CB6000s and security

[Locked by LRC]

Tom, another one saying that the 6Ks fits better than the 6k. I tried it and was supprised how much better the 6Ks was for daily use, staying in the desired position, urantion use, etc.

As for pull-out, I tried the KSD and had a problem also with abrassions. I could still pull-out if I wanted but, it was harder. The KSD did seem to keep the device and my penis in position better wehn I bent or twisted.

As others have stated I don't get out for personal fun. I do it because I just have to know if it is possible. I would like something that I KNOW I can't get out. I have no interest in a peircing, so thats out.

You're a tinkerer so I have an idea but don't know how to do it. I think trying to prevent pull-out is concentrated at the wrong location. They all seem to concentate on the penis part of the tube. My thinking is the portion of the base ring by the penis needs to addressed.

When I try getting out, the space on the top of the base ring is the reason I can get out. If I pull the base ring forward and then put my finger under my penis I can work it out. If somehow this space could be reduced, would this fix it? The problem is, how do you reduce it without causing the base ring to be to tight? Do you make it wider, cage to body? How would this be done?

Another thought I've had is could there be a ring that would go around the balls work? This would inhibit the distance the cage could move because of the sack being restricted. Would this cause other problems like with nocturnal erections and the cage not being able to move much?

[Edgewood]

Ever since this string was started I've been wondering about the security of my 6000s. Last night in the shower I tried to pull out and was successful. It was a real bitch to get myself back in though. My efforts were a little panic fueled because I didn't want my KH finding out I was screwing around on her.

Today I tried a smaller ring and it was tight enough that there was no pull out ever going to happen but it seemed not quite loose enough. I almost left it on but then I remembered how strong my morning wood was this a.m. There was no way I was going to make it through the night with the smaller option. I have the KSD-G3 security inserts ordered and hopefully they will improve the situation.

There are options to increase security at the base ring but in my opinion once I get things that far they will not stop me. They are called Baltus security points and Baltus flex security points. Check out http://www.lockeduplove.net/page/accessories

[Tom Allen]

If somehow this space could be reduced, would this fix it? The problem is, how do you reduce it without causing the base ring to be to tight? Do you make it wider, cage to body? How would this be done?

Another thought I've had is could there be a ring that would go around the balls work? This would inhibit the distance the cage could move because of the sack being restricted. Would this cause other problems like with nocturnal erections and the cage not being able to move much?

From what I've managed to figure out, a wider ring profile makes it easier to pull out. Narrower profiles and smaller spacers allow more of that squishy sausage to be stuffed into the tube. The way I figure it, the more you can cram into the tube, the harder it will be to pull out. This means that a thinner cuff ring (IOW, less space from cage to body). Unfortunately, there's a point where you're just compressing skin, and there's no compensation for growing or other body changes.

I've experimented with a second ring around the testicles, but haven't figured out an easy way to make it work. Plus, if you wear snug jeans, they become a target for bumps and whatnot.

[Locked by LRC]

What I was thinking, about the wider ring, in review may have been written different than my thoughts.

I have noticed that the device always hangs forward, away from the pubic bone. I can position everything up tight and after a few minutes of movement the cage will move forward. It may be me but, with any base ring design I can get my little finger barely through the sack area but, can get two or three fingers by the pubic bone area. This space is where I have access to grab my penis and work it out of the cage.

With the hinged and two-piece base ring I could get the base ring tighter but when there was no discomfort or discoloration, I would still have this droop.

My testicle size causes me problems with the solid base ring. To get through the base ring the fit is looser.

What I'm thinking is that the base ring would be wider only near the top, by the pubic bone, to help cover this area.
This thicker area would be about a third of the total diameter of the ring. For me, this area would have to be about a 1/2" to 3/4" wide.

This is what I was refering to with the discomfort part. Would this additional bulk at the top cause problems when there was clothing on? Would it press to much into the pubic bone?

[Tom Allen]

I think I understand what you're talking about. The problem is that your body meat is too squishy to keep something in place. My devices always fall forward a bit once I get warmed up, no matter how tight the cuff ring is. Well, let me qualify that by saying if the cuff ring is tight enough to keep it from sliding, then I've found it to be too tight, period.

A wider section at the top where the cage flange attaches to the cuff ring won't make any difference. The pivot is actually the point directly opposite (under your testicles), so unless the device is fastened at your penis, it's going to tip, i.e., swivel forward a bit. I can't think of how to create a wider area to keep your fingers out.

But because having an anchor to your penis keeps it from swiveling, you would think that a snugger tube would help. The early KSDs were simply rings that you had to fit through, but unfortunately were often too tight and caused edema. The current style tries to keep things in on 2 points - both restricting the opening a bit, and putting pressure in the center of the penis, behind the head.

I think that the reason that some of the MM devices are working out is that the cuff ring has a narrower, not wider profile. They look to be 1/4", while the CB3k rings were 3/8", and the newer 6k cuffs are more flat - but still 3/8" wide. The 1/4" section allows more penis to fit into the cage, which itself is made to specific dimensions. I'm afraid, though, that they are still heavier, and so ther will always be a tendency for them to slip forward a bit.

[Tasholeo]

Tom

How is your modified CB6K treating you so far on its maiden voyage?

[Tom Allen]

How is your modified CB6K treating you so far on its maiden voyage?

Grrr. It's off now. The cuff ring that I made seems to be part of the problem; it's not a circular profile, rather, it's 5/16 wide (front to back) and about 7/16 high (inside edge to outside). That gave it a rather wide face (more surface area to grip), but between the weight (it's stainless steel) and the face, something just wasn't cooperating.

I went back to the plastic ring (I made a solid ring out of one of the hinged cuffs (and that fit better, but the 6k itself just isn't quite right. It could simply need more polishing.

I have another 3k, though (already pretty cut up), and just for the hell of it, I might shorten that by the same amount. I just don't know when I'll get to it.

[Tasholeo]

Sorry to hear that it's not working out thus far... But it sounds that your pretty handy so I'm sure you'll figure something out...

[Tom Allen]

Yeah, I'm back to my old CB3k, just trying to see of I can tell what the difference could be.

Definitely the taller profile of the cuff ring did not work for me, neither on the 6k nor on the 3k. Too bad, 'cos it was a nice piece of work. It's still in the nightstand for a cockring. Back to the drawing board on that design, though.

The 3k just seems to fit me better than the 6k. I don't know if that's because of such long usage (i.e., familiarity), or for some other reason. For example, For the last few hours I've been at my desk, I'm barely aware of it. But even with the same cuff ring, I was fiddling with the 6k most of the day. Same jeans, same style of underwear - it's the device cage itself that's the issue. Again, maybe it needs more polishing to make it more slippery under clothing.

It wouldn't be the first time I'd spent hours on some mod, only to go back to what I had been wearing previously, though.

[TwistedMister]

I'm still having trouble with the concept that a smaller tube is more comfortable, although I do get the concept that it's probably better to fit (although not be squashed ) into a tube.

I'm having trouble with that too. I've been thinking of the WM from MM, with the *longest* cage option. I currently have the CB3k (for a goodly number of years). As a 'grower', only the smallest ring prevents 'pullout', but nocturnal erections are so strong that after 3 nights the bruising is so severe that it results in constant excruciating pain and that plus the sleep deprivation of being woken up every 1.5 hours or so makes it impossible to continue wearing it.

Using larger rings helps alleviate some of that but it's a trade-off as larger rings allow for more 'slippage' and at 6+" fully erect the pull on the testicles can result in a different but equally intolerable pain. I've managed to break 2 of the rings (the middle, and next to largest) at the hinge so I'm beginning to think that metal is the only option for me. I've used JB Weld to mend the rings but without the hinge the rings are exceptionally difficult to remove if I'm at all aroused, even with the assistance of ice-packs and lubricant...and *not* removing the rings results in some very ugly edema which makes me look misshapen and deformed (and horrifies my wife) as well as retrograde ejaculations (if it goes that far).

The KSD anti-pullout devices have also proven useless to me. Only the smallest prevents pullout...and is almost impossible to remove at all. Use of any of the 3 sizes results in lacerations and bleeding.

So, to my mind, a longer cage is called for in order to allow more room for expansion. Unfortunately, the current economy is making the price of a WM appear rather extravagant for an experiment that may not work.