Inversion Tables: Comparing the Competition

One inversion table may look the same as the next, but buyer beware–looks may be deceiving. What may not be immediately obvious are vital design features for user protection and reliable function. The disparity in product quality among inversion tables was emphasized by a 2010 study performed by Dynamark Engineering, an independent product testing firm that specializes in mechanical analysis and forensic engineering. Modeled after the UL 1647 safety standard, which includes unique requirements for inversion tables, Dynamark’s performance tests were conducted on a selection of widely distributed models. The results were nothing short of shocking. Please read below to find out why Teeter is the best way to relieve lower back pain. Accept no substitutes.

Endurance Test

UL 1647 Requirement: 30,000 simulated user cycles performed under maximum rated body weight. The ankle closure, foot platform and rotation from upright to full inversion are tested to ensure no failure. Dynamark Results: Each table was loaded with the manufacturer’s rated user weight and cycled to simulate actual use. All four competing brands experienced catastrophic failure resulting from torn or broken metal at just 12% or less of the UL 1647 Standard of 30,000 cycles. Teeter remained structurally sound, exceeding the cycle standard by 133% before the test was stopped for time. You may be thinking, “Why would I need my inversion table to last for 30,000 cycles?” The answer is, “Failure is not an option!” If your treadmill breaks, it’s annoying. If your inversion table breaks, it could hurt you. The minimum cycles for one user would assume 2 cycles per user per day, but many people rotate their inversion table far more than twice in a session, especially if they enjoy oscillation or intermittent traction to relieve lower back pain. Using an average daily use of 10 cycles means that every competitor’s inversion table tested would fail after less than 1 year, according to report data!

Strength Test

UL 1647 Requirement: Product must hold a minimum of 4 times the manufacturer’s rated body weight (a “4-times safety factor”). Dynamark Results: In the fully inverted position, weight was applied to determine the maximum static load each inversion table could withstand before failure. Unbelievably, one competitor actually failed under a load of only 18% of the UL requirement and the strongest competitor failed at only 40%! All fell far short of the 4-times safety factor. By comparison, Teeter held a load of 120% – that is 4.8 times the rated maximum user weight of 300 lbs. and more than 3 1/2 times the strength of the strongest competitor. The low failure load of the competing tables is especially concerning because the inversion table bounces during full inversion with exercise, causing a potentially increased load of 2-3 times the user weight.

Assembly Time

Dynamark Results: An average user built each model by following the instructions provided. Assembly time for the competing brands spanned from 54 to 110 minutes in contrast to Teeter’s 13 minutes – that’s 82% faster than the average competitor!

What does this mean for you?

The results from the Dynamark testing emphasize the responsibility you have as a consumer when researching which inversion table to purchase for your family. Any company can claim that an inversion table is “high quality” or “safe,” but what does that really mean? How do you know the true quality and reliability of the product you are buying unless it is independently tested and certified? The UL Mark provides you with peace of mind, knowing that every product bearing this symbol has been tested and certified for safety and quality. Teeter offers the only inversion tables listed to UL 1647.