CB6000 cages and safety features

Quick query for anyone currently using or having used the CB6000. Did you find a security add-on, such as the KSD, necessary to stop it from pulling out? Is the back end of the 6k just as easy to extract as the 3k’s? Also, did those who managed to urinate while wearing one find it more or less hassle compared to other cages?

I haven't actually *tried* pulling out yet. I suspect it would be quite straightforward, particularly in the shower. My KSD inserts are there, but I've only popped one in a couple of times. It was annoying to deal with and tended to pinch me. Since I don't attempt pull-outs regularly, they haven't been worth the effort for me.

I'm new to wearing a 6000s. Unless I am completely flaccid, pulling out isn't really an option for me right now. I'm considering purchasing KSD inserts, but honestly, when I'm hard or nearly so, it looks like that could be quite painful. Later on, I'll likely move to a PA lock for better security. For the moment, I am letting my KH size adjust.

I picked up my 6000s in early October, so I've been fiddling with it for about a month now. It is much more comfortable than my previous 2000 model. I started with the smallest KSD and have kept it on since then. Compared to the 2000, pulling out is harder, though I haven't really tried very hard yet. Regarding urinals, I tend to avoid them.

I began with the standard 6K but switched to a short model last summer. At first I thought I was mad for even considering that it would work. Given my average size, I didn't think there was much chance of me fitting inside it. That said, not only did it fit, but overall it was more comfortable and convenient than the regular 6K. With the standard 6k, I used the second-largest ring; when I tried moving to a middle-sized one, it became too painful while erect, although it was fine for normal wear. Once I started using the short version, I discovered I could use the middle ring with significantly less pain during erections. Not sure why that is, but it felt better. In terms of convenience, there were many improvements. First, because it is smaller, it is less noticeable under trousers. The best part was that standing up to pee became a more frequent option. Its shorter length helps keep everything contained in one spot. For instance, if I squat down, my penis doesn't retract into the tube and get stuck against the plastic wall (which would require lube to guide back out). So the tip stays aligned with the opening more often. Additionally, it cut down the need for lube almost entirely. I used the stocking method to put it on and rarely applied lube inside the tube anymore, though I still carried some and q-tips when going out or traveling. As for security: It might be slightly more secure than the regular 6k, but realistically they are equal in that regard because I could pull out of both. The difference is that since I wore a smaller ring with the short model, it was a bit tighter; I could only manage to pull out in the shower using soap, which I did every few showers for cleaning before putting it back in. I also tried using the KSD inserts. I got all three sizes but found I could really only use the small one. I have somewhat more girth, so there isn't much extra room inside, even with the other sizes. With the standard 6K, things stayed aligned and in place well enough that it didn't stop me from pulling out. In the short model, I didn't try to pull out because I wanted to see if it was possible first; I just assumed it wouldn't work. However, I am fairly confident I could do it with soap and water. The problem I had with the KSD in the short version is that it concentrated pressure on one spot of my penis. After about three or four days, it had to come out because it broke the skin and caused slight bleeding—even with the smallest size inserted. So I don't have extensive experience with the KSD there, but for someone with normal or less girth, they probably wouldn't face that issue. Ultimately, the main advantage I found with the KSD was simply helping to keep everything in place while wearing a regular 6K, which allowed me to sometimes pee standing up. I have no experience with the 3K so can't offer advice on it there. Lastly, when I ordered my SteelHeart (which I should be receiving today!!!), I based its sizing on the 6k short because of the comfort level I experienced in that cage. Hope this helps....

Also, I feel honored to be able to offer Tom Allen any advice regarding MC:D

> member_cc0a75751b wrote: > In addition, i feel honored to be able to give Tom Allen any advise regarding MC:D It happens more often than you'd expect;) Here is the situation: I have a 6k that sits unworn. The longer tip seems to catch on things easily, including Mrs. Edge (my head). It doesn't seem to fit into the end as well as it does with the 3k, and there has been a tendency for it to split along the seam. Oh, and pull-out was much easier with this one than with the 3k, probably because I didn't fit quite right. Over the last few months, I added a piece of plastic to the bottom seam and removed a 3/8" section from the middle of the tube to shorten it (I based this on knowing that the 6ks is about 1/2" shorter, so I spent some time measuring where my fit fell in both devices). I had already cut out a 3/8" hole at the end of the tube to help with alignment when using urinals. Also, I modified it to be compatible with older style solid cuff rings. It still needs a bit more polishing, but I am finally testing it by wearing it for several days. Yes, I could have just bought a 6ks cage section off the shelf, but where is the fun in that? Besides, experimenting is how I learn so much about form, fit, and function.

Yeah, I downgraded from a standard device to a small one about a month back after my wood-grained model split. It was quite daunting at first; I actually canceled the order only to reorder within 24 hours (apologies to John at LockedUpLove!) Anyway, I'm thrilled with the small size -- everything just feels better. Switching to a smaller ring was easy (went from second-largest to middle), and now I can stand to pee whenever I choose (though I still steer clear of urinals...). One major plus is not being mostly hard inside the cage! My size is pretty average among guys here, around 5.5 inches, and in the small device with zero room for growth when flaccid. My current theory is that my "growing pains" during ereptions helped cause the crack by adding extra pressure while I was getting hard, so this one might last longer. I can't compare it to other devices on the market, but pulling out will definitely be harder now that I've found the right ring size. I'm certain I couldn't get the thing off my testicles -- and honestly, having my dick out with the device dangling is way more painful than any scenario where my cock stays locked. I'd love to hear how your modification works though -- heaven knows I lack handy skills, but it would be fun to tinker with these devices. You know what I mean...:mrgreen:

I'm still trying to grasp the idea that a smaller tube is more comfortable, although I do see why it's likely better to fit (without being squashed) into the tube. I always mill out a larger section at the end of the tube for easier and consistent urinal alignment. However, does having a tighter fit inside the tube make cleaning harder? The cuff ring I use is machined stainless steel with a different profile than standard rings - not just a round rod bent into a circle, but more like the 6k style cuff, featuring a taller face and narrower thickness. It sits midway between ring sizes #2 and #3. This helps keep my testicles from getting pulled through on cold mornings -- an occasional but unpleasant issue in the past. I slept with it last night for the first time, but nothing to report yet.

> member_381064b05f wrote:I'm still having trouble with the concept that a smaller tube is more comfortable I struggled with this too. I really didn't believe it until my Steelheart arrived, which is much shorter than my CB6K. Perhaps steel versus plastic plays a role. But I've formed the theory that the correct statement is "a properly fitting tube is more comfortable than one that is either too short or too long".

Tom, another voice saying the 6Ks fits better than the standard 6k. I tried it and was surprised how much superior the 6Ks is for daily use, maintaining position, urination, etc. Regarding pull-out, I used the KSD and had issues with abrasions too. Pulling out was still possible but harder. The KSD did seem to keep both device and penis in place better when bending or twisting. Like others, I don't go through for pleasure; I do it just to know if it's possible. I want something that I KNOW cannot be removed. No interest in a piercing, so that option is out. As a tinkerer yourself, Tom, I have an idea but am unsure how to execute it. I think the focus on preventing pull-out is at the wrong spot. Everyone seems concentrated on the penis part of the tube. My thinking is that the portion of the base ring near the penis needs attention. When trying to get out, the space on top of the base ring allows me to exit. If I pull the base ring forward and slide my finger under my penis, I can work it free. Reducing this space might fix it? The question is how to reduce it without making the base ring too tight. Should we make it wider, closer to the body? How would that be done? Another thought: could there be a ring going around the scrotum? This would limit cage movement by restricting the sack. Would this cause issues like nocturnal erections where the cage can't move much?

Ever since this thread started, I've been wondering about my 6000s' security. Last night in the shower, I tried to pull out and succeeded. Getting back in was a real struggle though. My efforts were panic-fueled because I didn't want my KH finding out I was cheating. Today I tried a smaller ring; it was tight enough that no pull-out would happen, but felt slightly loose. I almost left it on until I remembered how strong my morning wood is this a.m. There's no way I'd make it through the night with the smaller option. I've ordered KSD-G3 security inserts and hope they improve things. There are options to boost security at the base ring, but in my opinion, once things get that far, nothing will stop me. They're called Baltus security points and Baltus flex security points. Check out

> member_75c78a1ec7 wrote: If somehow this space could be reduced, would this fix it? The problem is, how do you reduce it without causing the base ring to be too tight? Do you make it wider, cage to body? How would this be done? > Another thought I've had is could there be a ring that would go around the balls work? This would inhibit the distance the cage could move because of the sack being restricted. Would this cause other problems like with nocturnal erections and the cage not being able to move much? From what I figure, a wider ring profile makes pull-out easier. Narrower profiles and smaller spacers allow more soft tissue to be stuffed into the tube. My logic is that cramming more in makes it harder to pull out. This implies a thinner cuff ring (less space from cage to body). Unfortunately, there's a limit where you're just compressing skin with no room for growth or other bodily changes. I've experimented with a second ring around my testicles but haven't found an easy way to make it work yet. Also, wearing snug jeans makes that area prone to bumps.

What I was thinking about the wider ring might have been phrased differently than my actual thoughts. I've noticed the device always hangs forward, away from the pubic bone. Even if everything is positioned tightly initially, after a few minutes of movement the cage shifts forward. It may be me, but with any base ring design I can get just barely enough room for my little finger in the scrotum area, yet two or three fingers fit near the pubic bone. This space allows access to grab my penis and work it out. With hinged and two-piece base rings, I could tighten them more; but even without discomfort or discoloration, the droop remained. My testicle size causes issues with solid base rings because they need a looser fit for passage. I'm thinking the base ring should be wider only near the top, by the pubic bone, to cover this area better. This thicker section would comprise about a third of the total ring diameter. For me, it needs to be roughly 1/2" to 3/4" wide. This relates to my discomfort point: Would adding bulk at the top cause issues with clothing? Would it press too much into the pubic bone?

I think I understand what you're saying. The problem is that your body tissue is too soft to hold something firmly in place. My devices always fall forward slightly once warmed up, regardless of how tight the cuff ring is. Well, let me qualify that: if the cuff ring is tight enough to prevent sliding, I've found it to be actually too tight. A wider section at the top where the cage flange attaches to the cuff ring won't help much. The pivot point is directly opposite (under your testicles), so unless the device is anchored at your penis, it will tip/swivel forward slightly. It's hard to think of how to create a wider area that keeps fingers out. However, since anchoring to the penis prevents swiveling, one might assume a snugger tube would help. Early KSDs were just rings you had to squeeze through, but they were often too tight and caused edema. The current style aims to secure on two points - restricting the opening slightly and applying pressure in the center of the penis behind the head. I think some MM devices work well because their cuff ring has a narrower profile, not wider. They appear to be 1/4", while CB3k rings were 3/8", and newer 6k cuffs are flatter but still 3/8" wide. That 1/4" section allows more penis into the cage, which is dimensioned specifically. However, they remain heavier, so there's always a tendency to slip forward slightly.

Tom How is your modified CB6K treating you during its maiden voyage so far?

> member_cc0a75751b wrote: > How is your modified CB6K treating you so far on its maiden voyage? Ugh. It's off now. The cuff ring I made seems to be part of the issue; it lacks a circular profile, being 5/16 wide (front to back) and about 7/16 high (inside edge to outside). This gave it a quite wide face (more surface area for grip), but between its weight (stainless steel) and that face shape, something wasn't cooperating. I returned to the plastic ring. I made a solid ring from one of the hinged cuffs which fit better, but the 6k itself just isn't quite right. It might simply need more polishing. I have another 3k (already pretty worn), and for fun, I might shorten that by the same amount. Just not sure when I'll get to it.

Sorry to hear it's not working out yet... But you seem pretty handy so I'm sure you'll figure something out...

Yeah, I've returned to my old CB3k, just trying to determine what the difference is. Definitely the taller profile of the cuff ring didn't work for me on either the 6k or the 3k. Pity it was a nice piece of craftsmanship; it's still in the nightstand as a cockring now. Back to the drawing board for that design though. The 3k just seems to fit me better than the 6k. I'm not sure if this is due to long-term usage (familiarity) or another reason. For instance, sitting at my desk these past few hours, I barely notice it. But even with the same cuff ring, I was fiddling with the 6k most of the day. Same jeans and underwear style -- so it's the device cage itself causing issues. Again, maybe it needs more polishing to become slipperier under clothing. It wouldn't be the first time spending hours on a mod only to revert to what I had been wearing before.

> member_381064b05f wrote:I'm still having trouble with the concept that a smaller tube is more comfortable, although I do get the concept that it's probably better to fit (although not be squashed ) into a tube. I struggle with this too. I've been considering the WM from MM with its *longest* cage option. I currently have the CB3k for quite some time now. As a 'grower', only the smallest ring prevents pullout, but nocturnal erections are so strong that after 3 nights the bruising becomes severe enough to cause constant excruciating pain. Combined with sleep deprivation from being woken every hour or so, it's impossible to continue wearing. Larger rings help alleviate this somewhat but there is a trade-off as larger rings allow more 'slippage'. At over 6" fully erect, the pull on testicles can result in different yet equally intolerable pain. I've broken two of my rings (the middle and next largest) at the hinge so metal seems to be the only option for me now. I've used JB Weld to mend them but without a proper hinge they are exceptionally difficult to remove if aroused, even with ice packs and lubricant...and *not* removing the rings leads to ugly edema which makes me look misshapen (horrifying my wife) as well as retrograde ejaculations. The KSD anti-pullout devices have also proven useless. Only the smallest prevents pullout but is almost impossible to remove entirely. Using any of the three sizes results in lacerations and bleeding. So, I believe a longer cage is necessary to allow room for expansion. Unfortunately, current economic conditions make the price of a WM seem rather high for an experiment that might fail.

> member_1f353e1d87 wrote: > So, to my mind, a longer cage is called for in order to allow more room for expansion. Unfortunately, the current economy is making the price of a WM appear rather extravagant for an experiment that may not work. I know, it doesn't make sense at all. You might have a different experience but I am certain that for me, a smaller tube results in less discomfort and far less pulling on my balls during nocturnal erections. I am also a grower; flaccid around 2.5" or less, erect an honest 6". Diameter isn't clear to me but it's proportional to length, maybe slightly thick. I've experimented extensively with different diameters, lengths, designs, and ring sizes. My two most comfortable devices were my smallest Jailbird (1 1/8" x 2 1/4") and my Steelheart (31mm x 57mm). They are nearly identical in size. The Steelheart specifically rarely woke me at night. Sometimes I'd wake up and have to reach down just to tell if I was having a nocturnal erection. -A

> member_381064b05f wrote:I'm still having trouble with the concept that a smaller tube is more comfortable, although I do get the concept that it's probably better to fit (although not be squashed ) into a tube. ..... Haven't read everything else so this might repeat earlier points. Started with the 3K years ago and found it always too long when flaccid. The 6Ks is much more comfortable, especially during nocturnal erections. The reduced length makes dressing easier while out and about, and I think helps squash the erection before it builds up steam.:shock: Caveat - I don't often wear a CB at night (or day unfortunately). My wife still struggles with this and doesn't really care for me packing around her:( although this gives her free access to tease, she wishes she felt more comfortable teasing while the device is on. Did not like how KSDs felt so haven't used them. Just read Atones' post above mine. I am also a grower and once past initial excitement always shrink back into the 3K......less so with the 6Ks.

Tom, When I first started MC I used a cb6k. Found it cumbersome. Always had to sit to pee. While sitting in a chair or driving, the tube tip would rest at seat level pushing back against me. Uncomfortable indeed. Switched shortly after to a cb6ks. No problem with urinals now. Sitting is no longer an issue. As someone who drives for work this was crucial. It's just a better fit. I'm around 3" flaccid and align perfectly with the slit. Regarding pull out...I think all trapped ball devices have that flaw. I don't use extra security but can pull out as easily with the 6ks as anyone else. Putting everything back in is also trouble-free though I usually choose not to for the simple fact that I asked to be locked. It's what I want. However, I do see a need for better ring design. Did you find oval rings stopped pullout better? By oval I mean solid construction not just "shape" because flatness acts like a guide or runner making pull out easier. Dunno...maybe reaching. R