Gripper Calibration Question

[Mitch1963]

I have researched old threads trying to figure out what ratio to use to determine how my grippers rate on the scale. The article "Morton Gripper Calibration Device" was quite helpful. I built the Redneck calibrator and used the ratio .02068 to come up with my ratings. In his article he used his training #3 with 145 pounds required to close it as the base. 3/145 =.02068. My question is, am I correct in using that ratio?

Thanks for any help

[climber511]

Personally I just use the poundage numbers regardless of what it says on the handle. They vary so much the number on the handle is worthless. But in general, I think an "average" #3 is considered 150#.

[Mitch1963]

I was wondering how you would come to the conclusion that a certain #3 was say 2.7 on the scale?

[climber511]

If an "average" 3 is 150# then a simple ratio would give you the answer for say a 145# one or 155# one. 2.91 or 3.09 as examples. As least that's what I do but I'm not much on math!

[acorn]

Greg & Dave standardised an average #3 at 150# and average #4 at 209#. so thats a 59# difference. If you had a gripper that measured say 183, you would do this 183-150= 33, 33/59 = .559, then to get the rating you would add that to the base gripper you were working from so #3 + .56 (rounded) = #3.56.

For ones below #3 I do the same, say a gripper measures 140#: 150-140=10, 10/59 = .169, #3-.17 = #2.83.

I dont know that an average cal for a #2 was ever determined but I use the 59# difference still for Sub #3 stuff as per the IM rating there is supposed to be 85# between the #2, and #3 as well as #3 and #4. So I figure its gotta be fairly close. Hope that helps.

- Aaron

[Mitch1963]

Yes that helps a lot. Thanks guys

[EricMilfeld]

While we're on the subject of the calibrater, is the width of the strap which wraps around the handle a standardized width? Also, is the strap to be set flush with the face of the handle, or where the bevel begins on the handle?

Something else to consider is insuring the calibrater is set as level as possible.

[acorn]

While we're on the subject of the calibrater, is the width of the strap which wraps around the handle a standardized width? Also, is the strap to be set flush with the face of the handle, or where the bevel begins on the handle?

Something else to consider is insuring the calibrater is set as level as possible.

I use a 1" wide strap, set flush with the end. From a set of hold down straps from Home Depot or Lowes. Consistency is the key to getting good comparable results. I've had a couple of grippers that have been calibrated both on mine and other RGC's to verify consistent numbers.

- Aaron

[EricMilfeld]

While we're on the subject of the calibrater, is the width of the strap which wraps around the handle a standardized width? Also, is the strap to be set flush with the face of the handle, or where the bevel begins on the handle?

Something else to consider is insuring the calibrater is set as level as possible.

I use a 1" wide strap, set flush with the end. From a set of hold down straps from Home Depot or Lowes. Consistency is the key to getting good comparable results. I've had a couple of grippers that have been calibrated both on mine and other RGC's to verify consistent numbers.

- Aaron

I brought it up because you won't be able to compare results where straps of differing widths were used.

[ewokhugo]

COPY "Greg & Dave standardised an average #3 at 150# and average #4 at 209#. so thats a 59# difference. If you had a gripper that measured say 183,"

How do i get to the number 183?? in my country i use cm (1 inch=2,54 cm) i am sick at the moment and probably stupid at the same time ...lol but cant find this number .. any explanation? thanks...

By the way how do i measure my gripper? start to measure outside or inside?

[barbe705]

I noticed at Gripmas that the rating was only part of the story with the grippers. Some of the higher numbers were a lot easier because of the "feel" of the spring. It's interesting but, I'm not sure what affect knowing the poundage rating will have on my training.

Brent

[Mitch1963]

183 is in pounds. And yes I used a 1" wide strap set flush to the end. My #3 came out to 2.92. My #2.5 rated 2.53 and both of my #2's came in identical at 2.29.

[Mitch1963]

I noticed at Gripmas that the rating was only part of the story with the grippers. Some of the higher numbers were a lot easier because of the "feel" of the spring. It's interesting but, I'm not sure what affect knowing the poundage rating will have on my training.

Brent

I only wanted to know the rating so I could compare what I am sqeezing with what everyone else is squeezing. And also I had this fear that my grippers were easy. Thankfully I think they are pretty average. It will not affect my training.

[ewokhugo]

i am in trouble cant get the idea. any pic with the 1" wide strap set flush to the end..

thanks in advance

[Mitch1963]

http://www.software-henritzi.net/Articles/...ationDevice.pdf

This is what I fashioned mine after.

[Mitch1963]

http://gripperhell.blogspot.com/

http://www.software-henritzi.net/Articles/...ationDevice.pdf

At the BBB2 contest Dave Morton was telling me about the gripper calibrator he and Greg had come up with. It sounded like just exactly what has been needed for a very long time in our sport so I was excited when Greg sent me his article and pictures. I welded one up ASAP (mine mounts in my power rack) and ran all my grippers thru it along with the few I have borrowed at the moment. My numbers came out very close to theirs and were also very close to my personal impressions of the relative strengths. It will test grippers of all common sizes and models except for those with the huge handles diameters.

It’s very simple in construction so it will be easy for people to make and will allow a consistent method of measurement. I used plates weighed on a certified scale and included the spread of each gripper I did. I thought this might explain the different “feel” between grippers somewhat. If you make one and send the results to Greg – he will build a database of all grippers tested – it should be interesting.

Maybe this link will work.

[Teemu I]

I noticed at Gripmas that the rating was only part of the story with the grippers. Some of the higher numbers were a lot easier because of the "feel" of the spring. It's interesting but, I'm not sure what affect knowing the poundage rating will have on my training.

Brent

I think it has been useful for me to find out the ratings. Especially when the training is targeted towards getting stronger on the last little bit, it is helpful to know that the gripper is of appropriate strength. I've learned that for me, I should focus my attempts in training on the grippers that are about 2 pounds harder on the RGC calibration than my current max for the best results. I think that guideline has worked well for me with the choker or regular attempts. I don't think I've managed to make good progress with my attemps if I've tried to do regular attempts on too hard grippers. Everybody is different of course, but in my opinion calibration information can be used to advantage in training.

Edited December 14, 2007 by Teemu I

[ewokhugo]

thanks for the link Mitch!

[Mitch1963]

No problem Hugo!

[barbe705]

Teemu,

So, you feel that the ratings help you make a more incremental step up. I guess that makes sense. I guess that since I don't have that many grippers I'm not in a position to apply that knowledge. I might have to buy some more.

Brent

[Teemu I]

Teemu,

So, you feel that the ratings help you make a more incremental step up. I guess that makes sense. I guess that since I don't have that many grippers I'm not in a position to apply that knowledge. I might have to buy some more.

Brent

Brent, you understood me correctly. Of course you can compare the grippers by hand but calibration ratings work better for the purpose I believe. I think the calibration data has proved to be especially helpful trying to progress from the #3 to harder grippers. The harder the grippers get, the harder it is to make progress and small increments come handy then. Also I've had a chance to borrow some calibrated grippers of suitable strenghts to make progressing easier.

You were of course right that the calibration doesn't tell everything about the difficulty, some grippers are harder because of the spread, some are harder at the beginning and so on. But still those calibration numbers are pretty useful.

Edited December 14, 2007 by Teemu I

[odin]

I noticed at Gripmas that the rating was only part of the story with the grippers. Some of the higher numbers were a lot easier because of the "feel" of the spring. It's interesting but, I'm not sure what affect knowing the poundage rating will have on my training.

Brent

I think it has been useful for me to find out the ratings. Especially when the training is targeted towards getting stronger on the last little bit, it is helpful to know that the gripper is of appropriate strength. I've learned that for me, I should focus my attempts in training on the grippers that are about 2 pounds harder on the RGC calibration than my current max for the best results. I think that guideline has worked well for me with the choker or regular attempts. I don't think I've managed to make good progress with my attemps if I've tried to do regular attempts on too hard grippers. Everybody is different of course, but in my opinion calibration information can be used to advantage in training.

Brent, sorry I didn't talk to you, looked like you had your "game face" on and seemed like the silent and focused type. I think I had a similar experience to the one you described (especially since we tied on that event). What gripper did you miss an attempt on and which harder ones did you close later, if I may ask?

I wish I would have tried some of the harder grippers after the contest to see what my limit was. The RB330N felt hard for me (rated at 160, think several people missed on that gripper), while the #3 rated at 156.4 felt like I could have held it shut for a long time. I had a fantastic time with that event and hope it becomes the new contest standard, great idea by Chris. Jedd told me to try the 3.5 during the contest, wish i would have now when I was all charged up just to see how close i could get.

Teemu, I like your idea of micro-progression, but it seems like you'd need a lot of grippers. Have you found that this type of training is easier or harder on your hands? During the contest a missed attempt was not anywhere near as painful as missing with a NS or CCS with an unchoked gripper. It made a big difference to me in closing bigger grippers, as I haven't practiced setting yet (Eaton briefly showed me how while I was there). Have you (or anyone else) ever experimented with using grippers that were choked, but open more?

[Teemu I]

Bob, I think I didn't quite understand what you meant by asking "Have you found that this type of training is easier or harder on your hands?" What type of training are you talking about? If it is choker work, it is easier on the hands than regular attempts.

Well I don't have that much grippers, just that I've been lucky to get pretty suitable strengths. Also I've borrowed a few ones so that has helped. But I should add that the micro-progression as you put it hasn't been necessary, but it just has helped during the times when I've found myself stuck on the same level for relativley long periods of time. I've managed to go up a 10 lbs jump once, but most times I've felt that 2 lbs is a hard enough job.

Yes, I have experimented with the method (with pretty good results) where I use chokers to micro-progress, by opening up the choke 1 millimeter at a time is a good way to make progress. When hose clamp around the handles is used as a choker, it is quite productive to go from 20 mm (3/4") or parallel to 30 mm (1 and 1/4"), little by little. Once you are good for a solid close and about 3 sec hold on a gripper choked at 30 mm, you should be able to close it with a parallel set. That's a guideline that has worked for me.

Edited December 14, 2007 by Teemu I