Project Farm tests flex-head ratchets (and one roto-head)

[Boogerman]

Testing to failure when the failure point is far beyond the usage point is meaningless. Serviceability tests after a few thousands of repetitions at 60% of the failure point would be a meaningful test. How much slop, how is the "feel", what is the backdrag, how well does the direction change work after the usage repetitions would be meaningful. That's the kind of testing manufacturers do, not video click generating failures. Looking at the failure points, any of them except the Kobalt would probably be strong enough. The Kobalt would work, as long as you were careful with it, and as long as it holds up to repeated use, not just the one time failure test.

My experience has been that the pawls wear, and then the failure point goes way down, as the worn gear/pawl fails instead of the anvil. Then, you get a rebuild kit, and go again; starting in on the next wear cycle.

 

[JeepYJ]

Testing to failure when the failure point is far beyond the usage point is meaningless. Serviceability tests after a few thousands of repetitions at 60% of the failure point would be a meaningful test.

How can you test to 60% of the failure point if you don’t know the failure point? So it is a relevant test.

 

[General Geoff]

Stuck bolt? Use a breaker bar. Still stuck? Go up drive size. That bolt is either going to come loose or you are going to break the bolt head or round it off. If you broke your tool you're doing it wrong!

Is shearing the anvil of a breaker bar any less "wrong" than shearing the anvil of a ratchet at the same torque level? What if you don't have clearance to move up a drive size?

 

[Snapped-off]

I use the Wera at work and it's a light duty ratchet. I broke the swivel pawl within the first couple weeks.

 

[liliysdad]

That dude wears me out.

 

[milky2k]

Is shearing the anvil of a breaker bar any less "wrong" than shearing the anvil of a ratchet at the same torque level? What if you don't have clearance to move up a drive size?

If you're giving it full beans with a breaker bar and the bolt is not moving you should refrain from putting a cheater pipe on that breaker bar. You should instead consider applying penetrating oil, shocking the bolt, and/or applying heat. If your plan is to yank on that breaker bar/ ratchet until it or the bolt breaks, then you need a better plan.

 

[liliysdad]

Or…just put a cheater on it.

 

[Dakotadadv8]

Again entertaining but how durable are the, tough to test. Pros using them over time and feedback are more reliable.

 

[F-22]

It's an entertaining video. But ranking them based on what he tests is ridiculous. Some tighter ratchets did not perform well in his area test solely because they had a short handle that hit the "walls", and the long ratchets cleared the walls with the thick portion of the handle. Back drag is pointless until they're used for a bit. On the production line they squirt in some grease on the mechanism, it takes time for it to get everywhere and for everything to seat in properly so ratchets work usually smoother after a bit of use.

Force to rotate the switch is very odd to test. Just look at his tests, sometimes he presses closer to the pivot and sometimes further. Besides the much more important metric here is the actual shape of that lever - a higher force but a lever shaped in a way that still makes it easy to flick over is what most people would probably prefer.

Failure load is cool to watch but totally pointless to rank by. Tightening the lug nuts of a car (~100Nm) is something a reasonable person would not use a 3/8" ratchet for, and all of them failed at nearly twice that torque.

 

[AEAdam]

It's an entertaining video. But ranking them based on what he tests is ridiculous. Some tighter ratchets did not perform well in his area test solely because they had a short handle that hit the "walls", and the long ratchets cleared the walls with the thick portion of the handle. Back drag is pointless until they're used for a bit. On the production line they squirt in some grease on the mechanism, it takes time for it to get everywhere and for everything to seat in properly so ratchets work usually smoother after a bit of use.

Force to rotate the switch is very odd to test. Just look at his tests, sometimes he presses closer to the pivot and sometimes further. Besides the much more important metric here is the actual shape of that lever - a higher force but a lever shaped in a way that still makes it easy to flick over is what most people would probably prefer.

Failure load is cool to watch but totally pointless to rank by. Tightening the lug nuts of a car (~100Nm) is something a reasonable person would not use a 3/8" ratchet for, and all of them failed at nearly twice that torque.

Exactly.
Didnt want to say this, but these tests aren’t about ratchets, they are about getting clicks to see if a cheap Chinese ratchet can outperform Snap On.

It’s a perverse form of conspiracy theory paranoia, with a bit of David vs Goliath thrown in. ”can this $5 ratchet outperform a $200 ratchet? Let’s make up some test procedures and interpret the data to tell that story“

 

[JeepYJ]

It's an entertaining video. But ranking them based on what he tests is ridiculous.

It’s a perverse form of conspiracy theory paranoia, with a bit of David vs Goliath thrown in. ”can this $5 ratchet outperform a $200 ratchet? Let’s make up some test procedures and interpret the data to tell that story“

So what kind of tests would you perform that would be different than what PF has come up with?
I think he has demonstrated that S-O doesn’t have some mystical metallurgy that makes their ratchets much stronger than regualr store bought ratchets.
Tooth count may not matter as much partly based on handle design in tight confines.
Force for directional switch- you can decide how to interpret that as good or bad. You can see him operate them all and you may see some things you like and some things you dislike about design and placement along with force required to operate.
If you FF a all the way to the end and just look at the results then you’ve missed quite a bit of info. Directly comparing products side by side is informative and enlightening in many instances.

 

[CHI_Tool&Die]

I use the Wera at work and it's a light duty ratchet. I broke the swivel pawl within the first couple weeks.

It’s funny how different strokes for different folks go because my 1/2” Wera speed Zyklop is still going strong after 3 1/2 years of abuse. She’s a little loud but still silky smooth. I totally understand it not being on the same level as a truck/industrial brand but it’s been a pleasant workhorse in my box. The 1/2” Snap-on I just bought a few weeks ago, however, is giving me a lot of trouble. Seems that if I have any pressure downward in the square drive it gets super chunky feeling and sounds horrible. It is only smooth if I’m operating at a perfect 90* angle. It’s got me pretty pissed off cause this was supposed to be an upgrade over the Wera and a Proto breaker bar at work. It’s turning from a blissful decision to one I’m regretting.

 

[KnurledNut]

I would have liked to have seen Powerbuilt Pro Tech, AA’s Diehard, Matco and Cornwell Z-series in this test.

 

[M635_Guy]

I would have liked to have seen Powerbuilt Pro Tech, AA’s Diehard, Matco and Cornwell Z-series in this test.

And a Ko-ken.

But the dissimilarity of handle lengths (among other things) made this less useful (and fun) than his normal vids.

I did like seeing the slop measurements, etc.

 

[liliysdad]

Exactly.
Didnt want to say this, but these tests aren’t about ratchets, they are about getting clicks to see if a cheap Chinese ratchet can outperform Snap On.

It’s a perverse form of conspiracy theory paranoia, with a bit of David vs Goliath thrown in. ”can this $5 ratchet outperform a $200 ratchet? Let’s make up some test procedures and interpret the data to tell that story“

Agreed. I have never once watched one of his videos and considered the results anything but absolute silliness. As a matter of fact, I don't know that I have ever been able to sit through one of this videos in its entirety.

Torque Test Channel at least makes an effort to make sense.

 

[Bubba Fett]

Maybe I'm just a bottom feeder or something, but the DeWalt at just $24 honestly really impressed me.

If you ask me, the more force needed to change direction the better. That way maybe the damn thing won't be so likely to flip itself deep down in some darksome hole.

I have a 1/2" DeWalt socket set that I got for $30. While not the nicest, it certainly does the job. The sockets are well marked (stamped) and the ratchet is comfortable. It may not be as nice as a a ratchet that cost three times as much, but I wouldn't expect that. Good tools for the price, IMO.

 

[dnschmidt]

Who needs both hands to yank on a 3/8" long handle ratchet to bust loose a 25 year old crusty suspension bolt that lacks clearance for a 1/2" drive ratchet, and that's lived in the rust belt its entire life? Lotsa people.

Well, I no longer live in the rust belt (THANK GOD!) but it's almost physically impossible for somebody that's not a professional bodybuilder to achieve 270 ft-lb without using a four foot cheater bar. When my friend and I were rebuilding his 6.0 Powerstroke the cradle head bolt specifications were some ridiculous around 200 ft-lb number and with a three foot long torque wrench we could barely achieve it; All of these tools greatly exceeded the ASTM requirement for a 3/8” drive and the difference between almost all of them was like 10 ft-lb which is statistically insignificant. If the bolt is that tight you’re whipping out the blue wrench anyway.

 

[snickers muncher]

Also missing is real world usage. My 3/8” long flex is the first ratchet I grab for most non-interior jobs. Don't really need amazing back drag etc, but a knuckle with no slop, stiff enough to let me on, and high strength.

Reassembling, I almost always use a different ratchet, smaller, lighter, lower back drag if possible, don’t need high torque.

same here

 

[brandonsmash]

Olsa had a good showing. One of the things I note that he didn't test was the ability for the flex head to stay in position; I have a set of Protos and it's just a friction-set for the heads, and they're honestly not that great.

 

[F-22]

So what kind of tests would you perform that would be different than what PF has come up with?
I think he has demonstrated that S-O doesn’t have some mystical metallurgy that makes their ratchets much stronger than regualr store bought ratchets.
Tooth count may not matter as much partly based on handle design in tight confines.
Force for directional switch- you can decide how to interpret that as good or bad. You can see him operate them all and you may see some things you like and some things you dislike about design and placement along with force required to operate.
If you FF a all the way to the end and just look at the results then you’ve missed quite a bit of info. Directly comparing products side by side is informative and enlightening in many instances.

It's hard because cheap ratchets really are quite good. Differences start to show after some usage. And the advantages can be extremely subjective and case-dependant.


Point is, failure torque and force to flick over is just a waste of time to compare by. Yes "you can" decide by yourself, but the fact is that a lot of regular people decide based on his rankings.

And the force to flick over especially seems to be very pointless as his distance from the fulcrum was not consistent - but do you want it to be? Same mechanism will have different "required force" if one ratchet uses a slightly longer lever (or if he pushes slightly more to the edge).

 

[2ndGearRubber]

It's hard because cheap ratchets really are quite good. Differences start to show after some usage. And the advantages can be extremely subjective and case-dependant.


Point is, failure torque and force to flick over is just a waste of time to compare by. Yes "you can" decide by yourself, but the fact is that a lot of regular people decide based on his rankings.

And the force to flick over especially seems to be very pointless as his distance from the fulcrum was not consistent - but do you want it to be? Same mechanism will have different "required force" if one ratchet uses a slightly longer lever (or if he pushes slightly more to the edge).

Yeah, it's more about how they fail, and endurance to use. Snapping the heads is cool and all, but generally not expected use. That said, trying to quantify actual use reliability would be super hard to do.

 

[dnschmidt]

With ratchets, like golf clubs or tennis rackets, it's all about the feel. Technically, at this point in time, they all work but some feel better than others. Another example would be cordless impact wrenches. I prefer Milwaukee, not because they are any better than DeWalt, but because they fit my hands better. These arguments are similar to the Middle Ages debates on how many ferries can sit on the end of a pin. Snap-On sells a shitload of Dual 80's, well first because they're Snap-On, and secondly because they feel great in the hand. In short the better mouse trap has already been invented so it comes down to feel.

 

[Black300zx]

Failure load is cool to watch but totally pointless to rank by. Tightening the lug nuts of a car (~100Nm) is something a reasonable person would not use a 3/8" ratchet for, and all of them failed at nearly twice that torque.

I think in this case, the value of this "silly" test is to quite clearly prove that even cheap, run-of-the-mill flexheads are stout enough to lean into hard without worrying about breaking the flex joint. It of course also gives PF content to create a stir and generate views.

Or to say it differently, pretty much any name brand flex head is strong enough that you shouldn't make your buying decision based on strength. Make it based on availability, personal ergonomic preferences, ease of warranty, brand loyalty, or pretty much any other criteria.

 

[AEAdam]

So what kind of tests would you perform that would be different than what PF has come up with?
I think he has demonstrated that S-O doesn’t have some mystical metallurgy that makes their ratchets much stronger than regular store bought ratchets.

No, he hasn't done that at all. I suspect SO does indeed have special steel. Their steel could be twice as strong as someone else's (its not), but their section properties could be reduced so the tool wouldn't be twice as strong or even stronger. He weighed ratchets, but that isn't a great indicator.

Snap On's design approach can be characterized by least material possible. So they make a really strong wrench that also happens to be among the thinnest available. Wrenches and ratchets are also VERY long, again indicators of their confidence in their steel. They are industry leaders in that, For a better indicator of Snap On's steel quality, check the torque/thickness values TTC publishes.

Tooth count may not matter as much partly based on handle design in tight confines.
Force for directional switch- you can decide how to interpret that as good or bad. You can see him operate them all and you may see some things you like and some things you dislike about design and placement along with force required to operate.
If you FF a all the way to the end and just look at the results then you’ve missed quite a bit of info. Directly comparing products side by side is informative and enlightening in many instances.

Here's what I would do (and thanks for asking).
1) Interview pro mechanics and find out how they use their flex heads, find out what they like about them.
2) Using their points of view, review various ratchets using their criteria.

For example:
"I want a ratchet that doesn't let me down" Compare durability (could be tricky) Discuss difficulty rebuilding, obtaining rebuild kits, having a single rebuild kits for all ratchets in your box (as I have for example).

"I need this to access these water pump bolts on XXXX" Compare head heights widths, location of pivot (it matters), tool lengths etc

"I use this all day to remove stuff I can't get my gun on" Strength test, but I'd impose a minimum value they have to meet. Exceeding the reqt isn't really helpful and 295ftlbs vs 293ftlbs is meaningless and says nothing about quality to me.

I agree with the others who said, Asian manufacturing is improving and many previously **** tool manufacturers now make perfectly decent enough tools. Some better than that.

Here is where I typically come from on all these discussions:
I fix my cars because I like it and because it saves me a lot of money every year. The cost of repairs in my area is SO high, doing a job myself saves me enough cash to buy any brand of tool I want. Its not even close. Some people might want to use that savings for other things and that's fine.

Secondly, for ME, fixing cars is always challenging. I'm not looking to ADD to the challenge by buying the cheapest tools known to man. No thanks. I want the best, easiest to use hand tools I can get. So along these lines, as a DIYer, I'd add to my video:

• Handles I like and don't like (don't love Snap On hard handles and that's 90% of what I own)
• How I clean stuff
• How the extensions fit - if the heads rattle
• If the heads leak. Are their water tight? Do I have to rebuild after I drop one in the waste oil container?
• How the flex feels, if it holds its position, detents vs friction
• will repair kits be available in 5 years?
• Length versus speed. Are plastic handles lighter and easier to move fast? Its a moment of inertia thing we all experience- never heard it discussed. i generally want the smallest ratchet I can get away with when i can get away with it. When something is tight I want the LONGEST ratchet in the world. So I personally don't love normal sized ratchets. I use stubbies and my long flexes 90% of the time. Worth discussing in a video.

BUT: no one would watch my video because I don't have *****. If you want clicks on youtube, you need *****.

 

[dnschmidt]

Olsa had a good showing. One of the things I note that he didn't test was the ability for the flex head to stay in position; I have a set of Protos and it's just a friction-set for the heads, and they're honestly not that great.

This is exactly what I was referring to. I personally like a semi-floppy flex head as I hate detents which always click into place where I don't want them to be. You apparently don't. This is what I meant by when I said it's feel people are after. All the ratchets will do any job they are expected to do. It's which one feels right to you that matters.

 

[Firebrick43]

Yes, they will have a **** fit but this chart is worthless anyway. Who the hell torques a 3/8" ratchet to over 270 ft-lb? Also the difference between 295.2 and 292.0 is insignificant particularly when only one ratchet from each was tested. I love Project Farm but a lot of his tests are irrelevant in the real world picture.

Yesterday I broke some rusty hub mount bolts looses with an 18” ratchet and had most of my 250 lbs standing on them with one foot. Not all as I was holding on to the bumper to steady myself.

The 1/2” 24” ratchet/socket wouldn’t easily fit.

Not everyone lives in the desert

 

[Hohn]

Another good showing for GEARWRENCH.

It's PF's fault that I know own a couple of the 90Ts. They really are a heck of a value in ratchets. The combination of thin head, lack of slop, physical strength, low backdrag and reasonable price is just an absolute homerun.

That said, I'm not replacing all my Icons and Tektons with them because I'm happy with the all of them. I haven't had a truly horrible ratchet since my clapped out early 90s Craftsmans with the three-pie-slice directional change with built in thumbwheel. Maybe some folks remember those.

 

[Hohn]

Yesterday I broke some rusty hub mount bolts looses with an 18” ratchet and had most of my 250 lbs standing on them with one foot. Not all as I was holding on to the bumper to steady myself.

The 1/2” 24” ratchet/socket wouldn’t easily fit.

Not everyone lives in the desert

If need to borrow a breaker bar, just say so. I'm not far

 

[Hohn]

Who needs both hands to yank on a 3/8" long handle ratchet to bust loose a 25 year old crusty suspension bolt that lacks clearance for a 1/2" drive ratchet, and that's lived in the rust belt its entire life? Lotsa people.

Yeah, those of use who grew up the midwest wrenching on old rusted gear can't quite get it through to those who haven't.

Thankfully I'm starting to see things like 30" breakers in 1/2" drive and that's encouraging.

 

[Firebrick43]

If need to borrow a breaker bar, just say so. I'm not far

No need. Snap on ratchets have served me well for 20 years I have owned them. A breaker bar wouldn’t have worked either unless I would have used a 24” extension and crawled under the vehicle on the front two of the 4 bolts.

None of the guys I worked with used breaker bars either after getting long handle dual 80s.

Why waste money, storage, and time dealing with limitations of breaker bars if the ratchet is strong enough?

Cat commands such a large market share of the large engine market, some segments 80%, we didn’t have time to piddle with breaker bars like the guys down building QSK 50/60/95’s. We bought the best just like Cat customers do.

 

[jives]

I think in this case, the value of this "silly" test is to quite clearly prove that even cheap, run-of-the-mill flexheads are stout enough to lean into hard without worrying about breaking the flex joint. It of course also gives PF content to create a stir and generate views.

Or to say it differently, pretty much any name brand flex head is strong enough that you shouldn't make your buying decision based on strength. Make it based on availability, personal ergonomic preferences, ease of warranty, brand loyalty, or pretty much any other criteria.

This. At work I regularly use 3 different statistics programs, even though at least two of them can do nearly identical things. They just do them differently with different output formats. These programs cost from free to a $900/yr license. And real statisticians probably use even more. For many researchers, though, they may only use one program, and all they need to know is that the program works and produces correct outputs. What does that have to do with flex-head ratchets? In my shop I am the "one program" guy and I need to know that the one "cheap" ratchet will work reliably under all the stress and misuse I can throw at it. Yes, misuse. So, PF gives indication that even the cheapies can perform. I like that (but the lever switch force was kinda unimportant).

 

[Sparkland]

3 million subscribes must think he has something to offer.

 

[Dakotadadv8]

3 million subscribes must think he has something to offer.

or not much going on at home. Always wondered the intent of Op is he getting $ promoting PF.

 

[JeepYJ]

If the heads leak. Are their water tight? Do I have to rebuild after I drop one in the waste oil container?

Why would you need a rebuild if the ratchet fell into oil? That is lube.

will repair kits be available in 5 years?

Who cares if it has a lifetime warranty and you can replace the whole thing?

BUT: no one would watch my video because I don't have *****. If you want clicks on youtube, you need *****.

3 million subscribes must think he has something to offer.

PF a seems to get a lot of views with a nerdy guy talking really fast making home brewed tests for various tools, no ***** that I’ve seen on his channel.

 

[Mgdoug3]

I think he has demonstrated that S-O doesn’t have some mystical metallurgy that makes their ratchets much stronger than regualr store bought ratchets.

His tests don't prove or disprove Snap-on metallurgy is better than anyone else's. All his tests prove is that new ratchets can test as stronger or stronger than Snap-on. I'm more interested in longevity which is much harder to test. Perhaps Snap-on ratchets will have less wear on the gear and pawl after years due to better metallurgy. Less wear and tear will mean a stronger ratchet than competitors. Perhaps Snap-on is no better than GW and I'm overpaying for a ratchet.

At the end of the day, Project Farm is testing for views and I mostly like his videos. While I don't always agree with his methods or findings, they're informative for people who aren't professionals. I'll stick to buying ratchets off a truck because I know I'm getting a high quality ratchet and I like knowing how a ratchet feels before buying.

 

[teagueo]

About the strength testing - I would agree it's not the main selling point of a ratchet but more to show outliers. How a ratchet feels to use is more important to me. But there is a correlation between the ultimate failure strength and the fatigue strength (lower torque but for many more cycles).

An engineering "rule of thumb" is that the endurance limit (a stress at which failure will not occur no matter how many cycles) is about half of the ultimate failure strength (what PF tests, a single shot failure stress).

This goes for Steels - Aluminum doesn't really exhibit the same properties and isn't as predictable.



To keep it simple: if a ratchet anvil shears off at 100 ft-lbs of torque in a single go (brand new), it would theoretically have "infinite life" at a 50 ft-lbs stress level. There's much more to it, but it's a decent approximation.

 

[DerekV]

This test was a goofy one for sure, and I enjoy his videos far more often than not. It’s very simple, my biggest consideration in choosing a flex head ratchet is its ability to resist getting floppy over time as I am absolutely not a fan of detents for the same reasons Denny mentioned. Might not be everybody's top feature, but you have to admit it’s an obvious metric for any flex head tool. Off hand, I’m not sure how this would be tested especially in a condensed way that these videos command, but nevertheless he didn’t test for it, which basically made the video redundant at best, dare I say worthless if I’m being honest. There’s more to it than merely measuring deflection in the joint.

Snap On is exceptional in this category, truly a stand out, but you wouldn’t know that from his video.

Oh well, life goes on.

 

[F-22]

About the strength testing - I would agree it's not the main selling point of a ratchet but more to show outliers. How a ratchet feels to use is more important to me. But there is a correlation between the ultimate failure strength and the fatigue strength (lower torque but for many more cycles).

An engineering "rule of thumb" is that the endurance limit (a stress at which failure will not occur no matter how many cycles) is about half of the ultimate failure strength (what PF tests, a single shot failure stress).

This goes for Steels - Aluminum doesn't really exhibit the same properties and isn't as predictable.



To keep it simple: if a ratchet anvil shears off at 100 ft-lbs of torque in a single go (brand new), it would theoretically have "infinite life" at a 50 ft-lbs stress level. There's much more to it, but it's a decent approximation.

That's true, but even for the weakest one, half of its failure torque seemed to be more than what I'd ever use a 3/8" ratchet for.

Besides, if he tested the same ratchet 10 times there would stil likely be quite some spread on the failure force - especially with the cheaper ones.

 

[teagueo]

That's true, but even for the weakest one, half of its failure torque seemed to be more than what I'd ever use a 3/8" ratchet for.

Exactly. They are (or should) be designed to last nearly indefinitely at the normal usage torque range.

A well designed tool would also add a factor of safety added in for shock loading (applying torque in a jerky motion) and for torquing with an extension where the ratchet gear is side loaded, etc. So those higher failure torque numbers make some sense you account for real world usage.

Besides, if he tested the same ratchet 10 times there would stil likely be quite some spread on the failure force - especially with the cheaper ones.

There's probably a bit more variability in the cheaper ones but that's just my assumption.

 

[Farmall450]

USAG Dewalt

I ordered one (of course I did )