Different names for different benders.
Usually a Chicago refers to a mechanical bender.
Chicago 5100,5500
Greenlee 1800, 1818 etc.
With these type of benders the push through is the way to go. One reason I teach the method for hand bending as a transition to mechanical benders.
I'm thinking the three is a round up versus round down for
1/sin d (22.5).
2.5 is easy to use as is 3.
The difference is an increase in space between centers and a tad more of rise. Use the same shrink which is a rounding method as well. I
Different names for different benders.
Usually a Chicago refers to a mechanical bender.
Chicago 5100,5500
Greenlee 1800, 1818 etc.
With these type of benders the push through is the way to go. One reason I teach the method for hand bending as a transition to mechanical benders.
I'm thinking the three is a round up versus round down for
1/sin d (22.5).
2.5 is easy to use as is 3.
The difference is an increase in space between centers and a tad more of rise. Use the same shrink which is a rounding method as well.
Gentlemen, my bad for not calling the bender by its real name (Greenlee 1800). I agree with you, the poke thru method for saddles is the way to go with these types of benders as well as the 555 or even the 854 smart bender. I understand how the multipliers are found and used when bending with a hand bender (2.5).I find using the poke thru method with a hand bender, is the way to go as well .Also, when making a three bend saddle using 30 /15 degree bends instead of using 3.86 for the multiplier we've found 4.5 to be the multiplier for center to center bend marks. I believe you're correct when it offers more space for bend marks. also, adding half the total shrink gets the center spot on every time. Thank you for your time sir, Happy Bending...