PapaSmurf
Member
Just letting you know that every system ever devised to solve CP is the same thing through a different lense, so move efficiency/flexibility isn't a thing to worry about (especially when you're ignoring EO in Briggs FB). I would also say that in your CP solving idea, you solve line, then CP, then you solve the rest of FB, which is objectively worse than solving CP with FB (which 2GR system allows for). Inspection speed can be changed though by making the lense more efficient (if that makes any sense).I checked out the 2GR system in depth, and I do not agree here. The many steps in the system and the lack of flexibility make it take longer to inspect, and relatively inefficient for CP-line. The system was developed to combine with EO-pair, which it does brilliantly. But as stand-alone for CP-line it gets beaten both in inspection speed and in move efficiency/flexibility. This could possibly be taken up for debate till somebody practices with both techniques; but what is certain is EO-CP-line is impossible to do consistently in 15 second inspection using the 2GR system.