Pretty much pointless. Cranking on a hex fastener welded to a table to see if it breaks the ratchet is useless. Reef on any ratchet over and above the rated limits and it will break. I don't care what name is on it. How much force did he apply to either ratchet?
Grunting while bouncing on the handle is about as unscientific as it gets. He claims that the Carlyle held up whereas the Snap-On failed, with absolutely no empirical data to back that up: just his opinion and some grunting. Purely anecdotal. Thus meaning that the quantity of force exerted on either ratchet was not measured. Therefore there is no way to even remotely compare apples to oranges.
His postulation is based purely on observation of a sampling of both ratchets that is at a bare minimum: one of each. Had he repeated the test multiple times with multiple ratchets while measuring force exerted, then there might some basis to make a claim of better performance characteristics.
Add to that the fact that the Carlyle ratchet tested was 'used' versus the new Snap-On ratchet, and that he was the one using it, introduced a bias into the testing.
Even better he goes on to 'vouch' for the Carlyle ratchet after he bends the shank using a cheater bar. Brilliant
I will not lay a claim to which is the better ratchet, nor will I start the COO war for the one-bazillionth time on the forum. I have one of the two ratchets in my toolbox and I couldn't be happier with it.
Oh yeah... I edited this after thinking about if for a couple of hours.
--