Macky, since you have that nice pull gauge, can you measure a same color short and long cable at (the new) 3x length and see how they compare?
I'm guessing that LL is assuming that a cable at 3x length will always have the same tension regardless of its length. I don't know the properties of rubber well enough to say that's true.
As for the way they measure on their diagram. If you measure both handles, it gives the Tension in the cable, so that is correct. I've read some strand pulling texts that say if you do a pull at a certain weight that its pulling the same amount in the other hand. That would be the one handle measurement. That is more a problem of terminology, and how you want to look at it. Measuring tension in the cable always means the same thing however, its the total pull on both ends, for our purposes 2x the one handle measurement.
Well i guess you could also measure that to see it its true in real life, measure one handle and two and see if its really twice the pull.
I certainly would do that if I had any long cables MrBrady. But I only bought a set of Orange chest expander cables with soft handles.
I think we can all get caught up in too much complicated physics, and end up missing out on what is relevant, and what is not.
When you pull out a FCP or OHPD or Front/Back Press to full stretch, the 100lbs ( e.g. ) tension on the cable puts 100lbs on each arm, not 50lbs each as one would first imagine. It's not like a barbell press overhead where each arm is working towards the same direction, therefore share the 100lbs between them.
It follows that if one end of a cable is stopped firmly and the other end is attached to a scale and pulled out to where the scale registers 100lbs, then the stopped end has 100lbs pressure on it as well. That does not mean to say that the 100lbs tension generates 200lbs, only that each end of the cable has 100lbs tension on it.
Lifeline state repeatedly that their Chest expander cable pullweights are determined at twice the cable resting length, therefore the 16" cable is stopped at one end, and the other end is stretched to 32" length with a scale measuring the tension, then the poundage registered is posted for that cable colour.
Lifeline could only have done some 5 things with their Chest expander cables
1. Never have measured their Chest expander cables, because they would then have seen that the tests that Fatman and myself did were correct, and Lifeline were wildly out in their pullweights.
2. Measured the chest expander cables but made fundamental errors.
3. Measured the chest expander cables correctly but decided to ignore the true figures and post BS pullweights.
4. Measured the chest expander cables for three cables all up correctly, but somewhere in between the testing department and the page presenters the story changed from pullweights for three cables together, to single cables.
5. Measured the LONG cables and posted up the same results on their chest expander page.
Whichever one of these that Lifeline did, I cant believe their utter incompetence. They are either incapable of using a simple scale, or their internal communication is non-existent, or their ability to distinguish between their Long cables and their Chest expander cables is totally up the creek ( something that has been evidenced by Kevin Dorsey's post where he url's Lifeline's Long cable pullweight list and testing methods. )
That is why I suspected that Lifeline was deliberately falsifying its chest expander pullweight ratings and advertising them, because I also could not believe why out of 30-odd people, not one of them could organise a two-hour slot in the next day/week/month to test what I've been telling them for the last 15+ months. As I've said before, Lifeline have never refuted or denied my test figures, in fact NOBODY whatsoever has replied to my 3 and 18 May emails, or my last emails from last year. So what was I to think ?
To my mind, the only reason why Lifeline has done so well is not because it makes such good quality equipment, it's because most other's gear are so shitty. Price as well, I suppose.