1/4” Flex-Head Ratchets: Matco vs. Snap-On

[The Critic]

I want to add another 1/4” drive ratchet to my box. I prefer something in the 7-10” (length) range.

I have considered multiple brands, but keep coming back to these two due to ease of obtaining replacement parts, feel and warranty service.

Matco:

Pros= Finer tooth than SO (minimal), locking mechanism has a better design, more color choices

Snap-On:

Pros= lower cost (on eBay), quick release option available

Looking for feedback on which one you folks prefer and why.

Thanks.

 

[Fedwrench]

I've never cared for the Snap on T72 series. I've always preferred the thinner head of the Matco and its crisper ratcheting action but, rarely use the locking feature. I think the only thing better with the snap on would be the screw retained gear cover.
The new Gearwrench revised 120xp comfort grip handled push button locking flex head ratchets are quite nice at 9 inches in length.

 

[demarpaint]

I've never cared for the Snap on T72 series. I've always preferred the thinner head of the Matco and its crisper ratcheting action but, rarely use the locking feature. I think the only thing better with the snap on would be the screw retained gear cover.
The new Gearwrench revised 120xp comfort grip handled push button locking flex head ratchets are quite nice at 9 inches in length.

I agree regarding the GW. @The Critic I would certainly add that to your list.

 

[Theronswanson]

I've been wanting a Matco in the black finish with a blue handle for a while. Both make good ratchets. You can't really go wrong with either.

 

[ThePostman]

Matco. Thin head, and great locking mechanism. I use it daily. I also have a USA SK LP90 that I really like, actually two, one fixed and one flex, but what happens when one of them breaks? I have a long handle GW 120xp, I don't trust it, as it exploded on me once before. Proto 90 tooth (Mac Axis), is also a great ratchet, but the head is a little thicker than the others.

 

[CGarage]

Gearwrench

 

[drtyler]

I want to add another 1/4” drive ratchet to my box. I prefer something in the 7-10” (length) range.

I have considered multiple brands, but keep coming back to these two due to ease of obtaining replacement parts, feel and warranty service.

Matco:

Pros= Finer tooth than SO (minimal), locking mechanism has a better design, more color choices

Snap-On:

Pros= lower cost (on eBay), quick release option available

Looking for feedback on which one you folks prefer and why.

Thanks.

What are your preferred 1/4" drive ratchets that you use now?

You can't go wrong with either one. I've been impressed with my TLL72, use it often.

 

[Mgdoug3]

Matco. Thin head, and great locking mechanism. I use it daily. I also have a USA SK LP90 that I really like, actually two, one fixed and one flex, but what happens when one of them breaks? I have a long handle GW 120xp, I don't trust it, as it exploded on me once before. Proto 90 tooth (Mac Axis), is also a great ratchet, but the head is a little thicker than the others.

I like my LP90 flex too but it's too short. SK needs to make a longer version.

I have a SO 1/4 locking flex with hard handle. It's my go to ratchet in that size. I typically buy SO because there's a dealer near me. Matco appears to make a great ratchet but I would like to hold one before buying.

 

[The Critic]

What are your preferred 1/4" drive ratchets that you use now?

You can't go wrong with either one. I've been impressed with my TLL72, use it often.

Currently, it is a Gearwrench 81012P. My hands are larger so I want something with a larger handle....and preferably something that is a hair longer. It also sees minimal use and has already been rebuilt once.

I mainly want a second one because the GW is being reassigned to my mobile tool kit.

 

[Garcky]

Really, the only correct answer on GJ is to buy both. Then, use them for a year and tell us which is better and why. Or, buy neither and get a less costly one, which will probably last almost as long.

 

[VolvoRyan]

The Matco is a smaller package than the Snap-On. I love the Matco flex mechanism. I like the Snap-On for 1/2". The Dual-80's are phenomenal. For 3/8" and 1/4" the Matco's smaller head matters.

Has GW fixed their locking flex heads? I thought the 90T's might replace my 120XP's.... but the 90T's make generic, cheap 1980's import tools look awesome. Diabolical.

-Ryan

 

[VolvoRyan]

I like my LP90 flex too but it's too short. SK needs to make a longer version.

I have the little stubby LP90 flex in 1/4". I adore that little ratchet. It fits perfectly in my hand. It's really a shame that SK's fate is not looking too bright at the moment.

-Ryan

 

[d.mcfarland]

If you're putting a 3/8" head kit in it, which I suspect you are, you are going to want to consider warranty.

 

[drtyler]

Currently, it is a Gearwrench 81012P. My hands are larger so I want something with a larger handle....and preferably something that is a hair longer. It also sees minimal use and has already been rebuilt once.

I mainly want a second one because the GW is being reassigned to my mobile tool kit.

The regular metal handle on my TLL72 is pretty thin. If you want something thicker, you probably need to get one with the soft or hard plastic handle (which I'm sure you probably know already).

I'm not sure why some have had poor luck with their T72 series ratchets. My sample size is only one, but its held up pretty well with three years of regular use.

 

[Tallpilot]

I'm with Fed. I love Dual-80s but the 1/4" Dual-72 (as it should be called) just isn't as nice. I went with Matco for long 1/4" and I enjoy both the locking mechanism and the ratcheting action.
I wish Snappy would get their act together in 1/4”.

 

[The Critic]

I'm with Fed. I love Dual-80s but the 1/4" Dual-72 (as it should be called) just isn't as nice. I went with Matco for long 1/4" and I enjoy both the locking mechanism and the ratcheting action.
I wish Snappy would get their act together in 1/4”.

To be fair, my TLL72 has only seen limited use - but I have zero complaints. Can you (or others) elaborate on how the Dual-72's are not as nice?

 

[The Critic]

If you're putting a 3/8" head kit in it, which I suspect you are, you are going to want to consider warranty.

This is a matter that is separate from the Custom Ratchet Build.

 

[Ton ton]

Is there much of a cost difference between Matco versus Snap-on ratchets? I have never been on a Matco truck.

 

[CGarage]

I have a long handle GW 120xp, I don't trust it, as it exploded on me once before.

What drive size? And what were you doing with it?

Long handles mean more torque. Still, hard to imagine unless you were really pushing it past it’s intended design limits.

 

[The Critic]

Is there much of a cost difference between Matco versus Snap-on ratchets? I have never been on a Matco truck.

MSRP is pretty similar, but there are a lot more SO ratchets for sale on eBay…and the prices tend to be quite a bit lower than Matco.

 

[65k10]

To be fair, my TLL72 has only seen limited use - but I have zero complaints. Can you (or others) elaborate on how the Dual-72's are not as nice?

The issue I have noticed with the T72 series is some ratchets have a rough feeling mechanism, while others are reasonably smooth. I have had a couple where the drive gear fits a bit loose and will get really rough if you put a side load on them with an extension. QR models where the gear is supported at two points seem to avoid this issue, although in use it doesn't really seem to happen often.

My Matco ratchets seem to be consistently smooth. The negative with them is I have one (that was used mind you) that is very lube sensitive at cold temps. If the oil got slightly thick, it wanted to auto reverse. My T72 ratchets had no issues at the same temps. I also had a matco pop apart once when trying to use it to wiggle off a socket that got stuck on a bolt. Maybe the snap ring wasn't fully seated.

I'm still trying to decide which I like more. The Matco has the advantage of a great locking mechanism, a smooth action, and a smaller comfort grip that I prefer. I wish the mechanism wasn't quite as finicky about what oil it likes. The Snap-On 72 tooth has the advantage of it always seems to work even if it isn't quite as nice to use. I also think the comfort grips on those are a bit bigger than I like.

 

[M6erfan]

MSRP is pretty similar, but there are a lot more SO ratchets for sale on eBay…and the prices tend to be quite a bit lower than Matco.

The issue I have noticed with the T72 series is some ratchets have a rough feeling mechanism, while others are reasonably smooth. I have had a couple where the drive gear fits a bit loose and will get really rough if you put a side load on them with an extension. QR models where the gear is supported at two points seem to avoid this issue, although in use it doesn't really seem to happen often.

My Matco ratchets seem to be consistently smooth. The negative with them is I have one (that was used mind you) that is very lube sensitive at cold temps. If the oil got slightly thick, it wanted to auto reverse. My T72 ratchets had no issues at the same temps. I also had a matco pop apart once when trying to use it to wiggle off a socket that got stuck on a bolt. Maybe the snap ring wasn't fully seated.

I'm still trying to decide which I like more. The Matco has the advantage of a great locking mechanism, a smooth action, and a smaller comfort grip that I prefer. I wish the mechanism wasn't quite as finicky about what oil it likes. The Snap-On 72 tooth has the advantage of it always seems to work even if it isn't quite as nice to use. I also think the comfort grips on those are a bit bigger than I like.

I've had a T72 QR for about 15 years, it's pretty much my go to regular length non flex 1/4" ratchet. I really like it, smooth, strong, crisp. It just works and is a pleasure to use. At least my example is. I can't imagine how many hours are on it, and it's never been rebuilt, but I have a rebuild kit in the toolbox waiting.

 

[Zewnten]

I sold my admittedly bought used Snap On to buy the Matco's and haven't ever regretted it.

 

[Walkers]

I have this swivel head 1/4" SO ratchet. It has been one of my goto tools for decades.

 

[65k10]

I've had a T72 QR for about 15 years, it's pretty much my go to regular length non flex 1/4" ratchet. I really like it, smooth, strong, crisp. It just works and is a pleasure to use. At least my example is. I can't imagine how many hours are on it, and it's never been rebuilt, but I have a rebuild kit in the toolbox waiting.

They are great little ratchets and if I didn't have a preference for the lock Matco uses on their ratchets, I'd probably stick with Snap-On across the board instead of having a mix of the two brands for ratchets.

 

[Mgdoug3]

I have the little stubby LP90 flex in 1/4". I adore that little ratchet. It fits perfectly in my hand. It's really a shame that SK's fate is not looking too bright at the moment.

-Ryan

I've held off on buying anything SK since the buyout. If they came out with a 9" USA made LP90 1/4" flex, I buy it instantly. I like the lower profile of the LP90 vs my SO. Matco may be the best current option for me but I probably don't need anymore ratchets.

 

[Tallpilot]

The issue I have noticed with the T72 series is some ratchets have a rough feeling mechanism, while others are reasonably smooth. I have had a couple where the drive gear fits a bit loose and will get really rough if you put a side load on them with an extension. QR models where the gear is supported at two points seem to avoid this issue, although in use it doesn't really seem to happen often.

My Matco ratchets seem to be consistently smooth. The negative with them is I have one (that was used mind you) that is very lube sensitive at cold temps. If the oil got slightly thick, it wanted to auto reverse. My T72 ratchets had no issues at the same temps. I also had a matco pop apart once when trying to use it to wiggle off a socket that got stuck on a bolt. Maybe the snap ring wasn't fully seated.

I'm still trying to decide which I like more. The Matco has the advantage of a great locking mechanism, a smooth action, and a smaller comfort grip that I prefer. I wish the mechanism wasn't quite as finicky about what oil it likes. The Snap-On 72 tooth has the advantage of it always seems to work even if it isn't quite as nice to use. I also think the comfort grips on those are a bit bigger than I like.

This is a great write up. The only thing I will add is Snappy does not make a long 1/4” in locking flex. That's how I ended up with my Matco in the first place.

 

[CGarage]

This is a great write up. The only thing I will add is Snappy does not make a long 1/4” in locking flex. That's how I ended up with my Matco in the first place.

The Matco and Gearwrench long handle, 1/4” drive, locking flex heads are the thing that is needed most in ‘hard to access’ fastener situations these days.

I did not notice a difference in quality between the 90T Gearwrench locking flex head and the Matco equivalent.

 

[CGarage]

I should also add, I walked onto a Matco truck for the first time ever prepared to buy the long handle, locking, 1/4” flexhead- Some ~ $170 for a ratchet.

The dealer only had the red handle version available……I really wanted the Matco Michael Blue handle 🫢, especially if I was going to drop that sort of money on a ratchet.

When I picked up the red-headed step child, I was so surprised. All of the posts on here about the Matco being superior to the Gearwrench did not jive with this example. The locking flex-head had the same amount of “play” (or lack thereof) as the Gearwrench equivalent.

I will proudly support Taiwan and their tool industry. China, not so much.

There seems to be slight design improvements and modernization that Gearwrench has incorporated into their locking flexhead ratchets that Matco has yet to follow.

 

[Ton ton]

I should also add, I walked onto a Matco truck for the first time ever prepared to buy the long handle, locking, 1/4” flexhead- Some ~ $170 for a ratchet.

The dealer only had the red handle version available……I really wanted the Matco Michael Blue handle 🫢, especially if I was going to drop that sort of money on a ratchet.

When I picked up the red-headed step child, I was so surprised. All of the posts on here about the Matco being superior to the Gearwrench did not jive with this example. The locking flex-head had the same amount of “play” (or lack thereof) as the Gearwrench equivalent.

I will proudly support Taiwan and their tool industry. China, not so much.

There seems to be slight design improvements and modernization that Gearwrench has incorporated into their locking flexhead ratchets that Matco has yet to follow.

Thank you for sharing your experience!

 

[CoThG]

Gearwrench

Gearwrench has too much play in the anvil. I prefer the no slop of the SnapOn with the face plate held on by screws vs. the snap ring of the GW.

 

[CoThG]

I'm with Fed. I love Dual-80s but the 1/4" Dual-72 (as it should be called) just isn't as nice. I went with Matco for long 1/4" and I enjoy both the locking mechanism and the ratcheting action.
I wish Snappy would get their act together in 1/4”.

SnapOn 1/4" is now Dual 80.

 

[CGarage]

Gearwrench has too much play in the anvil. I prefer the no slop of the SnapOn with the face plate held on by screws vs. the snap ring of the GW.

It has no more play than the Matco equivalent.

I am indifferent as to snap ring versus the screws.

The screws often times get accumulated dirt and grime packed into the slots and that can cause issues when servicing comes up.

 

[d.mcfarland]

SnapOn 1/4" is now Dual 80.

From their website on the T72 ratchet page:

"Dual 80® Technology based ratchet design features 72-tooth gear, with six teeth in contact with gear to provide strength and durability"

 

[CoThG]

It has no more play than the Matco equivalent.

I am indifferent as to snap ring versus the screws.

The screws often times get accumulated dirt and grime packed into the slots and that can cause issues when servicing comes up.

You're right about the Matco. It has the same style of snap ring retention. That's why I prefer SO ratchets. I clean my tools after use and have no dirt or grime packed into the slots of my SO ratchets. You should take better care of your tools.

 

[CoThG]

From their website on the T72 ratchet page:

"Dual 80® Technology based ratchet design features 72-tooth gear, with six teeth in contact with gear to provide strength and durability"

You're right. It uses the same technology as the 80 tooth larger drive ratchets.

 

[CGarage]

You're right about the Matco. It has the same style of snap ring retention. That's why I prefer SO ratchets. I clean my tools after use and have no dirt or grime packed into the slots of my SO ratchets. You should take better care of your tools.

Mine are well cared for and get wiped down before being put away. Still, the tiny screw slots are easy for dirt and grime to find their way into. The snap ring is almost a preferable design to me.

 

[CoThG]

Mine are well cared for and get wiped down before being put away. Still, the tiny screw slots are easy for dirt and grime to find their way into. The snap ring is almost a preferable design to me.

That's why you should clean your tools when they get dirty. Matco's and GW's design with the plate retained by a snap ring is inherently less rigid than SO's plate secured by screws. SO's is just a better design.

 

[CGarage]

That's why you should clean your tools when they get dirty. Matco's and GW's design with the plate retained by a snap ring is inherently less rigid than SO's plate secured by screws. SO's is just a better design.

If you think I am going to brush out tiny particles of grit and grime on the tiny screw heads of the Snap On ratchets I have that I use once in a blue moon, you are nuts. Wipe them down and keep them oiled after using them? I will do that. I am not going to detail clean screw heads.

Not sure how the plate retention affects the rigidity of the ratchet???? Care to explain?

The anvil on the other hand is another topic of discussion, between the Gearwrench/Matco design and that of Snap-On.

Interestingly, the Matco / Gearwrench locking flex head design, from my independent poll, seems to be far more popular than the Snap-On locking flex head and much preferred, regardless of the (possible) cost differential.

 

[CoThG]

If you think I am going to brush out tiny particles of grit and grime on the tiny screw heads of the Snap On ratchets I have that I use once in a blue moon, you are nuts. Wipe them down and keep them oiled after using them? I will do that. I am not going to detail clean screw heads.

Not sure how the plate retention affects the rigidity of the ratchet???? Care to explain?

The anvil on the other hand is another topic of discussion, between the Gearwrench/Matco design and that of Snap-On.

Interestingly, the Matco / Gearwrench locking flex head design, from my independent poll, seems to be far more popular than the Snap-On locking flex head and much preferred, regardless of the (possible) cost differential.

The plate affects the slop in the anvil. Every Matco 88T and GW 90T ratchet I've handled, more than a few, have had noticeable play/slop in the anvil. Every SO Dual 80 that I've handled, again more than a few, have had no play/slop in the anvil. The SO plate, secured by screws, is a superior and more rigid securing method for the ratchet internals. I have SO's new locking flex head, and it's far superior to it's earlier version.