bearings may be similar to an inch db, I think.

[maidenfan]

My Clays Handle (2.5" metal version of the RT with ball bearings) seems to be real similar to the "Inch Replica" I just had made (2 7/16" handle - 180lbs) as far as weight lifted on both - definately closer than the RT.

[Koura]

My Clays Handle (2.5" metal version of the RT with ball bearings) seems to be real similar to the "Inch Replica" I just had made (2 7/16" handle - 180lbs) as far as weight lifted on both - definately closer than the RT.

Today even grip training is hi-tech!

That had to be good handle.

[Florian Kellersmann]

My Clays Handle (2.5" metal version of the RT with ball bearings) seems to be real similar to the "Inch Replica" I just had made (2 7/16" handle - 180lbs) as far as weight lifted on both - definately closer than the RT.

Thanks for your input, Morgan. That's what I thougt.

[Hubgeezer]

... the main reason is that on the inch the globe bells make a lot of rotational torque when you lift it and you have to counteract that. whereas the RT doesnt do that.

This is the biggest reason there is no comparison to the two. It is as if the Inch is a "magician's trick dumbbell", playing a joke on the strongman who cannot budge it. As soon as the weight of the bells begins to come off the ground, an unseen force is yanking the dumbbell out of your hand while you are focusing on lifting it. The only way to combat it is to be much stronger than what, on the surface, it would take to pick it up. A rotating handle is not nearly the opponent that the globe bells are. Plates are not nearly the opponent that the globe bells are.

[odin]

I was sick for a few days this week, so I spent some time making a "brain dump" compilation of things people have been asking ad nauseam. There are multiple threads asking about RT poundages and lifting the Inch Replica. I also found some good Inch-lifting training tips, which was the original intention of my searches. I will create a new thread sometime this weekend and others can contribute if they wish.

Edited October 19, 2007 by odin

[rbrown]

IMO the correlation on the Inch and the RT depends on the technique that you use and surface finish on the RT handle used. If it is a new RT it will be slick and the pounds lifted on it will be signficantly less than if it is worn.

If you use a technique on RT like I use, the fact that it rolls is not significant because I just pick it up from the position that it will want to roll to--i.e. palm directly over the handle. The rolling is only to prevent peopel from trying to cup it. If you don't try to do that the rolling aspect (even if there were ball bearings is made irrelevant).

The reason the inch is much harder is the same reason that a db farmers walk is much harder than a traditional farmers walk--on the RT the weight being lifted is below the handle entirely. On the Inch the weight is all around the handle--resulting in the weight trying to twist out of your hand.

I would estimate that most will find the 220 lb figure to be about right on RT before they can lift the Inch, but it will vary.

[odin]

IMO the correlation on the Inch and the RT depends on the technique that you use and surface finish on the RT handle used. If it is a new RT it will be slick and the pounds lifted on it will be signficantly less than if it is worn.

If you use a technique on RT like I use, the fact that it rolls is not significant because I just pick it up from the position that it will want to roll to--i.e. palm directly over the handle. The rolling is only to prevent peopel from trying to cup it. If you don't try to do that the rolling aspect (even if there were ball bearings is made irrelevant).

The reason the inch is much harder is the same reason that a db farmers walk is much harder than a traditional farmers walk--on the RT the weight being lifted is below the handle entirely. On the Inch the weight is all around the handle--resulting in the weight trying to twist out of your hand.

I would estimate that most will find the 220 lb figure to be about right on RT before they can lift the Inch, but it will vary.

Ryan, are you saying that you are basically "pinching" the Inch?

Would this style be the best one for someone with an exceptionally strong thumb? Or is it simply a good balance between fingertip and thumb strength, with less wrist emphasis? I remember Clay writing something in another forum about pushing hard with the thumb, and matching the pressure with the other fingers.

[CoC#3]

I pulled 220lbs on the RT a few days before my first try at the inch. At this time i was at my strongest at thick handles. I only got the inch a couple inches off the ground and a little better with tilt. I own an inch replica now but after a few months of trying to lift it i never got it past the knees so i eventually gave up regular training with it.

[Wes]

I think the difference would be worst with someone like me who uses a ton of wrist to lift on the RT. I still grab it with my thumb but I cock the hell out of my wrist. Guys that lift with their hand directly over like Ryan, Scott Clayton, Wade Gillingham and Jedd Johnson can lift the inch at a lighter poundage on the RT than someone like me

Edited October 20, 2007 by Wes

[Sybersnott]

The reason the inch is much harder is the same reason that a db farmers walk is much harder than a traditional farmers walk--on the RT the weight being lifted is below the handle entirely. On the Inch the weight is all around the handle--resulting in the weight trying to twist out of your hand.

I was going to say the exact same thing; this is why trying to lift the Inch is so deceptive - it exploits the weakest part of your grip, so it had better be stronger than 172 pounds at lift-off.

[thearm95]

The RT despite having a revolving handle still has plenty of friction between the plastic sleeve and the inner section that prevents free rotation. No doubt if it contained high quality lubricated bearings (like say an Eleiko oly bar) a 172 RT would be a lot closer to an Inch lift.

[mobsterone]

Wrong and it has been discussed at some length.

[Wes]

Wrong and it has been discussed at some length.

How is that wrong? Are you saying it's as easy to lift on a RT that has ball bearings instead of a plastic sleeve on metal? Seeing as the level of rotation is what makes the RT hard and you have pulled so much more on a RT that is old as the hills and barely rotates than on a new nicely rotating one this seems a little contrary. If you pull less at a fixed strength then it is obviously a lot more difficult. Thus a 172 RT would be closer (notice he didn't say "equal to") to an inch lift. If you weren't talking about thearm95's post then ignore this completely.

[mobsterone]

If you disagree then you are completely ignoring the simple fact that regardless of friction, ball bearings or 'an RT as old as the hills' (which would be wrong - my best was done some years ago when the RT I used then wasn't that old and my RT work now is done on a newer / younger RT) - that the weight hangs below. Ergo the mechanical physics, all other aspects being equal, are different. It was stated that the Inch comes from floor and that the RT starting position is higher, that one rotates and the other does not and so on.

Even my best Inch style lift is 300.1lbs, my best solid handled dumbbell 103-kilos / 228lbs and my best 'old' RT 270+lbs and best 'new' RT around 230+.

And that's without adding in thumb length (good for me) and hand size (again good but not Mark Felix or Laine Snook size).

Finally ALL previous comments ignore the many previous RT vs Inch discussions.

[deathatthegates]

If you disagree then you are completely ignoring the simple fact that regardless of friction, ball bearings or 'an RT as old as the hills' (which would be wrong - my best was done some years ago when the RT I used then wasn't that old and my RT work now is done on a newer / younger RT) - that the weight hangs below. Ergo the mechanical physics, all other aspects being equal, are different. It was stated that the Inch comes from floor and that the RT starting position is higher, that one rotates and the other does not and so on.

Even my best Inch style lift is 300.1lbs, my best solid handled dumbbell 103-kilos / 228lbs and my best 'old' RT 270+lbs and best 'new' RT around 230+.

And that's without adding in thumb length (good for me) and hand size (again good but not Mark Felix or Laine Snook size).

Finally ALL previous comments ignore the many previous RT vs Inch discussions.

Confused..

solid handled dumbell meaning that they have plates loaded on the end instead of a huge globular end(like the inch)? but same diamter handle

[PowerHouse]

If you disagree then you are completely ignoring the simple fact that regardless of friction, ball bearings or 'an RT as old as the hills' (which would be wrong - my best was done some years ago when the RT I used then wasn't that old and my RT work now is done on a newer / younger RT) - that the weight hangs below. Ergo the mechanical physics, all other aspects being equal, are different. It was stated that the Inch comes from floor and that the RT starting position is higher, that one rotates and the other does not and so on.

Even my best Inch style lift is 300.1lbs, my best solid handled dumbbell 103-kilos / 228lbs and my best 'old' RT 270+lbs and best 'new' RT around 230+.

And that's without adding in thumb length (good for me) and hand size (again good but not Mark Felix or Laine Snook size).

Finally ALL previous comments ignore the many previous RT vs Inch discussions.

Confused..

solid handled dumbell meaning that they have plates loaded on the end instead of a huge globular end(like the inch)? but same diamter handle

Pretty sure he was talking about a solid globe DB(in his case the MDB)