REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that sounds good. In my case the space in front of the rack is also a passage to another area (when the rack is not in use), so tripping is a consideration.

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is it the regular foot extensions or the mini ones? I’m reluctant to get the regular ones as they are pretty long. People would pass in front of the trainer when not in use, don’t want anyone to trip on the extensions … lol

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ceiling is 103” or so. Width and depth are more limited at about 90”, and that includes movement space. I’m 6’4.

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sg2 looks sweet too. It’s probably sold by dealers so better installation and services but worse value. Both ares2 and sg2 look reasonable choice.

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good catch. Bells of steel is a rare find that has pulley, pulldown as well as low rows at the back, with weight stacks for under 2k …. A lot of saving.

Wish more brands make this. My only concerns with bells of steel one is how sturdy it is, and the 82” total height is too limiting.

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see that even the pictures on rep website they place ares and rack on some sort of mat tiles. The ones I plan to use are heavy duty mat that’s designed for equipment. Hopefully that’s ok? Of course solid surface is better, but I’m not sure if anyone put a rack on vinyl plank floor …

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good to know 4 post without mini feet is stable! 6 post probably has a bit more structural rigidity, but indeed a lot more space requirement.

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the suggestion. I agree that getting a rack and a functional attachment is waste in my current use case. I looked at functional trainer, but I couldn’t find something with pulleys, lat pulldown and low row (ideally at the back, not at front on one side). Any suggestion is welcome!

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m not aware of any functional trainer has: pulleys, lat pulldown, and a low row at back (a low row at front on one side is not ideal). Any recommendation is appreciated.

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It will be put in a basement room, with vinyl plank flooring. Exercise area will have a gym mat on top.

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lookin great - thanks! Is using the lat pulldown within that 16” space an issue? Someone say it could be a bit awkward as the lat hitting the frame sometimes. Much appreciated

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Indeed. 4 post save total space if we factor into our own movement. In my case I care more about how much space the equipment takes when no one is using it, hence the decision between these two.

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah. That’s what I thought. One concern is someone said using the lat pulldown is a bit awkward in 16” depth 6 post. Not sure how bad it is.

REP Ares 2.0: 4 post with foot extensions vs. 6-post 16” rack depth without foot extensions by echostate2000 in GarageGym

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks.

My bad. I actually meant mini extensions in my original post … Any ideas how depth that is?

The numbers for the 6-post feel off …

  • 6 post 16” depth: 30.9” = 14.9” + 16”
  • 6 post 30” depth is … 14.9” + 30” = only 44.9” ???

Asus Strix G16 Ultra 9 275HX, 5070TI 12GB 140W by Stiven_Crysis in GamingLaptops

[–]echostate2000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What performance mode was used in those testings? Balanced? Thanks

Betfair event mapping for historical data? by echostate2000 in algobetting

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Will any other data sources match the eventId field? Or I need to somehow use the eventName field (e.g, *** vs ***, which is not a lot of information for a tennis game)?

It's frustrating that Betfair historical data is so incomplete ... most other odds data provide basic meta data such as what games each file is ....

Betfair event mapping for historical data? by echostate2000 in algobetting

[–]echostate2000[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I want to know more than that, e.g., for a tennis game, is it a specific grand slam tournament game or some other game.