Interesting test on various 1/2" ratchets
- Thread starter dlundblad
- Start date
- Status
Quote:
The torture test was cooked up by Steve Watt of Maxwell Industries. Steve makes fixtures for testing shocks and has a device for measuring the spring rate of torsion bars. It was perfect for our demolition test. The ratchet’s ½-inch-square socket mount was inserted into the fixture, and a hydraulic ram with a load sensor applied the force. The distance from the fulcrum to the ram was 1-foot when the wrench was parallel with the ground, so we didn’t use any conversion to come up with our torque number—it was just the force in pounds at our 1-foot distance.
I trust this over your calculations.
The torture test was cooked up by Steve Watt of Maxwell Industries. Steve makes fixtures for testing shocks and has a device for measuring the spring rate of torsion bars. It was perfect for our demolition test. The ratchet’s ½-inch-square socket mount was inserted into the fixture, and a hydraulic ram with a load sensor applied the force. The distance from the fulcrum to the ram was 1-foot when the wrench was parallel with the ground, so we didn’t use any conversion to come up with our torque number—it was just the force in pounds at our 1-foot distance.
I trust this over your calculations.
Originally Posted By: Vikas
I am snickering at this test and dreaming about Snap-On 1/2 inch. I am sure it would have beaten all of those cheapos.
1) Their measurement tool would be broken instead of the Snap-On
2) If they managed to break the Snap-On ratchet, then it was used in correctly.
Am I missing anything else?
In a test like this the ratchet with the "coarsest" movement has a big advantage. I bet a Snap-On has a nice "fine" movement (fewer degrees per click) that a mechanic would value, but would put it at a disadvantage in a strength test.
I am snickering at this test and dreaming about Snap-On 1/2 inch. I am sure it would have beaten all of those cheapos.
1) Their measurement tool would be broken instead of the Snap-On
2) If they managed to break the Snap-On ratchet, then it was used in correctly.
Am I missing anything else?
In a test like this the ratchet with the "coarsest" movement has a big advantage. I bet a Snap-On has a nice "fine" movement (fewer degrees per click) that a mechanic would value, but would put it at a disadvantage in a strength test.
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
Originally Posted By: Vikas
2) If they managed to break the Snap-On ratchet, then it was used in correctly.
What are you even talking about? Every ratchet in this test was used incorrectly.
You guys don't understand. If Snap-On breaks, it is user's fault. If HF breaks, it is cheap chinese excrement.
How long have you been participating here? By this time, you should have got the party line.
You're right. I don't understand. Although I must admit, I never understood the Snap-On thing either.
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
Originally Posted By: Vikas
2) If they managed to break the Snap-On ratchet, then it was used in correctly.
What are you even talking about? Every ratchet in this test was used incorrectly.
You guys don't understand. If Snap-On breaks, it is user's fault. If HF breaks, it is cheap chinese excrement.
How long have you been participating here? By this time, you should have got the party line.
You're right. I don't understand. Although I must admit, I never understood the Snap-On thing either.
Interesting video. That said high torque goes on my breaker bar not my ratchets.
I might not either but there is something to be said about a finely built and finely balanced instrument in your hand. I have got a lots and lots of cheap ratchets and when you play with all of them, you realize that how much you would like to have something which is
- high tooth count 120+
- zero slop
- very smooth
- properly balanced
- thin low profile
- light weight
- recessed quick release button
- recessed directional switch
- will never ever switch direction on you by itself
- etc
I am not saying Snap On has the one like that but if such a thing is available, it will be done by one of those guys.
I like to poke fun at the blind fanboyism that is exhibited by some people who are Snap On fondlers and use derision on low prices stuff just because it is available to us peons at cheap price.
- high tooth count 120+
- zero slop
- very smooth
- properly balanced
- thin low profile
- light weight
- recessed quick release button
- recessed directional switch
- will never ever switch direction on you by itself
- etc
I am not saying Snap On has the one like that but if such a thing is available, it will be done by one of those guys.
I like to poke fun at the blind fanboyism that is exhibited by some people who are Snap On fondlers and use derision on low prices stuff just because it is available to us peons at cheap price.
Originally Posted By: redbone3
Originally Posted By: Vikas
I am snickering at this test and dreaming about Snap-On 1/2 inch. I am sure it would have beaten all of those cheapos.
1) Their measurement tool would be broken instead of the Snap-On
2) If they managed to break the Snap-On ratchet, then it was used in correctly.
Am I missing anything else?
In a test like this the ratchet with the "coarsest" movement has a big advantage. I bet a Snap-On has a nice "fine" movement (fewer degrees per click) that a mechanic would value, but would put it at a disadvantage in a strength test.
Exactly right, i don’t really care for fine tooth ratchets in the 1/2 and up sizes, a good old 36 tooth will do me.
I just don’t see the value of fine teeth on a big ratchet, it would be a very rare occasion to use or even need one in a limited space where a short swing would be beneficial.
For everyday wrenching i prefer 36 tooth ratchets but sometimes a nice fine tooth is helpful in the 1/4 and 3/8 sizes, i use both. A properly built 36 tooth does not have to be a hard clunky mechanism, they are smooth.
Originally Posted By: Vikas
I am snickering at this test and dreaming about Snap-On 1/2 inch. I am sure it would have beaten all of those cheapos.
1) Their measurement tool would be broken instead of the Snap-On
2) If they managed to break the Snap-On ratchet, then it was used in correctly.
Am I missing anything else?
In a test like this the ratchet with the "coarsest" movement has a big advantage. I bet a Snap-On has a nice "fine" movement (fewer degrees per click) that a mechanic would value, but would put it at a disadvantage in a strength test.
Exactly right, i don’t really care for fine tooth ratchets in the 1/2 and up sizes, a good old 36 tooth will do me.
I just don’t see the value of fine teeth on a big ratchet, it would be a very rare occasion to use or even need one in a limited space where a short swing would be beneficial.
For everyday wrenching i prefer 36 tooth ratchets but sometimes a nice fine tooth is helpful in the 1/4 and 3/8 sizes, i use both. A properly built 36 tooth does not have to be a hard clunky mechanism, they are smooth.
Originally Posted By: willbur
CR did a test of various brands of ratchets in the early 1980s. If I remember correctly, Snap-On broke before some bargain brands.
Hmm. That would explain why a Snap-On fanatic on another forum keeps saying that tool breakage is not the ultimate test of a tool.
CR did a test of various brands of ratchets in the early 1980s. If I remember correctly, Snap-On broke before some bargain brands.
Hmm. That would explain why a Snap-On fanatic on another forum keeps saying that tool breakage is not the ultimate test of a tool.
Originally Posted By: Vikas
I might not either but there is something to be said about a finely built and finely balanced instrument in your hand. I have got a lots and lots of cheap ratchets and when you play with all of them, you realize that how much you would like to have something which is
- high tooth count 120+
- zero slop
- very smooth
- properly balanced
- thin low profile
- light weight
- recessed quick release button
- recessed directional switch
- will never ever switch direction on you by itself
- etc
I am not saying Snap On has the one like that but if such a thing is available, it will be done by one of those guys.
I like to poke fun at the blind fanboyism that is exhibited by some people who are Snap On fondlers and use derision on low prices stuff just because it is available to us peons at cheap price.
I agree.. I was using a Craftsman with the cheap selector on a brake caliper. Wile I had it selected ot ccw to remove the bolt, i must have bumped it and i did not notice because of the backwards like angle i was using it.....luckily I got it off and rwplaced the entire caliper with a JY unit. Made me kinda sick I almost disabled the car from tightenong the bolt until it rounded which made removal impossible for me, all over a 2 cent selector. After that I searched out roundheads to save from this aggravation and danger....i mean, what all this potential trouble over a "feature" that saves two seconds....kind of like power windows with the auto up and down "feature" almost broke my arm, to save me the hassle of having to hold the button for three seconds.....i mean, how lazy do they think we are?
And, you want low back drag!
I might not either but there is something to be said about a finely built and finely balanced instrument in your hand. I have got a lots and lots of cheap ratchets and when you play with all of them, you realize that how much you would like to have something which is
- high tooth count 120+
- zero slop
- very smooth
- properly balanced
- thin low profile
- light weight
- recessed quick release button
- recessed directional switch
- will never ever switch direction on you by itself
- etc
I am not saying Snap On has the one like that but if such a thing is available, it will be done by one of those guys.
I like to poke fun at the blind fanboyism that is exhibited by some people who are Snap On fondlers and use derision on low prices stuff just because it is available to us peons at cheap price.
I agree.. I was using a Craftsman with the cheap selector on a brake caliper. Wile I had it selected ot ccw to remove the bolt, i must have bumped it and i did not notice because of the backwards like angle i was using it.....luckily I got it off and rwplaced the entire caliper with a JY unit. Made me kinda sick I almost disabled the car from tightenong the bolt until it rounded which made removal impossible for me, all over a 2 cent selector. After that I searched out roundheads to save from this aggravation and danger....i mean, what all this potential trouble over a "feature" that saves two seconds....kind of like power windows with the auto up and down "feature" almost broke my arm, to save me the hassle of having to hold the button for three seconds.....i mean, how lazy do they think we are?
And, you want low back drag!
You are right Trav, IMO..... 1/2" is for torque, 1/4" and 3/8" is for speed and feel, tight confines and the such.
HangFire, if you want to throw down, grab the pull bar...keep the ratchet for ease of use and having a feel for how much torsionyou are applying so fasteners fit and not back out and more importantly dont shear, wallow or round off or break or kill the threads. Plus being a joy to use a precision tool made from quality parts, good n' strong metals manufactured by a fellow who enjoys his craft.
HangFire, if you want to throw down, grab the pull bar...keep the ratchet for ease of use and having a feel for how much torsionyou are applying so fasteners fit and not back out and more importantly dont shear, wallow or round off or break or kill the threads. Plus being a joy to use a precision tool made from quality parts, good n' strong metals manufactured by a fellow who enjoys his craft.
Originally Posted By: mjoekingz28
You are right Trav, IMO..... 1/2" is for torque, 1/4" and 3/8" is for speed and feel, tight confines and the such.
HangFire, if you want to throw down, grab the pull bar...keep the ratchet for ease of use and having a feel for how much torsionyou are applying so fasteners fit and not back out and more importantly dont shear, wallow or round off or break or kill the threads. Plus being a joy to use a precision tool made from quality parts, good n' strong metals manufactured by a fellow who enjoys his craft.
Huh? Me? I know how to properly use a ratchet. As a late-comer to the impact party, I probably have more breaker bar experience than a lot of pros. I have plenty of breaker bars and flex heads, in 1/4, 3/8, 1/2 and 3/4. My longest is a Snap On 1/2".
I like SO tools. I also like tweaking their brittle enthusiasts. I was just making a comment about one of the Kool Aid drinkers.
You are right Trav, IMO..... 1/2" is for torque, 1/4" and 3/8" is for speed and feel, tight confines and the such.
HangFire, if you want to throw down, grab the pull bar...keep the ratchet for ease of use and having a feel for how much torsionyou are applying so fasteners fit and not back out and more importantly dont shear, wallow or round off or break or kill the threads. Plus being a joy to use a precision tool made from quality parts, good n' strong metals manufactured by a fellow who enjoys his craft.
Huh? Me? I know how to properly use a ratchet. As a late-comer to the impact party, I probably have more breaker bar experience than a lot of pros. I have plenty of breaker bars and flex heads, in 1/4, 3/8, 1/2 and 3/4. My longest is a Snap On 1/2".
I like SO tools. I also like tweaking their brittle enthusiasts. I was just making a comment about one of the Kool Aid drinkers.
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
Originally Posted By: Vikas
2) If they managed to break the Snap-On ratchet, then it was used in correctly.
What are you even talking about? Every ratchet in this test was used incorrectly.
You guys don't understand. If Snap-On breaks, it is user's fault. If HF breaks, it is cheap chinese excrement.
How long have you been participating here? By this time, you should have got the party line.
You're right. I don't understand. Although I must admit, I never understood the Snap-On thing either.
+1. I have a snap-on 1/4" high tooth count ratchet, bought because of its finish and feel in tight spaces. Overall I prefer my sk and proto (teardrop) ratchets though.
This article doesn't say anything that we don't know. Teardrop head ratchets have more space for larger internal mechanisms, and more interfacing surface area to distribute the load.
What I really don't understand is why anyone would try to put 800 ft-lb on a ratchet. They should be using a breaker bar to break the torque of the fastener, then use the ratchet to speed the fastener out...
Trolling to make some sort of a "quality" assessment regarding dumped goods from the third world which steal American manufacturing jobs means that others have squarely missed the point and should work on comprehension versus trying to stir the pot.
Originally Posted By: Vikas
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
Originally Posted By: Vikas
2) If they managed to break the Snap-On ratchet, then it was used in correctly.
What are you even talking about? Every ratchet in this test was used incorrectly.
You guys don't understand. If Snap-On breaks, it is user's fault. If HF breaks, it is cheap chinese excrement.
How long have you been participating here? By this time, you should have got the party line.
You're right. I don't understand. Although I must admit, I never understood the Snap-On thing either.
+1. I have a snap-on 1/4" high tooth count ratchet, bought because of its finish and feel in tight spaces. Overall I prefer my sk and proto (teardrop) ratchets though.
This article doesn't say anything that we don't know. Teardrop head ratchets have more space for larger internal mechanisms, and more interfacing surface area to distribute the load.
What I really don't understand is why anyone would try to put 800 ft-lb on a ratchet. They should be using a breaker bar to break the torque of the fastener, then use the ratchet to speed the fastener out...
Trolling to make some sort of a "quality" assessment regarding dumped goods from the third world which steal American manufacturing jobs means that others have squarely missed the point and should work on comprehension versus trying to stir the pot.
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
What I really don't understand is why anyone would try to put 800 ft-lb on a ratchet. They should be using a breaker bar to break the torque of the fastener, then use the ratchet to speed the fastener out...
The point is we don't have to worry about the occasional 200-300 lb pull if the tool can go to 800. It's not like the article writers picked 800 before they did the testing.
Another point is those cheap ratchets are more than good enough. That makes supporting American tool manufacturers all the harder, but I still do it.
What I really don't understand is why anyone would try to put 800 ft-lb on a ratchet. They should be using a breaker bar to break the torque of the fastener, then use the ratchet to speed the fastener out...
The point is we don't have to worry about the occasional 200-300 lb pull if the tool can go to 800. It's not like the article writers picked 800 before they did the testing.
Another point is those cheap ratchets are more than good enough. That makes supporting American tool manufacturers all the harder, but I still do it.
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: HangFire
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
What I really don't understand is why anyone would try to put 800 ft-lb on a ratchet. They should be using a breaker bar to break the torque of the fastener, then use the ratchet to speed the fastener out...
The point is we don't have to worry about the occasional 200-300 lb pull if the tool can go to 800. It's not like the article writers picked 800 before they did the testing.
Another point is those cheap ratchets are more than good enough. That makes supporting American tool manufacturers all the harder, but I still do it.
Heck, even 200-300 ft-lb. That's a LOT of torque... I mean, think of the output of your engine being in that range typically.
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
What I really don't understand is why anyone would try to put 800 ft-lb on a ratchet. They should be using a breaker bar to break the torque of the fastener, then use the ratchet to speed the fastener out...
The point is we don't have to worry about the occasional 200-300 lb pull if the tool can go to 800. It's not like the article writers picked 800 before they did the testing.
Another point is those cheap ratchets are more than good enough. That makes supporting American tool manufacturers all the harder, but I still do it.
Heck, even 200-300 ft-lb. That's a LOT of torque... I mean, think of the output of your engine being in that range typically.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: HangFire
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
What I really don't understand is why anyone would try to put 800 ft-lb on a ratchet. They should be using a breaker bar to break the torque of the fastener, then use the ratchet to speed the fastener out...
The point is we don't have to worry about the occasional 200-300 lb pull if the tool can go to 800. It's not like the article writers picked 800 before they did the testing.
Another point is those cheap ratchets are more than good enough. That makes supporting American tool manufacturers all the harder, but I still do it.
Heck, even 200-300 ft-lb. That's a LOT of torque... I mean, think of the output of your engine being in that range typically.
Unless it's a Honda, LOL!!!!
Originally Posted By: HangFire
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
What I really don't understand is why anyone would try to put 800 ft-lb on a ratchet. They should be using a breaker bar to break the torque of the fastener, then use the ratchet to speed the fastener out...
The point is we don't have to worry about the occasional 200-300 lb pull if the tool can go to 800. It's not like the article writers picked 800 before they did the testing.
Another point is those cheap ratchets are more than good enough. That makes supporting American tool manufacturers all the harder, but I still do it.
Heck, even 200-300 ft-lb. That's a LOT of torque... I mean, think of the output of your engine being in that range typically.
Unless it's a Honda, LOL!!!!
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: HangFire
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
What I really don't understand is why anyone would try to put 800 ft-lb on a ratchet. They should be using a breaker bar to break the torque of the fastener, then use the ratchet to speed the fastener out...
The point is we don't have to worry about the occasional 200-300 lb pull if the tool can go to 800. It's not like the article writers picked 800 before they did the testing.
Another point is those cheap ratchets are more than good enough. That makes supporting American tool manufacturers all the harder, but I still do it.
Heck, even 200-300 ft-lb. That's a LOT of torque... I mean, think of the output of your engine being in that range typically.
Unless it's a Honda, LOL!!!!
Even our Honda, at least...
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: HangFire
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
What I really don't understand is why anyone would try to put 800 ft-lb on a ratchet. They should be using a breaker bar to break the torque of the fastener, then use the ratchet to speed the fastener out...
The point is we don't have to worry about the occasional 200-300 lb pull if the tool can go to 800. It's not like the article writers picked 800 before they did the testing.
Another point is those cheap ratchets are more than good enough. That makes supporting American tool manufacturers all the harder, but I still do it.
Heck, even 200-300 ft-lb. That's a LOT of torque... I mean, think of the output of your engine being in that range typically.
Unless it's a Honda, LOL!!!!
Even our Honda, at least...
Just like what I've been noticing myself, that Taiwan is a good country of origin for hand toobls these days. The tekton stuff at Meijer is really nice.
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Heck, even 200-300 ft-lb. That's a LOT of torque... I mean, think of the output of your engine being in that range typically.
Unless it's a Honda, LOL!!!!
255HP/250 lb-ft for my Honda.
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Heck, even 200-300 ft-lb. That's a LOT of torque... I mean, think of the output of your engine being in that range typically.
Unless it's a Honda, LOL!!!!
255HP/250 lb-ft for my Honda.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: HangFire
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Heck, even 200-300 ft-lb. That's a LOT of torque... I mean, think of the output of your engine being in that range typically.
Unless it's a Honda, LOL!!!!
255HP/250 lb-ft for my Honda.
And the fact you had to mention that sort of made my point in a roundabout way, LOL
The current Accord I4 makes 181lb-ft, you have to opt for the V6 to get above 200.
The joke was more a byproduct of the "fast and furious" scene where the S2000 was being revered for its HP/L whilst putting down a whopping 150lb-ft of torque
That's the same as the torque required for my lug nuts on the Expedition
(another facet to that joke).
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Heck, even 200-300 ft-lb. That's a LOT of torque... I mean, think of the output of your engine being in that range typically.
Unless it's a Honda, LOL!!!!
255HP/250 lb-ft for my Honda.
And the fact you had to mention that sort of made my point in a roundabout way, LOL
The current Accord I4 makes 181lb-ft, you have to opt for the V6 to get above 200.
The joke was more a byproduct of the "fast and furious" scene where the S2000 was being revered for its HP/L whilst putting down a whopping 150lb-ft of torque
- Status
