Has anyone seen this device?

[chasteinhaiku]

I originally wore a CB6000 but after a few months switched to a CB6000s for about a year and liked the tighter fit. It reduces the amount of movement of the device.

I'm a somewhat average 6.5 inches and 5 inches around so the CB6000s and the Tight Squeeze are definitely tight fits but that also reduces the chance of pulling out.

I ordered a Steelheart with similar dimensions to the CB600s but with a smaller ring. The Steelheart was rather heavy compared to the plastic device and wasn't as tight a fit. I haven't been able to get Deitmer to reply to my emails about getting a new better fitting ring for it either... its frustrating to spend that much on a device and have it not work out.

Perhaps it's unfair of me to judge the steelheart under these circumstances but there it is.

The Tight Squeeze device is very light, stays in place, is very easy to put on and take off, erections aren't painful in it although nighttime erections are tough in the 1.5 inch ring. I also like the openness of it and being able to pee standing up if necessary.

I also like the hinged ring that comes with the Tight Squeeze. (The Steelheart has the Bipartite which is super tough to put on.)

I didn't need to take any measurements or attempt a custom fit, it fit perfectly right out of the package. And I could order 5 more and still end up spending less than I spent on the Steelheart.

I'm sure I'll eventually get hold of Deitmer and get the Steelheart properly adjusted but for now I'm super happy with this Tight Squeeze device
\

[Atone]

The Tight Squeeze device is very light, stays in place, is very easy to put on and take off, erections aren't painful in it although nighttime erections are tough in the 1.5 inch ring. I also like the openness of it and being able to pee standing up if necessary.

I also like the hinged ring that comes with the Tight Squeeze. (The Steelheart has the Bipartite which is super tough to put on.)

I can see how the weight can make a big difference especially if the fit isn't right. I am used to it now but it took a little while.

I had never heard from anyone with the Bipartite ring on a steelworxx, sorry it is so hard to put on.

I hope Dietmar comes through and gets everything right for you.

[Sir Chaste]

Atone: What is the "Bipartite" base ring? How does it work? Does it have any advantages over other types of base rings?

[gungadn]

This is the Biparte base ring:
http://steelworxx.de/Bipartite-A-Ring-f ... b-47p.html

I have one I ordered with my first Steelheart. Coming from the CB3K and CB6K I was worried about being able to "squeeze" the boys through a solid ring.
The basic functionality is designed to work like the rings for the CB6K. The ring is in 2 pieces so you can put the 1 part around your junk then attach the 2nd piece. One joint is at the pin (the pin in removable). The 2nd joint is a post and a hole. This is then held together with an Allen head screw. You can see the parts in the pictures in the site linked above.

In practice, it takes 3 hands to try to put the 2 pieces together then tighten the allen screw while you are wearing it. Then, like all other multi part rings, the Joint is a source of irritation.
The only times I wore it, I ended up just putting it together first then putting it on like a normal solid ring. But, I could only wear it for a couple of days due to irritation from the joint.

So, I cannot recommend this ring based on my experience. In fact, I have one I would be happy to sell for cheap to anyone that wants to give it a try.... (45mm I think)

The only good to come from this was I really like the removable pin. That way, when taking it off for fun, I can remove the tube. Remove the pin. But, leave the ring in place (as its rather difficult / impossible to remove when excited) without any problems of the pin poking any sensitive bits.
So, when I ordered my current smaller steelheart, I ordered all solid rings with removable pins.

[jack]

After reading this thread, I decided to purchase a Tight Squeeze. I had been wanting something better and this was pretty cheap so I thought I would take a chance. I had been seriously considering a much more expensive CD, but had not done anything because of the cost. I got it with a 1.75" base ring.

I have to say that so far I am quite pleased with the Tight Squeeze. It is small and tight, but I can get into it when flaccid (no extra room though). I have been wearing it for the past 4 days with zero issues. Here are a few Pros and Cons so far:

Pros
It is really comfortable - snug but not tight
The rectangular base ring is also very comfortable - as opposed to a round ring, it seems to distribute the contact area very well. Also, it is less obtrusive to my legs as the overall circumference is smaller
It is hinged so my wife can take it off and put it on without my help - this is a very big issue and she was successful the first try!!
No issues with the hinge or closure - the hinge is covered with a little surgical tubing. The ring is nicely machined so where the ring comes together, there doesn't seem to be much of any pinching issue.
The cage is easy to put on the base ring - the closure for the base ring forms a square tang that a tab on the cage slides over, once in place, it is easy to get the locking post inserted.
Low profile - the locking post/lock is a pretty low profile compared to my previous CD and is pretty much invisible under my clothes.
Lighter weight - it is considerably lighter than my previous CD (smaller in size and fewer rings and lighter base ring).
Erections while sleeping have not been painful - so far, it seems that the snugness of this device are preventing pain from night time erections. I may wake up and know that my erection is being restrained, but they are not painful. At least so far.
I can pee standing up - I really like this as having to sit down all the time was a pain as well as in inconvenience sometimes.

Cons
Probably chromed, not stainless - this is an assumption. It is not magnetic, but the finish is very shinny (chrome), unlike most stainless steel finishes I have seen which have a duller look.
Play between the cage and base ring - because of the way the two connect, there is a little play/movement between them. They are very sturdy and would be hard to bend, but they do move.
Gap between bottom of cage and base ring a little big - the gap is probably too big for good security. The angle of the last ring of the cage also increases the gap. While not a problem for me, it might be for some guys.
Limited base ring selection - They only offer 3 sizes when purchasing their CDs, but they do sell in-between sizes separately.
A couple of slightly sharp edges - the back side of the tab on the cage that slips over the base ring does have a couple of sharpish corners that I would like to round off. These sit directly against my abdomen and are sometimes noticeable. I would use a file to round them over, but I am concerned about the chrome finish.

I am pretty pleased so far, but it has only been a few days. I even went for a 30 minute jog while wearing it this evening. I will be ordering a smaller base ring this week, 1.625", and maybe an additional CD that looks interesting (the Tormentor) with a 1.5" base ring. This should give us several options to experiment with. I have already given my wife the key to the new CD as I don't think I will be having any wearability issues. So now, again, I am totally reliant on her to let me out when she wants.

[chasteinhaiku]

Aloha Jack

I don't see the 1.625 ring for sale on their website... Can you post a link?

I currently have the 1.5 and 1.75 rings. I switch between the two as necessary.

I'd like to have the 1.625 size as well!

So far I am still delighted with the device. It is aptly named as it is indeed a tight squeeze but it's def the most comfortable device I've worn.

I also like that my keyholders can remove the hinged ring w.out my help

[jack]

Go to their main chastity devices page, then there is a sub-page, steel chastity devices. You will find them there.

http://www.fetishtoybox.com/STEEL-CHAST ... ES_c64.htm

I did go ahead and order the 1.625" ring. It should be here in a couple days.

I have been in the tight squeeze one week as of tonight. So far so good, still comfortable with no wearability issues. Most of the time I forget that I have it on. But, it is snug, any attempt at growth at all is immediately stopped, as it should be.

The wife let me out to play a little last night. She took it off and put it back on later. She needs a little practice, but she did it without my help. She told me now that we have this CD, I won't be allowed to touch my dick outside the cage for a while. Not sure how long that will be, but it should be interesting!

[chasteinhaiku]

Sounds awesome!

Neither of the girls have tried putting my device back on... i don't think I'd be able to avoid erection, lol.

I have to use the stocking method to get myself fully into the tube anyway... not something that would easily be done by another person.

I found the page with the rings a minute after posting. I'll be ordering the new ring tonight.

The longest I've worn mine straight was 4 days. I wore it in the ocean each day and the device is still in great condition which speaks well of the quality of steel. The lock, however, rusted... I was quite nearly stuck in the tight squeeze device. Fortunately the key worked one last time. We replaced the lock and will use the plastic tabs next time we go to the beach.

[jack]

Niether of the girls? Hmmm.... sounds like you are one lucky dog!!

I can just squeeze into it, and my wife was quick enough to get me back in before I had a chance to swell up.

[jeank]

I have often been tempted to comment on the fact that "medical grade" (316 austenitic) stainless steel is expensive.

The material itself is certainly not expensive if buying from a steel stockist, as a company making CBs would. Depending on volume and size of bar, grade 316 stainless should rarely be more than £8 ($12.50) per KILO and buying larger bars and quantities I generally pay around £5.50 per kilo - 1/8" and 1/4" bars would be at the higher end because of production cost at the mill. This is approx 25-30% higher than "cutlery grade" SS.

So unless a company is competing with mass produced product in high volume consumer markets, this is not a significant cost issue for a device that weighs less than 200g.

316 is trickier to weld than mild steel, so time and equipment needed is more. If the company is casting product, then chromed white metal may be cheaper as there would be no heat treatment needed.

But overall, the material cost of a metal CB is very small compared to selling price - we're paying for the design, labour, admin and workshop overhead (and distributor profit).

Rant over......