Axles Recognized For Nags-Sanctioned Contests

[Cannon]

Is IM the only one?

If not, can we compile some links to acceptable choices?

[Cannon]

Here is IronMind's Apollon's Axle just so the link is included in this thread:

http://www.ironmind-store.com/Apollons-Axle153/productinfo/1271/

$249.95 plus shipping

Weighs 33lbs unloaded

[Chez]

I believe IM is the only one allowed currently for contests.

[Electron]

IM only for record keeping purposes. They vary, but not as much as the difference between IM and SX, or others.

For medleys and such, I believe any axle is acceptable.

[Andrew P]

To my knowlege IM has the only true 2" OD bar with 50mm turned ends to accept bumper plates. Most bars are a 1.9" pipe or a solid 2" bar that does not fit bumper plates.

[1stCoC]

If you check your history the actual Apollon's axle is 1.9 " in diameter not 2".

2" will not fit plates on the end sleeve section most Olympic weights so, it has to be turned down in that area with IM axle as with all Olympic bars.. I think 2" center was used to avoid extra machining in center shaft area and to be able to use 2" thick wall dom pipe as material. It is a nice bar, but is relatively expensive.

[climber511]

All the records set so far have used the IM Axle. Even though historically inaccurate - it has become the de facto standard over recent Grip Sport and Strongman sport history - somewhat (perhaps mostly) due to being a bare steel product with a heavy enough wall thickness and ends that do not cause the plates to tilt excessively. 1 1/2" pipe has the historic 1.9" diameter but "pipe" has a coating of sorts which varies in texture and is a pain to remove - "handrail" has a lesser coating but is still not bare steel (and only comes in schedule 40 I believe). The steel retailer I go to has only these two products in 1.9" - I am unaware of other hollow options but they may exist. Is anyone making a 1.9" bare steel product with a schedule 80 wall thickness similar to the IM product (.25")?

[1stCoC]

I find in all gripping a plain , weathered ,natural surface seems to be most user friendly and is less apt to slip with some applied surface as requested and offered by most companies. I actually far prefer raw steel that has been clean blasted and allowed to slow brown rust to a brown natural patina. I like the fact that the IM buffalo and axles are done this way. I think that same thought should be given to hub and pinch assemblies as well.

We for our standard line of products blast clean each grip product and then coat with a non slick neutral powder coat. However we can easily supply a raw media blasted steel finish in any product as we being custom builders. "If you use it enough it will grow with you and never red rust from disuse" R Sorin

[1stCoC]

Chris, there are many types of " standard" pipe and dom( drawn over mandrel) that go up as thick as you want schedules 40,80,100, and 3/16 to probably a half inch wall if you wanted it. Also there is un coated, seamless, and machinable surface DOM available .

[climber511]

Chris, there are many types of " standard" pipe and dom( drawn over mandrel) that go up as thick as you want schedules 40,80,100, and 3/16 to probably a half inch wall if you wanted it. Also there is un coated, seamless, and machinable surface DOM available .

Richard - the place where I buy most of my steel is fairly small - and of course my experience building is also quite small by Sorinex standards - I have read about but never used much of the DOM tube sizes. To me the "Perfect Axle" would be historically accurate at 1.9" OD center section and bare steel - it would have ends that were close enough to the Olympic bar standards (around 1.95" or so) that there would be no plate flop (a real problem on all the pipe bars) - and the wall thickness would be such that there would be no denting or bending like I have seen occur on schedule 40 pipe when the Strongmen drop them from overhead with steel plates. Probably expensive to make with all the lathe work but as close as we can maybe hope for to get to a historically accurate plate loading Duplicate of the original.

Edited April 8, 2015 by climber511

[Squeezus]

So the big question is, can the Sorinex bar be used interchangeably with the IM bar, and if not, why?

[climber511]

So the big question is, can the Sorinex bar be used interchangeably with the IM bar, and if not, why?

No it cannot for competition. The reason is the IM Axle is an actual 2" and the Sorinex Bar is 1.9". There is a real difference in what can be lifted between them. For training both are fine.

[bwwm]

I agree 1.9" is not the same as 2". I'd also suggest a big difference between the seasoned IM bars folks have been using for years at various contents vs. a new IM bar that they typically use at the Expos and other contests Randall & folks setup. However, it would be difficult to measure/correct of seasoning differences.

[1stCoC]

What size would/did Apollon use? The handle on the original Apollon bell I would guess to have been pipe of some sort and thin schedule 40. The original axle non revolving with rail car type ends was bent and stayed so after an attempt by John Davis blacking out prior to successfully making the lift. It has stayed bent even when Shemanski cleaned it once and then jerked it 5 reps.

The close to historical model built by Ivanko to Apollon's standard for the Arnold's Strongman contest and used for years , just as the original did not revolve ,weighed 366 and has a true 1.9" measurement.

[Squeezus]

So the big question is, can the Sorinex bar be used interchangeably with the IM bar, and if not, why?

No it cannot for competition. The reason is the IM Axle is an actual 2" and the Sorinex Bar is 1.9". There is a real difference in what can be lifted between them. For training both are fine.

I don't have calipers to measure mine, but http://store.sorinex.com/Sorinex-Fat-Bar-p/p00255.htm shows that it is 2". What is the actual measurement, Richard?

[Mikael Siversson]

I personally noted no difference at all in performance when my IM axle was brand new compared with a more seasoned state. For me it is not a friction lift at all.

I agree 1.9" is not the same as 2". I'd also suggest a big difference between the seasoned IM bars folks have been using for years at various contents vs. a new IM bar that they typically use at the Expos and other contests Randall & folks setup. However, it would be difficult to measure/correct of seasoning differences.

[Rick Walker]

Picked my axle up from swagger strength now submit strength. Over 75 pounds empty, smooth, and fits bumper plates.

[acorn]

I personally noted no difference at all in performance when my IM axle was brand new compared with a more seasoned state. For me it is not a friction lift at all.

I agree 1.9" is not the same as 2". I'd also suggest a big difference between the seasoned IM bars folks have been using for years at various contents vs. a new IM bar that they typically use at the Expos and other contests Randall & folks setup. However, it would be difficult to measure/correct of seasoning differences.

I agree. The ground finish on my IM Axle was just as grippy as it is now with some patina and a bit of chalk on it.