What a shock! Lucky I was sitting down when I read that...
...Avenger F1000: made for FLAT surfaces only
Woods: made for curved surfaces...
The Woods 6" is made from softer and more pliable rubber and this is a point of difference between the Avenger and Woods. I always preferred the stiffer Avenger on glass, windscreens etc because it was stiffer and flexed less than the Woods. Even then I would use the Woods, some times the 4.5" version, where the glass was curved.
Avenger and 4.5" Woods:
6" and 4.5" Woods:
...Avenger F1000: holds 4.41 lbs
Woods: holds 71 lbs.
I'm not sure this is as telling as you wish it to be and it might be saying more about the companies (and how they test or rate them) than the cups themselves. As the cups are the same physical size and very similar construction, using almost the same pumps, how can one be 16 times stronger than the other? Not 2 or 3 times, but 16 times stronger! Maybe the laws of physics are different in Italy compared to the US. Having used both Avenger and Woods since approx 2003 I would suggest they have a similar holding power given the same clean flat surface to grip but I am not qualified to comment so this is clearly only an opinion.
Avenger F1000: pump is known to fail
Woods: never heard of a single failure, ever...
All cups can fail for various reasons as they all work the exact same way. All manufacturers will tell you NOT to trust the cups explicitly and to check/re-pump regularly. I've had quite a few Woods cups fail for various reasons over the last 10 years, but no more than the Avenger. The pump inside them looks almost identical so it's crazy to claim that one is significantly different or better than the other. The stiffer rubber of the Avenger makes it unsuitable for some uses so I would expect it to loose vacuum more often if used the wrong way. But that's user stupidity rather than a fault of the product. I always carried both types of cups and used the one best suited to the task.
The Woods is more flexible so not as good as the Avenger for single cups use such as below.
...Avenger F1000: swivel is made into the cup
Woods: swivel is detachable so you can add an extension...
Rubbish. The Swivel in the Avenger is bolted in and can be removed. I've done it many times and installed my own 3/8th or 1" shafts as required.
The fact of the matter is that the Manfrotto is conusmer-grade, and the Woods is film-industry-grade, and that is all the difference in the world...
Rubbish. How is it a "fact"? I Googled the term "film-industry-grade" and got nothing. You're just making that up. Avenger is the 'high end' of Manfrotto and they use the same cups as Manfrotto, just with a different name. Woods is NOT a film/photography supplier but a materials handling company, and a very good one. I don't think that they make "film-industry-grade" (whatever that is) equipment any more than Manfrotto/Avenger do.
...Moral of the story is, the Manfrotto will work, but is far from optimal for rig-shots. I have seen many get away with using the Manfrotto because they were using a super light (and inadequate) boom, but once you use a pro-grade boom (unless you break the bank on carbon fiber), the odds are massively for you having an issue. To me, this is worth the difference in price, so I use only Woods cups on my rig-shots.
I think the moral of the story is that people should seek unbiased opinions, and I'm not selling anything either.
By the way, I do prefer the Woods over all bacause of it's fexibility (which can also work against it as mentioned previously) so I think it holds better on curved surfaces so is possibly safer on cars which are almost entirely curved. However the sweeping comment that it is significantly better and that "many get away with using the Manfrotto" is, well, rubbish.