Equation To Rolling Thunder (new Handle)?

[Kashtan]

Hello.

1.Old handle RT- +15% (from +10% to +30%)

2.FBBC crushers 2"-?

3.2,5" - -5%

4.3" - ?

5.Warren Tetting deadlift-handle - ?

6.Robert Baraban handles 50mm - ?

7.60mm - ?

8.75mm - ?

9.Dumbbell Inch (172lb) - 225 lbs (from 220 to 235 lbs)

10.Dumbbell Millennium (228lb) (MDB)- ? (maybe - 280 lb?)

11.Circus dumbbell 3" 181 lbs - ? (maybe - 260 lb?)

12.Circus dumbbell 3" 202 lbs - ? (maybe - 285 lb?) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sivz0ysCFr8

13.Mark Henry bell (2,5", 300 lbs) - ? (maybe - 360 lbs?)

Please, who else thinks?

[Kashtan]

9.Dumbbell Inch (172lb)= FBBC crushers 2,5" 190 lbs

[Forever]

Hello.

1.Old handle RT- +15% (from +10% to +30%)

2.FBBC crushers 2"-?

3.2,5" - -5%

4.3" - ?

5.Warren Tetting deadlift-handle - ?

6.Robert Baraban handles 50mm - ?

7.60mm - ?

8.75mm - ?

9.Dumbbell Inch (172lb) - 225 lbs (from 220 to 235 lbs)

10.Dumbbell Millennium (228lb) (MDB)- ? (maybe - 280 lb?)

11.Circus dumbbell 3" 181 lbs - ? (maybe - 260 lb?)

12.Circus dumbbell 3" 202 lbs - ? (maybe - 285 lb?) http://www.youtube.c...h?v=sivz0ysCFr8

13.Mark Henry bell (2,5", 300 lbs) - ? (maybe - 360 lbs?)

Please, who else thinks?

awesome clip n topic, MarK Henry bell looks like a beast

[Kashtan]

10.Dumbbell Millennium (228lb) (MDB)- ? (maybe - 280 lb?) Also, 260 - 280 lb. middle - 270 lb.

[Kashtan]

220 on the RT = 190s on the 2" crusher

[Hubgeezer]

Hello.

1.Old handle RT- +15% (from +10% to +30%)

2.FBBC crushers 2"-?

3.2,5" - -5%

4.3" - ?

5.Warren Tetting deadlift-handle - ?

6.Robert Baraban handles 50mm - ?

7.60mm - ?

8.75mm - ?

9.Dumbbell Inch (172lb) - 225 lbs (from 220 to 235 lbs)

10.Dumbbell Millennium (228lb) (MDB)- ? (maybe - 280 lb?)

11.Circus dumbbell 3" 181 lbs - ? (maybe - 260 lb?)

12.Circus dumbbell 3" 202 lbs - ? (maybe - 285 lb?) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sivz0ysCFr8

13.Mark Henry bell (2,5", 300 lbs) - ? (maybe - 360 lbs?)

Please, who else thinks?

Boy, I don't think this is possible. There is not enough data out there, and each person varies so much. There are two lifts out of the 13 that have been discussed by more than a few people; other than that, the discussion has been pretty limited.

I will comment on just the two that have had significant discussion:

1. Old Handle Rolling Thunder versus New Handle Rolling Thunder. Nope. The entire range is off. My best on the new handle is 207, and old handle was 216. The old handle on which I did my 216, was, in my opinion, as easy one. I say the range is 3-10%, not 10-30%. Part of the myth of the difficulty of the "new handles" is that there was a new Rolling Thunder handle for around 3 months that got reworked, because the numbers were so far off. IronMind gave me a "free" new one when I sent my "old new one" back to them. I call them Version I, Version II and Version III. There are very few Version II's out there.

9. The Rolling Thunder range is wider, 190-240. Captain of Crush Sean Littleton picked up the Inch on the same day he pulled 190 in a contest on an old RT handle in 2004. There are guys who have done 230 on the RT who cannot budge the Inch. But, 225 is probably a good number. However, the range is quite broad.

The Youtube of Tex, Rich, and Brian on the Circus Dumbbell is one of my favorites, if not my very favorite strength videos. Thanks for posting that so I don't have to look for it next time!

Edited November 18, 2010 by Hubgeezer

[Kashtan]

Hello.

1.Old handle RT- +15% (from +10% to +30%)

2.FBBC crushers 2"-?

3.2,5" - -5%

4.3" - ?

5.Warren Tetting deadlift-handle - ?

6.Robert Baraban handles 50mm - ?

7.60mm - ?

8.75mm - ?

9.Dumbbell Inch (172lb) - 225 lbs (from 220 to 235 lbs)

10.Dumbbell Millennium (228lb) (MDB)- ? (maybe - 280 lb?)

11.Circus dumbbell 3" 181 lbs - ? (maybe - 260 lb?)

12.Circus dumbbell 3" 202 lbs - ? (maybe - 285 lb?) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sivz0ysCFr8

13.Mark Henry bell (2,5", 300 lbs) - ? (maybe - 360 lbs?)

Please, who else thinks?

Boy, I don't think this is possible. There is not enough data out there, and each person varies so much. There are two lifts out of the 13 that have been discussed by more than a few people; other than that, the discussion has been pretty limited.

I will comment on just the two that have had significant discussion:

1. Old Handle Rolling Thunder versus New Handle Rolling Thunder. Nope. The entire range is off. My best on the new handle is 207, and old handle was 216. The old handle on which I did my 216, was, in my opinion, as easy one. I say the range is 3-10%, not 10-30%. Part of the myth of the difficulty of the "new handles" is that there was a new Rolling Thunder handle for around 3 months that got reworked, because the numbers were so far off. IronMind gave me a "free" new one when I sent my "old new one" back to them. I call them Version I, Version II and Version III. There are very few Version II's out there.

9. The Rolling Thunder range is wider, 190-240. Captain of Crush Sean Littleton picked up the Inch on the same day he pulled 190 in a contest on an old RT handle in 2004. There are guys who have done 230 on the RT who cannot budge the Inch. But, 225 is probably a good number. However, the range is quite broad.

The Youtube of Tex, Rich, and Brian on the Circus Dumbbell is one of my favorites, if not my very favorite strength videos. Thanks for posting that so I don't have to look for it next time!

Thanks!

I have such statistics, so I have had such an opinion.

Why Old Handle Rolling Thunder versus New Handle Rolling Thunder different 10-30%?

1.http://bhsasec.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=logs&action=print&thread=31

Mobsters training logPost by admin on Dec 31, 2007, 11:57am

Newer Handle R/H: continued on with 100-kilos x 1 rep and a miss at 105-kilos Old handle 130-kilos x 1 rep and stopped with a miss at 135-kilos

Mobsters training logPost by admin on May 8, 2008, 1:06pm

New handle (spins freely)L/H 85-kilos (90.4 )R/H 100-kilos (105.4) Old handle (barely turns)L/H: to 105-kilos (110.4) x 4 x 1 repsR/H: to 120-kilos (125.4) x 4 1reps

2.http://davidhorne-gripmaster.com/2001Contests.html

Old Handle - David Horne 120k Steve Gardener 100k Jim Wylie 102.5k

http://davidhorne-gripmaster.com/2006Contests.html

Rolling Thunder attempt (Brand new handle) David Horne 96.6k Jim Wylie 91.4k

www.davidhorne-gripmaster.com/2007contests.html

British Rolling Thunder Champs (Using a Brand new handle, and Ivanko calibrated plates)

Laine Snook 113k David Horne 95.5k Steve Gardener 95.5k Jim Wylie 90.5k

3.

New handle 205

Old Handle 235

Best regards.

[Kashtan]

http://www.gripboard.com/index.php?showtopic=31903&st=100

New handle 205

Old Handle 235

http://www.gripboard.com/index.php?showtopic=32607

2" crusher ... tougher than an old rolling thunder handle.

Edited November 19, 2010 by Kashtan

[Hubgeezer]

Hello.

1.Old handle RT- +15% (from +10% to +30%)

2.FBBC crushers 2"-?

3.2,5" - -5%

4.3" - ?

5.Warren Tetting deadlift-handle - ?

6.Robert Baraban handles 50mm - ?

7.60mm - ?

8.75mm - ?

9.Dumbbell Inch (172lb) - 225 lbs (from 220 to 235 lbs)

10.Dumbbell Millennium (228lb) (MDB)- ? (maybe - 280 lb?)

11.Circus dumbbell 3" 181 lbs - ? (maybe - 260 lb?)

12.Circus dumbbell 3" 202 lbs - ? (maybe - 285 lb?) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sivz0ysCFr8

13.Mark Henry bell (2,5", 300 lbs) - ? (maybe - 360 lbs?)

Please, who else thinks?

Boy, I don't think this is possible. There is not enough data out there, and each person varies so much. There are two lifts out of the 13 that have been discussed by more than a few people; other than that, the discussion has been pretty limited.

I will comment on just the two that have had significant discussion:

1. Old Handle Rolling Thunder versus New Handle Rolling Thunder. Nope. The entire range is off. My best on the new handle is 207, and old handle was 216. The old handle on which I did my 216, was, in my opinion, as easy one. I say the range is 3-10%, not 10-30%. Part of the myth of the difficulty of the "new handles" is that there was a new Rolling Thunder handle for around 3 months that got reworked, because the numbers were so far off. IronMind gave me a "free" new one when I sent my "old new one" back to them. I call them Version I, Version II and Version III. There are very few Version II's out there.

9. The Rolling Thunder range is wider, 190-240. Captain of Crush Sean Littleton picked up the Inch on the same day he pulled 190 in a contest on an old RT handle in 2004. There are guys who have done 230 on the RT who cannot budge the Inch. But, 225 is probably a good number. However, the range is quite broad.

The Youtube of Tex, Rich, and Brian on the Circus Dumbbell is one of my favorites, if not my very favorite strength videos. Thanks for posting that so I don't have to look for it next time!

Thanks!

I have such statistics, so I have had such an opinion.

Why Old Handle Rolling Thunder versus New Handle Rolling Thunder different 10-30%?

1.http://bhsasec.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=logs&action=print&thread=31

Mobsters training logPost by admin on Dec 31, 2007, 11:57am

Newer Handle R/H: continued on with 100-kilos x 1 rep and a miss at 105-kilos Old handle 130-kilos x 1 rep and stopped with a miss at 135-kilos

Mobsters training logPost by admin on May 8, 2008, 1:06pm

New handle (spins freely)L/H 85-kilos (90.4 )R/H 100-kilos (105.4) Old handle (barely turns)L/H: to 105-kilos (110.4) x 4 x 1 repsR/H: to 120-kilos (125.4) x 4 1reps

2.http://davidhorne-gripmaster.com/2001Contests.html

Old Handle - David Horne 120k Steve Gardener 100k Jim Wylie 102.5k

http://davidhorne-gripmaster.com/2006Contests.html

Rolling Thunder attempt (Brand new handle) David Horne 96.6k Jim Wylie 91.4k

www.davidhorne-gripmaster.com/2007contests.html

British Rolling Thunder Champs (Using a Brand new handle, and Ivanko calibrated plates)

Laine Snook 113k David Horne 95.5k Steve Gardener 95.5k Jim Wylie 90.5k

3.

New handle 205

Old Handle 235

Best regards.

What I have no idea concerning your Rolling Thunder comparisons about "old" versus "new", are you talking about different manufacturing versions of the Rolling Thunder, what I call Version I, Version II, and Version III, or are you talking about Old Used Rolling Thunders versus New Rolling Thunders. There is no longer such a thing as "new" Version I Rolling Thunders, as they have not been made in years. Most of us do not believe that the Version III Rolling Thunders wear down the way the old ones do. I believe that any Rolling Thunder stories that precede 2008 are now irrelevant, as those would be Version I Rolling Thunders, of which there is no longer such a thing as a "new" Rolling Thunder. If the comparison is a Version III Rolling Thunder versus a very well worn Version I Rolling Thunder, then there could be a 30% difference depending on the condition. But, as the Version III Rolling Thunders become more common, there will be less variability. I had a very worn Version I Rolling Thunder, 8 years of use, that never lost a bit of its difficulty/spin.

[Kashtan]

Thank you. Now I understood.

[Hubgeezer]

Thank you. Now I understood.

Yeah, I only experienced a "well worn" Rolling Thunder one time, about 6 years ago. I was about a 175 RT guy at the time, had not done deadlifts for 30 years. I was weak. I had some RT handle that was real stiff, and did 200 easy on it. I didn't even think I was strong enough to lift that much. I have owned 5 Rolling Thunders, and I have no idea how someone could abuse the thing the way some of these old ones were abused. I think a few years back there were some real "monster numbers" pulled on some of those things.

[Force]

I'm planning to buy a rolling handle. Which one do you recommend when IronMind RT is out of the question. Alternatives are Beef Builder The Handle 2,5", RB 50mm (1,97") or 60mm (2,36"), or FBBC Crusher 2" or 2,5".

[mfin77]

are the ironmind rts no good anymore

[Hubgeezer]

I'm planning to buy a rolling handle. Which one do you recommend when IronMind RT is out of the question. Alternatives are Beef Builder The Handle 2,5", RB 50mm (1,97") or 60mm (2,36"), or FBBC Crusher 2" or 2,5".

Is that a price issue?

Don't know anything about BB and RB's handled products. MANY people love the Crushers. It would seem to me that if price and strength were the issue, but you wanted to get good at Rolling Thunder, you would train on a 2.5 inch Crusher, get strong, and then the Rolling Thunder would feel like a feather. I have thought about doing that to improve my Rolling Thunder numbers, sort of like "training beyond the range" with grippers, but that is just intuitive on my part and have not heard others articulate that. I wonder if that (2.5 inch Crusher) might help with Inch training as well...

[IROC-Z]

I'm planning to buy a rolling handle. Which one do you recommend when IronMind RT is out of the question. Alternatives are Beef Builder The Handle 2,5", RB 50mm (1,97") or 60mm (2,36"), or FBBC Crusher 2" or 2,5".

I own one of the BB handles, and it is very similar to the "old" RT handles. If I had to train with a handle other than the "new" RT, I would use a 2.5" Crusher.

On a different note - I have a pair of 2" Crushers and a pair of 2.5" Crushers, and I use them for doing Pullups. This is a great way to train your support grip.

[Force]

I'm planning to buy a rolling handle. Which one do you recommend when IronMind RT is out of the question. Alternatives are Beef Builder The Handle 2,5", RB 50mm (1,97") or 60mm (2,36"), or FBBC Crusher 2" or 2,5".

Is that a price issue?

No, I just like to support other companies than IronMind.

It would seem to me that if price and strength were the issue, but you wanted to get good at Rolling Thunder, you would train on a 2.5 inch Crusher, get strong, and then the Rolling Thunder would feel like a feather. I have thought about doing that to improve my Rolling Thunder numbers, sort of like "training beyond the range" with grippers, but that is just intuitive on my part and have not heard others articulate that. I wonder if that (2.5 inch Crusher) might help with Inch training as well...

I've never tried RT and have no idea how much I could lift with that. I've no interest to that (RT result), I just want to build strong grip and think that other handles can do that as well.

[Force]

I'm planning to buy a rolling handle. Which one do you recommend when IronMind RT is out of the question. Alternatives are Beef Builder The Handle 2,5", RB 50mm (1,97") or 60mm (2,36"), or FBBC Crusher 2" or 2,5".

I own one of the BB handles, and it is very similar to the "old" RT handles. If I had to train with a handle other than the "new" RT, I would use a 2.5" Crusher.

On a different note - I have a pair of 2" Crushers and a pair of 2.5" Crushers, and I use them for doing Pullups. This is a great way to train your support grip.

Is there big difference in difficulty between 2" and 2,5" handles? How much more you can lift with smaller handle?

[Kashtan]

I'm planning to buy a rolling handle. Which one do you recommend when IronMind RT is out of the question. Alternatives are Beef Builder The Handle 2,5", RB 50mm (1,97") or 60mm (2,36"), or FBBC Crusher 2" or 2,5".

I own one of the BB handles, and it is very similar to the "old" RT handles.  If I had to train with a handle other than the "new" RT, I would use a 2.5" Crusher.  

On a different note - I have a pair of 2" Crushers and a pair of 2.5" Crushers, and I use them for doing Pullups.  This is a great way to train your support grip.

Is there big difference in difficulty between 2" and 2,5" handles? How much more you can lift with smaller handle?

While more experienced users think, I will answer.

At Robert Baraban Handle 50 mm like the record of 265 lbs (120 kg), at 2.5" Crusher record 200 lbs (91 kg). 

Suppose, RB Handle 50 mm of effort is adequate Crusher 2. Then we obtain the relation between effort 2" and 2.5" 100 lbs to 67 lbs. 

[Force]

While more experienced users think, I will answer.

At Robert Baraban Handle 50 mm like the record of 265 lbs (120 kg), at 2.5" Crusher record 200 lbs (91 kg). 

Suppose, RB Handle 50 mm of effort is adequate Crusher 2. Then we obtain the relation between effort 2" and 2.5" 100 lbs to 67 lbs. 

I think I'll go with Barabans 60mm handle. I live in europe so RB:s are easier to get here. Those RB handles seem to be good sturdy quality.