Tool design revisions - cutting manufacturing costs?

[YesIHaveAHammer]

Couple of things I spotted recently. What else have you spotted? How would certain changes reduce the manufacturing cost?

Exhibit A - Crescent indexing flat pry bar (DB18X, or in recent years updated DB18X-06)
The original has a hex stock shaft, terminating in a single tongue which fits into a Y on the the claw part. The newer has a round shaft and the arrangement is reversed - now the single tongue is on the claw, and the molded/cast Y is on the shaft. Not sure if the shaft diameter remains the same but if it is, round would be more metal, but I expect there's also some differences in how they're formed. This finish has also changed from a rough looking grey, to painted black. The edges of the claw part are no longer as sharp.


Exhibit B - Snap-on rigid carbon scraper CSA8C (model number unchanged)
The gradual taper from shaft to the blade area is gone, now much more abrupt. Reducing the cost of grinding, or a strength improvement? The older shape was also present on the now-discontinued SGCSA8 (left in 3rd image, credit to Last Best Tool for covering this).


Exhibit C - Hazet bit set 2240N/36
The finish has changed from a dark grey to a bright silver. The shafts now have a round section which accommodates a coloured size ring. Best case scenario this is all simply cosmetic because people like shiny colourful things.


Exhibit D - Milwaukee M18 Surge 2760-20 (model number unchanged, serial H16A vs H16B)
So this is more complex but thought it worth mentioning, reports here that newer ones are less powerful and less reliable.

 

[RoninB4]

-In

 

[HannibalLecter]

Some revisions are for the worse, some are for improvement. The best ones are the ones that fulfil both. An electric tool for example if made simpler (not at expense of functionality) will be more reliable. However making a gearbox housing plastic is not one of them. Someone ***** from the executive department asked the engineer what could would be the outcome regarding fatigue and longevity, the engineer response was it will be severed by 2/3 and the executive morons went for it

 

[YesIHaveAHammer]

Milwaukee again. 2767-20 impact H96B problems https://toolguyd.com/milwaukees-m18-fuel-2767-impact-wrench-probems/

Replaced a planetary gear cage with some pins, and removed one bearing.

That article is from Oct 2022 when it was resolved by withdrawing the updated version. Yet the date on the M18 Surge update bulleting I linked is May 2023, so I guess they weren't put off.

 

[YesIHaveAHammer]

Not sure if the shaft diameter remains the same but if it is, round would be more metal, but I expect there's also some differences in how they're formed.

Trying to answer my own question... hex stock would be rolled, whereas the new version would be molten steel poured into a mould - making a weaker product.

 

[neophyte]

Trying to answer my own question... hex stock would be rolled, whereas the new version would be molten steel poured into a mould - making a weaker product.

No competent manufacturer is casting a pry bar, and while people may hate the offshoring, the current Crescent items are sometimes just as good as the older USA made tools.
I gorget the name, but there was actually an individual with a number of Patents that were assigned to Crescent/Apex, but who also had Patents assigned to some other manufacturers.
At least one or more of the Patents were for Pry Bars, although I forget whether the Patents were for the indexing head design.
It’s possible the old Patent ran out, and Apex os trying to avoid paying continued licensing fees, or maybe they came up with an “improvement” to the design, which was more recently Patented.
As far as pry bar tip sharpness goes, numerous manufacturers have gotten lazier on the grinding, and are making blunter pry bars.
Stanley is fairly bad on the sharp tip issue, but their Wonder Bars are fairly cheap.

 

[MushCreek]

Engineering questions:
If it breaks, what can we make stronger?
If it doesn't break, what can we make weaker?

 

[bdbecker]

Engineering questions:
If it breaks, what can we make stronger?
If it doesn't break, what can we make weaker?

In this case, I'd say "if it doesn't break, can we make it cheaper"

Reminds me of what the president of our Formula SAE club in college used to say... "the wheels should fall off the race car right after it crosses the finish line, otherwise it was overbuilt". The team always struggled to make a lightweight car. Obviously we wanted it to be more durable than that, but the point was that we needed to be comfortable pushing the limits. A tough ask for a bunch of farm kids in engineering school, but it worked that season - it was the first car in recent history we actually had to add weight to in order to meet the minimum, and it made it through competition without failure.

 

[YesIHaveAHammer]

In this case, I'd say "if it doesn't break, can we make it cheaper"

Turns out that in the case of the Crescent pry bar, that was by changing supplier and with that country. I still can't say whether the design change makes it cheaper to produce, or is it just incidental, or to avoid patents.

The original DB18X is a GearJaw Wrecking Bar by Tonsco of Taiwan. They make all their tools there, since 1978, and have many patents worldwide. You can buy the square shaft variant of this as the QUINN 18 In. Indexable Wrecking Bar at Harbor Freight.

The updated DB18X-06 is a "Product of Vietnam, finished in China". Photo from a review on Crescent's product page.

 

[Astro_Pneumatic_Tools]

Expect to see a massive, unholy, unfathomably large, untrack-able in number amount of examples of this sort of thing across every industry right now due to mainly switching countries of origin at a rapid pace to avoid the ever yo-yoing levels of tariffs and even cost to manufacture in the US due to raw materials tariffs as well. I can't think of any yet under Astro, possibly eventually a couple undercar kits due to heavy metal parts, but we have customers who are daily switching COO with less oversight than prudent. Daily.

 

[merkyworks]

Engineering questions:
If it breaks, what can we make stronger?
If it doesn't break, what can we make weaker?

More like CEO/President questions:
Bottom line needs to be better so I get my bonus. Order Engineers to redesign so it cost less to make. If it breaks sooner who cares, just means customer has to buy another and I get more money.

 

[wolfinator]

Expect to see a massive, unholy, unfathomably large, untrack-able in number amount of examples of this sort of thing across every industry right now due to mainly switching countries of origin at a rapid pace to avoid the ever yo-yoing levels of tariffs and even cost to manufacture in the US due to raw materials tariffs as well. I can't think of any yet under Astro, possibly eventually a couple undercar kits due to heavy metal parts, but we have customers who are daily switching COO with less oversight than prudent. Daily

That's pretty bad, but its going to coincide with rolling waves of ~2021-2022 like inflation. It's a similar supply shock (although totally artificially induced this time). Higher prices, worse quality. Stock up on the stuff in inventory now if it's important!