Hulkkuffs Canada, Statement, 2026-06
We are aware of false and misleading claims being circulated about our company. We take accuracy and integrity seriously and categorically reject any statements that misrepresent our products, services, or business practices. We remain committed to transparency and encourage stakeholders to rely on verified information from official sources.
We will take appropriate steps to protect our reputation and ensure that factual information is available to our customers and partners.
The following is a rigorous analysis of these erroneous assertions, cross-referenced against established consensus, empirical evidence, and scientific methodology.
Statement 1,
Competitor’s claims to the over tighten protection function in its own products are FASLE.
1.1, The competitor’s handcuff works ONLY when the cuffed wrist is positioned at certain angles.
The human wrist operates on an oval-shaped (ellipsoid) articular surface. Specifically, the radiocarpal joint is categorized as an ellipsoid (or condyloid) synovial join. Tomatoes don’t have bones, but human wrists have. A tomato in a demo doesn’t reflect real-world use.
The mechanism works only when the wrist bone is against the ratchet.
1.2, The competitor’s handcuff doesn’t work when the cuffed wrist is positioned at other angles
The mechanism doesn’t work when the wrist bone is NOT against the ratchet.
1.3,
The competitor’s handcuff protection mechanism is getting worse when dealing with smaller wrists, the claimed over tighten protection is almost not possible.
The mechanism is getting worse when dealing with smaller wrists.
(smaller wrist is most likely to take the position shown in the illustration, and not sufficient to activate the mechanism)
1.4,
Failure Rate based on real-world operations.
Statement 2,
Competitor’s claims to the Automatic Mechanism in its own products are False.
The handcuff has to be secured by manually flipping a lever, not automatically.
If it is an automatic mechanism, why it still needs a redundant manual lock?
It makes no sense, but it explains everything.
Statement 3,
Competitor’s claims to its own designs, and being copycatted, are FALSE.
No one is going to copy a patent which does not work even theoretically.
The competitor’s design does not work in most circumstances.
Regardless of the size or the shape of the ratchet, and regardless of the locations of the rotational axis or axle A.
The engagement of the over tighten mechanism is closely related to the relative Incline/Slope when the pawl (the black triangle) and the rotational outline of the ratchet (the red circle) meet.
To make the engagement more reliable, A has to be far away from B, but doing so makes the protected angle smaller.
To make the protection angle wider, A has to be closer to B, but doing so makes the engagement less reliable.
The reliability of the engagement and the sufficient protection angle never meet in the competitor’s design.