- Joined
- Mar 20, 2016
- Messages
- 13,866
There's proof right that Nathan made the HDMC, more like HDMC 
It's actually a bit thicker than the proto-HC (there were actually 8 of them which I think I had mistakenly quoted as 6!):
Proto-HC was 0.260" vs HDMC at 0.275" and weight wise, it comes in heavier than the original specs which Nathan had stated, i.e, ~25.6 oz vs ~23.2 oz while proto-HCs were a "puny" ~22.9 oz!
So I suppose that by making the grinds taller, Nathan went a tad thinner BTE to make the HDMC a better cutter or else I don't see why the proto-HCs were originally claimed as indestructible for knuckleheads who luv to break sh*t! Hail the true HDMC and now I will be needing a 2nd one, likely future Fridays sale score with TT handle scales

It's actually a bit thicker than the proto-HC (there were actually 8 of them which I think I had mistakenly quoted as 6!):
Proto-HC was 0.260" vs HDMC at 0.275" and weight wise, it comes in heavier than the original specs which Nathan had stated, i.e, ~25.6 oz vs ~23.2 oz while proto-HCs were a "puny" ~22.9 oz!
So I suppose that by making the grinds taller, Nathan went a tad thinner BTE to make the HDMC a better cutter or else I don't see why the proto-HCs were originally claimed as indestructible for knuckleheads who luv to break sh*t! Hail the true HDMC and now I will be needing a 2nd one, likely future Fridays sale score with TT handle scales
