LEVEL3CUFFS and TUFF KUFFS

To follow up on the multiple Tuff Kuff threads here... 

The creator/founder of Tuff Kuffs actually lived in Central Florida. Rumor has it that he had some medical issue and the brand was sold to a third party buyer.  Not long after the original founder was never heard from again and some suspect he died and others think he might have intentionally disappeared from the scene.

Also you guys should check out 

https://level3cuffs.com

Pretty ingenious creation. The creator evidently has working prototypes but was unable to sell or lease the concept to the mainstream manufacturers. They claimed the production costs were too high despite loving his design.

Certainly solves the universal keying problem except for maybe those that are double jointed. So at this point it doesn't look like mass production will become a reality unless something changes.

Interesting, though a thinking person would press the bottom button against a stationary protrusion like a detail on the top of a hand rail or protrusion on a statue, or any other thing which sticks out a bit and then twist the key while pressing the remaining side with one of their fingers. It certainly would make it much more difficult and require more favourable conditions to escaping using the key but people should never say it's impossible to get out even if you have the key. I like that design though. I would like to get a pair in my collection one day.

That's a good point but until we can sample them it's hard to tell what kind of pressure is required to depress both buttons and while I agree it's not impossible to defeat, I really don't think it would be that easy either. 

The hand in the cuff you are unlocking might not have the dexterity or reach to turn the key and probably won't be able to depress the top button for the same reason. The other hand would ultimately have to turn the key but couldn't turn the key and simultaneously press the top button even while you press the bottom against an object. 

I would call these an absolute win for design strategy because they keep the universal keying convenience while making the possession of that key by the wearer less meaningful. 

I would love to see these mass produced and I give the inventor all the credit in the world for trying to advance the handcuff scene to a new level without coming up with some stupid design that's unrealistic. 

Although I doubt the design does anything to prevent chain binding which the advertising material for this handcuff does mention - this given the standard chain linkage.

So the real question is - can these be bought? :) 

Alas, there'll be none of these being made anytime soon...
Tim Pearce <t.pearce@clearadvancement.com> 15:33 (15 minutes ago)
to me





Hi Chris,

Im sorry, but they are not in production; those units you see on the website are the proof of concept pre-production models.
We are not planning to go into production anytime soon, as we are still seeking a buyer for our IP,  or a significant investment of $10M to stand up production and a company. 

Thank you for your interest.

Tim 


TIM PEARCE    
Founder, President & Inventor
Creative Law Enforcement Resources Inc
Los Angeles Police Dept. (Retired)
206 Star of India Lane, Carson, CA 90746  
Cell: 310 408-9600
www.aufire.com



On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 5:10 PM Squarespace <form-submission@squarespace.info> wrote:

Sent via form submission from Level III
Name: Chris 
Email: ...
Message: To whom it may concern,

Can you please advise when it would be possible to purchase these handcuffs?

Best regards,

Chris
Does this submission look like spam? Report it here.

How can you be the founder & CEO of a make believe handcuff company?

If I had 10 million dollars laying around to make handcuffs, I'd re-create the tooling, and go into production of McKenzie Mitts, Palmers, Loreys, Houstons, Romers, & Lilly Irons. Hell, I'd even make Goncz cuffs, and send John a dozen pairs for free!

This guy CLEARly has no intention of making anything - EVER!

Tell him he's too late, I just invested 11 million to be the exclusive owner of a bridge in Brooklyn, NY. ...At least there's a chance with the bridge!

 

W C wrote: ↑

Nov 27, 2022

How can you be the founder & CEO of a make believe handcuff company?

If I had 10 million dollars laying around to make handcuffs, I'd re-create the tooling, and go into production of McKenzie Mitts, Palmers, Loreys, Houstons, Romers, & Lilly Irons. Hell, I'd even make Goncz cuffs, and send John a dozen pairs for free!

This guy CLEARly has no intention of making anything - EVER!

Tell him he's too late, I just invested 11 million to be the exclusive owner of a bridge in Brooklyn, NY. ...At least there's a chance with the bridge!

 

Click to expand...

It's madness, I know. 

At least he replied unlike other manufacturers, right @djhalfdead ? haha

I mean at least the guy has proof of concept and has tried to rethink the handcuff unlike most of the other manufacturers.. I mean for example I love Peerless cuffs.. I think their quality speaks for itself but...

They rarely make any security improvements to their handcuffs which baffles me.. I understand design changes cost a ton of money but in the end it's an investment that might be worth the return because ultimately you're building a better product than most of your competitors with a brand everyone already knows..

Peerless cuffs have had single pawl with three teeth like many others since the dawn of time. I understand the current design works but isn't it time to perhaps make some improvements here? Perhaps add double pawls as a standard feature with maybe some shimming and picking resistance such as adding 5 to 6 teeth on a split rail design much like cts trimax?

Then there's the chain binding issue that few manufacturers ever want to discuss.. i have already posted that i do not believe much can be done to address chain link binding vulnerability but the joint design of the Alcyon cuffs proves there are alternatives that work to prevent this besides hinged designs..

Just saying someone has to take the initiative to improve handcuffs since the current manufacturers rarely do.. And I hate to say it but Chinese cuffs are usually way more innovative than the main players including Peerless, ASP, Smith & Wesson, Hiatts, CTS, etc.. 

although I will give CTS credit for Trimax.. i just wish they were more easily available in colors... evidently you can order CTS Trimax in color from handcuffwarehouse.com but a minimum order applies for each color ordered..

Why does everything you post go back to the chain binding issue? If the handcuffs are properly applied, hands behind back, palms out, key holes up, the chain binding issue isnt an issue at all. Its only when the cuffs are applied in the incorrect manner that its even possible. IF chain binding were an issue you would hear of many more instances of officers having been attacked because the prisoner snapped their cuffs are were able to harm the officer. Handcuffs have been the standard single pawl, swing through design since roughly about 1912. Simply, if it isnt broke....dont fix it! Yes, there are and have been many alternatives made to come up with a stronger, more secure handcuff. But it always comes down to price pojnt. The standard American cuffs have always dominated the American Market and roughly sell for under $30 a set. If a company puts out a cuff that is lets say $100 for a set, but have design changes, how many officers are going to go out and replace their cuffs that have served them well all of these years? For example, The Spider Cuffs that were discussed recently. The top of the line model was retail at $329 for 1 set. I dont see many Police Departments buying these. They just cost too much. A street petrol officer wont use them, since they are so large and bulky. Its not a very usable design except for in specialized institutions, prisons, etc. Even at that, if every prison were to buy a couple of pairs, that wouldnt be enough to keep this company in business. Perhaps transport companies would buy a more secure cuff for their line of work, but would they likely buy enough sets to make it their only cuff they would use for a transport? Likely not. How many transports happen every day? How many instances of broken cuffs and injured officers do you hear about? How many prisoners go free on a daily basis because of snapped cuffs? Yes, there are alternatives to use in case the prisoner is a known escape risk. How many prisoners are going to be transported at one time who are known escape risks that would warrant using a higher security cuff? Then there are safety devices that could be employed. Belly chains, blue boxes, cuff covers, etc.

All of the companies that are out to re-invent the wheel. If you really want to re-invent the wheel, perhaps convince American police forces, jails and prisons to use something other than a standard key on their cuffs. But, it would only be a matter of time that the key would be sold and widely available to the general public. Then there is the convenience aspect of having 1 key open the majority of cuffs. A jail just has to keep the standard keys on hand and the officer can drop off a prisoner for booking while they take off and go on the next call. The officer can come back to the jail and retrieve their cuffs at a later time. The American police forces are not going to change that anytime soon. I see that being way more of an issue than chain binding. But, again, if cuffs are properly applied, the key holes are not very accessible even with a key in hand. A double locked set of standard cuffs properly applied cannot easily be shimmed open. You would have to disengage the double lock, then get a shim into position to use it. Sitting in the back of a police car, hands behind back with palms out and key holes up, double lock applied, youre not going to be able to bang the cuffs on anything hard enough to disengage the double lock to make a shim viable to open the cuffs.
-Richard Knip-

Richard

Very well thought out and stated.

Spencer

I understand some of your points but....

Chain binding is a personal pet peeve of mine.. think about the engineering that went into designing handcuffs from then until now.. and all the effort and design thought that has gone into making a handcuff secure.. different types of metals used.. different processes to harden those metals.. only to have a simple flaw of a chain link kinking itself into an easily rotated position causing all of that progressive work to fail... just.. like... that... snaappp..

And it doesn't matter if you say binding can't easily be done.. or that it's not a common problem on the street because enough cops have not collectively complained about binding... the bottom line is.. chain binding can has and will strike again.. and the whole palms facing out technique is ridiculous.. most detainees placed in cuffs can rotate their hands against the handcuff into the position they want sometimes with pain and other times without.. palm positioning or effectively wrist positioning is just not a reliable technique..

As far as having to sell cuffs at $100 plus with the improvements I suggested.. well that's just nonsense.. cts trimax are $35 a pair and that's with adjusted inflation.. they have most of the enhancements I would like to see and they used to be under $30 a pair just a few years ago I think..

The standard handcuff key is a problem but yes a universal key is absolutely needed for duty convenience.. we all know this in the handcuff scene.. and that's why LEVEL3 CUFFS tried to invent a handcuff that retained this convenience but made the handcuff a little more secure for those wearing the cuffs even with a key in hand.. and he did a great job aligning that vision with officer safety and handcuff practicality.. the design holds a lot of potential and its really too bad that it will probably never see the light of production day...

i mean at minimum can we at least get the main players to agree to these ideas at least..

a. extend the 3 tooth pawl to 5-6 teeth for added security?
b. stop making keyholes the size of the grand canyon (peerless sets the standard for smaller keyholes)
c. peerless needs to add backloading to their hinged cuffs much like their chain cuffs (makes no sense)

and one last thing.. i absolutely love triple bit keying.. i think the chinese cuffs that offer triple bit keying systems are genius designs.. i just wish the cuffs were made of stronger metals... the brifields as i mentioned in another thread are held together by soft metal links.. and they will absolutely break with enough force applied.. i have already deformed those links applying 60% of my own strength while refraining from completely snapping them via binding just because i didnt want to have to buy a new pair..

The triple flag keys are not very reliable. The flags tend to snap off. Just like with the extended flag of the S&W Model 104 series. There just isnt enough meat left to each individual flag when you put 3 cuts into it. ASP triple pawl has the same issue. In my opinion a double "split" pawl would be a more feasible solution. But, opening one would be as easy as taking a standard handcuff key and cutting a notch a splitting the flag. As to the wrist rotation issue, perhaps change the cuffs shape to mare of an oval, like Clejuso or the La Massenotte from France? If the wrists are placed in one of those with the palms facing down, but the locks toward the top of the lock case, youre not going to spin those around to get at the lock.

The chain binding issue has been thoroughly approached and discussed on this forum over the years. Just do a search for the word "binding." You will find several threads pertaining to it. Tri Lock, many years ago, made a series of different cuffs that could eliminate the binding issue. One had a webbed strap joining the cuffs and another design had a piece of aircraft cable as the connector. Personally, i would rather see a rigid cuff come into use like they use in the United kingdom. I think stacking the arms is more effective and less of an escape risk, than using a chain cuff. But, rigids are bulky, harder to carry and can cause harm to the wearer if they struggle against them. I think they are easier to apply for the most part, since the cuffs can be held by the center bar to apply them. One of the other issue with using a rigid is a lot of people in America are too "robust" to make using a rigid, viable. You would be left stacking their arms in the front of their body and of course, hands to the front is generally a bad idea, unless secured by an additional device.

Of course, to make a cuff harder to open, we could spin back to some of the designs that were made by one of the members of this forum, Steve Santini. I quite liked a few of his designs. Several were done to hinged style cuffs so binding wasnt an issue. Although, a few of the designs added quite a bit of weight to the cuffs. One thing today's officers do not want any more of is weight. Especially when there are lightweight cuffs available on the market. I guess one way to completely eliminate the chain binding issue is to use a disposable restraint. But, of course, that would get expensive over time. This type of disposable restraint is virtually unbreakable. There is a video on Youtube of a World's Strongest man trying to break them. https://www.handcuffwarehouse.com/tuff- ... nit-black/
-Richard Knip-

And not for anything but maybe these twisted link designs in these ESP cuffs will stop binding?

Also check out the rebranded ESP triple bit key model that looks exactly like Brifrield, Yoghourds, and Nextorch... Chinese rebranding is amazing huh?

https://www.euro-security.info/en/metal ... cuffs.html

Those 'ESP' cuffs with the twisted links actually look like Kel Met cuffs from Poland that are just sold under the ESP brand.

They look exactly identical.

Well are the Kelmet any good in terms of quality and strength?

lol
cuffbar is an interesting concept but they arent practical...

While it is a prototype could you explain why the Cuffbar is not practical?

JConley wrote: ↑

Jan 03, 2023

While it is a prototype could you explain why the Cuffbar is not practical?

Some people complain that ASP are too bulky. Those cuffbar are very bulky and large. They would be really annoying and awkward to carry, I think.

silentbd wrote: ↑

Jan 03, 2023

JConley wrote: ↑

Jan 03, 2023

While it is a prototype could you explain why the Cuffbar is not practical?

Some people complain that ASP are too bulky. Those cuffbar are very bulky and large. They would be really annoying and awkward to carry, I think.

I have never heard a of a baton being considered bulky to carry. The Cuffbar illustrated is a prototype designed for demonstration purposes...If manufactured en masse, it would most likely be manufactured in a smaller size, either with or without the telescoping feature of the bar. The bar is also one component of three compromising a full restraint system.

looking at this design I just don't see how you would comfortably equip this on your duty belt.. and there is so much distance between the handcuffs I bet a 300lb guy could move from the back to the front and to the back again lol