Thanks. It sounds like they may have made some improvements over time to increase the VPM's. It would be interesting to use one of the newer ones.
Guido, do you suppose that the 3000 VPM as opposed to the 6000 VPM is simply a difference in the way it was stated? In other words, what is a "VPM"? or, what is a "vibration"? Does it mean a full cycle as in an AC sine wave or does a "vibration" imply movement from one extreme position to the other? Or, the movement from the left to the right would be one "vibration" and then the right to left movement would be another "vibration"?
The reason I question this is because of the second number (6000) being exactly doubled from the original number (3000). Did perhaps, Marketing simply convince Engineering that, since 6000 sounded more impressive than 3000, the method of defining a "VPM" needed to be revised?
(Is this my just cynical view of marketing hype showing?)
Regards,
Tom