barbe705 Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 I just got some RB grippers from FBBC. The 210has a larger coil for the spring than the 240. they look like the same size wire. just with a couple os squeezes they feel about right. is the size difference in the coil normal? brent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cemery Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 Funny you posted this now. Paul just came up to my work and brought his RB 240, I had my RB 210. We compared them and noticed the exact same thing you did. The difference seems to be how tightly the coil is wound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jad Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 I believe Robert has stated in the past that his grippers' difficulty is based on spring coil tightness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barbe705 Posted August 15, 2008 Author Share Posted August 15, 2008 freaky none the less. Based on a quick feel test they are labeled correctly and they do seem at least close to where they should be. but, they look very weird right next to each other. Now I just need to TNS the 330. brent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 Ha, it's funny you mention that, cuz I just noticed that Warren Tetting just changed the coil size on the Beast to make it 1500 instead of the old 1800lb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Lipinski Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 I have seen this mentioned in the past. I forgot where, but what I thought was a reputable source mentioned that Robert uses the same size springs and varies the tightness of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule92 Posted August 15, 2008 Share Posted August 15, 2008 (edited) Hahahaha, funny you mention this, me and Paul were talking about this the other day, my 240 is way wider then all of my other 10 or so RB grippers. I thought it was just the newer grippers were made like this but I guess Bob could be right either. EDIT: Bob is right, my 240 and 210 are both 6.95mm springs but different coil diameter, winding, however you want to put it, RB210 Dia: 25.93mm RB240 Dia 20.92mm Edited August 15, 2008 by vikingsrule92 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthcarl Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 I am pretty sure the RB 210, 240, and 260 all have the same diameter wire. I wasn't really sure how it worked, but coil tightness makes sense....I have the 240N and 260N and the wire looks the same (no calipers) and there is only a 1/16" difference in the handle spread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David_wigren Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 Yes he uses the same diameter of the spring and tightens the coil by three steps before making the spring thicker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim71 Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 Ha, it's funny you mention that, cuz I just noticed that Warren Tetting just changed the coil size on the Beast to make it 1500 instead of the old 1800lb. Where did you see that they changed the coil size? I had figured they just changed their estimate. Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnus Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 Ha, it's funny you mention that, cuz I just noticed that Warren Tetting just changed the coil size on the Beast to make it 1500 instead of the old 1800lb. Where did you see that they changed the coil size? I had figured they just changed their estimate. Tim It said right on the Nutritiongeeks site. http://www.nutritiongeeks.com/hand-gripper...nd-gripper.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim71 Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 Thanks for the link, I hadn't read that before. I'm glad they changed it because I think it was too tough to close before . Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule92 Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 Thanks for the link, I hadn't read that before. I'm glad they changed it because I think it was too tough to close before .Tim C'Mon Tim!!! You can crush down a 1/2" x 8" between the thighs, you should be able to rep this thing 20-30 times man! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsmiley Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 I've used the coc's hg's, anb bb's; how does the feel of the tighter springs on the rb's differ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim71 Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 According to physics, you'd think the tighter coil would ramp up more but I can't say for sure. Derek, I think using my thighs might not be allowed. Would that be called a thigh set? Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule92 Posted August 16, 2008 Share Posted August 16, 2008 According to physics, you'd think the tighter coil would ramp up more but I can't say for sure.Derek, I think using my thighs might not be allowed. Would that be called a thigh set? Tim Haha well no one could close it regular! But I figure thigh crushing it should be easy for you 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.