
Electric 8-inch gripster with USB-C charging, 200 kg

- USB-C charging
- 3.7 V / 4,000 mAh battery
- Digital display
- For smooth and rough surfaces
Ranking among 200 gripsters of shape "Round"
Overview
Electric 8-inch gripster with USB-C charging, 200 kg: an electric vacuum gripper with a round suction pad (Ø 203 mm). Rated at 200 kg, it sells for around €66. No brand name is given; the tool comes from Chinese series production.
Price and load capacity compared
Among the 200 round vacuum lifters in this comparison, it is priced slightly above the median of €60. Its load capacity matches the typical value for this design (200 kg) almost exactly. That works out at 303 kg of capacity per €100 spent; the median is 347 kg.
Drive and operation
The battery is built in. That saves weight and cost, but means a charging break when it runs flat. It charges via USB-C, so with the same cable and charger as your phone or laptop. Battery capacity is 4,000 mAh. A digital display shows the vacuum level and battery charge.
Seal and applications
The sealing lip is rubber. On smooth surfaces such as glass, polished tiles and stone it seals very tightly and lasts a long time; on rough or textured surfaces it is at a disadvantage. According to the data sheet it is suitable for glass and tiles.
Strengths
- Charges via USB-C
- Digital vacuum and battery display
- Durable rubber seal
Weaknesses
- Lower capacity than most round models
- Built-in battery, needs charging breaks
- Rubber holds less well on rough surfaces
Specifications
| Brand | Unbranded |
|---|---|
| Shape | Round |
| Suction pad | Ø 203 mm |
| Load capacity (manufacturer rating) | 200 kg |
| Drive | Electric (battery) |
| Battery | Built-in battery |
| Battery capacity | 4,000 mAh |
| Batteries included | 1 |
| Charging port | USB-C |
| Automatic re-pump | n/a |
| Indicator | Digital display |
| Seal | Rubber |
| Vibration function | No |
| Quantity | 1 |
| Carry case | n/a |
| Brand origin | China |
| Made in | China |
| Applications | Glass, Tiles |
| Price | €66 |
Head-to-head comparisons
Alternatives




