Car Craft has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

SMKS · May 8, 2013

Car Craft has finally posted their recent torque wrench test on their website.

It was in the magazine that came out a couple months ago, but now it's on the website, too. It's an interesting read.

http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/ccrp_1304_torque_wrench_testing/

rockchucker · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

Good read. One reason why all of my Torque Wrenches are zero'd out after every use and for storage.

George in Rancho Cordova · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

Anyone notice that HF seems to always have good results?
Who advertises heavily in the magazine?

hungerc · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

Saw that article when it came out in Car Craft. Had good information. To George in Rancho's comment: All the magazines "use" their advertiser's products. The results are what they are!! Car Craft and other like magazines have not been around for 50-60 years by being biased toward advertisers with bad product. At Harbor Freight, or anyplace else, you get what you pay for. Sometimes a new idea is not more expensive, just better.

biscuit141 · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

That HF torque adaptor is interesting and may serve well for most of my torque ing applications. Might have to get one.

wrh3 · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

I just ordered a few, they are on sale and the 20% off coupon can be used as well.

SMKS · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

biscuit141 said:
That HF torque adaptor is interesting and may serve well for most of my torque ing applications. Might have to get one.

It's an interesting device. I mainly use it for checking torque wrenches, but that alone is worth the price to me.

It is bulkier than a normal torque wrench, though, so it won't fit in a lot of places if you're torquing things under a hood or in the suspension.

I posted pics/info about it in this thread:
http://www.garagejournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=158822

mmack66 · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

George in Rancho Cordova said:
Anyone notice that HF seems to always have good results?
Who advertises heavily in the magazine?

That's because they are decent torque wrenches, as has been discussed several times. :dunno:

justanengineer · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

Not trying to start an argument, but Im not convinced for the same reason that 50%+ of the reviews on here dont convince me. Simply stated, reviewing a new, or like new tool (several months old = like new) is rather pointless IMHO. Even torque wrenches age due to use and the environment, so Id like to see a comparison done using 10 year old torque wrenches that werent babied but regularly used their entire lives.

If anybody is nearby and would like to volunteer their tools and join me for a brew or two, I am in the early stages of working with our instrument maker/repair guy to restore my CDI torque tester and may be convinced to do a truly unbiased public test once its finished. Admittedly, it will probably take awhile as Im rather deep in projects atm, but its something to think about.

Lurch67 · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

Is it me, but do they compare any torque wrenches except for harbor freight? Not much of a comparison.

Loscaldazar · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

Might pick up the torque adapter too now!

I can verify the clicker type accuracy with an in home test. Mine was nearly as accurate as the test done above, but I still got good numbers for the HF (5% error).

Stuart in MN · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

Lurch67 said:
Is it me, but do they compare any torque wrenches except for harbor freight? Not much of a comparison.

They also tested a Craftsman and a Snap-On.

Givl Reggin · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

hungerc said:
All the magazines "use" their advertiser's products. The results are what they are!! Car Craft and other like magazines have not been around for 50-60 years by being biased toward advertisers with bad product.

I would sure like to hear that from the publisher.

mmack66 · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

justanengineer said:
Not trying to start an argument, but Im not convinced for the same reason that 50%+ of the reviews on here dont convince me. Simply stated, reviewing a new, or like new tool (several months old = like new) is rather pointless IMHO. Even torque wrenches age due to use and the environment, so Id like to see a comparison done using 10 year old torque wrenches that werent babied but regularly used their entire lives.

If anybody is nearby and would like to volunteer their tools and join me for a brew or two, I am in the early stages of working with our instrument maker/repair guy to restore my CDI torque tester and may be convinced to do a truly unbiased public test once its finished. Admittedly, it will probably take awhile as Im rather deep in projects atm, but its something to think about.

It would be nearly impossible to have an objective test of a bunch of random torque wrenches of some indeterminate age.

Heck, you could buy a new HF torque wrench every year and still be way ahead than you would had you purchased a Snap-On torque wrench, though if you are doing work that requires precision torquing, you probably aren't using a clicker torque wrench in the first place.

DirtRoad · May 8, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

mmack66 said:
It would be nearly impossible to have an objective test of a bunch of random torque wrenches of some indeterminate age.

Heck, you could buy a new HF torque wrench every year and still be way ahead than you would had you purchased a Snap-On torque wrench, though if you are doing work that requires precision torquing, you probably aren't using a clicker torque wrench in the first place.

Exactly, testing a bunch of torque wrenches with unknown age, unknown use, unknown abuse and unknown storage practices would be stupid, it would be a total cluster fu.....

The only way to truly test would be if they where all brand new and all subjected the the exact same testing and use.

No engineer would suggest any other way.

justanengineer · May 9, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

DirtRoad said:
Exactly, testing a bunch of torque wrenches with unknown age, unknown use, unknown abuse and unknown storage practices would be stupid, it would be a total cluster fu.....

The only way to truly test would be if they where all brand new and all subjected the the exact same testing and use.

No engineer would suggest any other way.

By that logic my neighbor's new box store "tin tractor" mower is very comparable to my 35 year old Cub Cadet on a quality basis. After all, performance-wise they would test about the same now (performance of mine hasnt changed in decades). Nevermind the fact that his tractor will have a life-span of maybe 10 years while mine has gone 35 already. Given a few years, I doubt his will be able to keep up with mine.

Realistically, I doubt it would be difficult to find torque wrenches that saw very similar usage but were different brands and were bought within a year or so of each other. Many shops see similar workloads, larger ones have many techs doing very similar work, and there are very similar storage/treatment habits amongst techs (which is why sharing tools isnt as huge of a deal as it would be amongst the general public). I bet if I asked around the tool room, gage shop, and techs on the floor at work I could probably come up with 2-3 brands in similar conditions with similar age by myself.

Sorry if you fellas find it pointless, but IMHO its a more relevant test than the one conducted by the rag.

mmack66 · May 9, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

justanengineer said:
By that logic my neighbor's new box store "tin tractor" mower is very comparable to my 35 year old Cub Cadet on a quality basis. After all, performance-wise they would test about the same now (performance of mine hasnt changed in decades). Nevermind the fact that his tractor will have a life-span of maybe 10 years while mine has gone 35 already. Given a few years, I doubt his will be able to keep up with mine.

Realistically, I doubt it would be difficult to find torque wrenches that saw very similar usage but were different brands and were bought within a year or so of each other. Many shops see similar workloads, larger ones have many techs doing very similar work, and there are very similar storage/treatment habits amongst techs (which is why sharing tools isnt as huge of a deal as it would be amongst the general public). I bet if I asked around the tool room, gage shop, and techs on the floor at work I could probably come up with 2-3 brands in similar conditions with similar age by myself.

Sorry if you fellas find it pointless, but IMHO its a more relevant test than the one conducted by the rag.

But what would it prove? If someone is still using a $20 torque wrench ten years later, and it checks out okay, it doesn't do $300 torque wrench Snap-On guy any good to know that. If it doesn't, well that doesn't prove anything either.

Will these torque wrenches ever have been calibrated during that ten years?

oldtools · May 9, 2013

So why are people spending $300 for a SO. I might get the adapter torque wrench to check my clickers.

cgv69 · May 9, 2013

justanengineer - There are way too many issues with what you propose. Do you really think a brand new cub cadet is made as well as your 35yo model? Do you think that all cub cadets made 35 years ago have been just as reliable and are in the same condition as yours?

1. The problem with all tool tests is generally they only test 1 sample of each model from each manufacture. Sample sizes of one are always potentially misleading because regardless of how that one sample performs, you can not automatically assume all other samples of the same model perform exactly the same. There is a real possibility that test sample is above or below average?

2. The only way you can test and get any meaningful results of tools past a certain age\usage amount would be to buy them all new and run the exact same test, on the exact same schedule over the entire span of the testing period (and even then you have the same issue re; sample size). There is no way you can get any sort of reliable or trustworthy data testing tools that have no been subjected to the same exact work load, maintenance schedule, care, handling, storage, environment, etc. There are just too many variables that can effect a products long term performance and without controlling those variables, any sort of heads up testing would be meaningless.

3. Lastly, lets assume someone spent the time and money to buy 10 examples of the same model from 5 different manufactures. They keep all examples in the same environment and subject them to the same exact work load on the same exact schedule over the course of 10 years. In the end they tabulate all of the data which results in a clear winner. My question then is, so what? What use is that information?

Chances are you will not be able to buy those exact same models anymore. Even if that manufacture still lists that model, you can not assume it is made exactly like the ones in your test group made 10 years earlier. Manufactures are constantly tweaking their models. Different materials, difference sources for parts and materials. changes to the design. Changes to the manufacturing process and all of those change can effect a products performance or reliability.

So as flawed as most tool tests are, from a practical standpoint they are typically about as good as we are going to get. Do your own research, look around, educate your self and then roll the dice. That's any of us can do.

Spudland_Dave · May 9, 2013

What stops HF From Cherry Picking and testing/calibrating the Torque wrench prior to handing it off to CarCraft?

One big issue i've had with HF items is the 50% failure rate right out of the box. If that was a torque wrench, how would I know it was bad? Its not like the $5.99 Air hammer I got...which was easy to see it didnt work.

oldtools · May 9, 2013

Spudland_Dave said:
What stops HF From Cherry Picking and testing/calibrating the Torque wrench prior to handing it off to CarCraft?

One big issue i've had with HF items is the 50% failure rate right out of the box. If that was a torque wrench, how would I know it was bad? Its not like the $5.99 Air hammer I got...which was easy to see it didnt work.

Every torque wrench is calibrated before selling to consumer. There is a quality stamp on the wrench. You can buy the digital torque adapter to test HF clicker before using it. There is a GJ thread where it show SO has a higher failure rate (out of calibration) than other brands including HF.

justanengineer · May 9, 2013

mmack66 said:
But what would it prove?
Will these torque wrenches ever have been calibrated during that ten years?

Testing like Im proposing would give each torque wrench owner an idea of when to expect problems. Realistically, a hobbyist isnt going to send his torque wrench off to be cal'ed every six months or a year like a professional, so to them being able to know that one wrench might go 5 years and still be within 5% accuracy vs lasting 30 (admitted extreme possibility but you never know) for another, its invaluable when youre buying.

cgv69 said:
justanengineer - There are way too many issues with what you propose.

1. The problem with all tool tests is generally they only test 1 sample of each model from each manufacture.
2. The only way you can test and get any meaningful results of tools past a certain age\usage amount would be to buy them all new and run the exact same test, on the exact same schedule over the entire span of the testing period
3. My question then is, so what? What use is that information?

Chances are you will not be able to buy those exact same models anymore. So as flawed as most tool tests are, from a practical standpoint they are typically about as good as we are going to get.

Youre very correct about sample size. Both mine and the magazine's are flawed in that respect. Regarding ensuring everything is "equal," Im not sure Id agree. In a perfect world youd run this in a lab with similar constraints, but in product development while we do lab testing, we also regularly go back and review a (admittedly large) sample population to see product life and durability. As far as the usefulness of the info, to me its about durability and repeatability. As I mentioned above, hobbyists arent going to cal their torque wrenches much, if ever, so if there is a decent assurance of one wrench failing inside of a year vs others lasting forever....for me its a no-brainer simply for peace of mind when Im building a $10k hot rod engine with that tool.

Realistically, my test is far from perfect but frankly its much better than the way these other tests are conducted. Who really cares about the accuracy or repeatability of two tools that are fresh out of the manufacturer's cal shop? That doesnt tell you diddly about the quality or life span/durability of a tool, all it does is suggest the manufacturer assembled it correctly. Not sure about you guys, but my standards for tools go beyond simply "does it work for 5 mins?"

oilfieldtrash4 · May 9, 2013

justanengineer said:
Testing like Im proposing would give each torque wrench owner an idea of when to expect problems. Realistically, a hobbyist isnt going to send his torque wrench off to be cal'ed every six months or a year like a professional, so to them being able to know that one wrench might go 5 years and still be within 5% accuracy vs lasting 30 (admitted extreme possibility but you never know) for another, its invaluable when youre buying.

Youre very correct about sample size. Both mine and the magazine's are flawed in that respect. Regarding ensuring everything is "equal," Im not sure Id agree. In a perfect world youd run this in a lab with similar constraints, but in product development while we do lab testing, we also regularly go back and review a (admittedly large) sample population to see product life and durability. As far as the usefulness of the info, to me its about durability and repeatability. As I mentioned above, hobbyists arent going to cal their torque wrenches much, if ever, so if there is a decent assurance of one wrench failing inside of a year vs others lasting forever....for me its a no-brainer simply for peace of mind when Im building a $10k hot rod engine with that tool.

Realistically, my test is far from perfect but frankly its much better than the way these other tests are conducted. Who really cares about the accuracy or repeatability of two tools that are fresh out of the manufacturer's cal shop? That doesnt tell you diddly about the quality or life span/durability of a tool, all it does is suggest the manufacturer assembled it correctly. Not sure about you guys, but my standards for tools go beyond simply "does it work for 5 mins?"

So what scientific standard are you using to determine which torque wrenches you "won't build a 10k engine with"? Is it price, name brand, etc..?

TangoFoxTrot · May 9, 2013

It honestly doesn't surprise me that a Harbor Freight torque wrench does well.

How long has this technology been around? Have you seen the inside of a torque wrench? It's not exactly cutting edge, it's mainly a big spring. It really seems to piss people off that it's actually an accurate torque wrench for a really cheap price.

I have a CDI model that I prefer (the same one Snap On slaps their label on and almost doubles in price) but I also have the Harbor Freight model and it's been great. I definitely recommend it for the type of DIY guy that probably would normally not use a torque wrench at all.

Hiball · May 9, 2013

TangoFoxTrot said:
It honestly doesn't surprise me that a Harbor Freight torque wrench does well.

How long has this technology been around? Have you seen the inside of a torque wrench? It's not exactly cutting edge, it's mainly a big spring. It really seems to piss people off that it's actually an accurate torque wrench for a really cheap price.

I have a CDI model that I prefer (the same one Snap On slaps their label on and almost doubles in price) but I also have the Harbor Freight model and it's been great. I definitely recommend it for the type of DIY guy that probably would normally not use a torque wrench at all.

Absolutely.. If the DIY guy doesnt have a Torque Wrench, The HF is a Great Option.. Its Not Hard to make a Torque Wrench Accurate out of the Box, Making one that will be Accurate over Multiple cycles over a Various of different Torque Settings is a suspect a different story.

Kracin · May 9, 2013

justanengineer said:
Testing like Im proposing would give each torque wrench owner an idea of when to expect problems. Realistically, a hobbyist isnt going to send his torque wrench off to be cal'ed every six months or a year like a professional, so to them being able to know that one wrench might go 5 years and still be within 5% accuracy vs lasting 30 (admitted extreme possibility but you never know) for another, its invaluable when youre buying.

Youre very correct about sample size. Both mine and the magazine's are flawed in that respect. Regarding ensuring everything is "equal," Im not sure Id agree. In a perfect world youd run this in a lab with similar constraints, but in product development while we do lab testing, we also regularly go back and review a (admittedly large) sample population to see product life and durability. As far as the usefulness of the info, to me its about durability and repeatability. As I mentioned above, hobbyists arent going to cal their torque wrenches much, if ever, so if there is a decent assurance of one wrench failing inside of a year vs others lasting forever....for me its a no-brainer simply for peace of mind when Im building a $10k hot rod engine with that tool.

Realistically, my test is far from perfect but frankly its much better than the way these other tests are conducted. Who really cares about the accuracy or repeatability of two tools that are fresh out of the manufacturer's cal shop? That doesnt tell you diddly about the quality or life span/durability of a tool, all it does is suggest the manufacturer assembled it correctly. Not sure about you guys, but my standards for tools go beyond simply "does it work for 5 mins?"

aside from wanting to spend less than 50 bucks on a torque wrench that you want to last for 30 years of continuous use without being recalibrated...

it isn't hard for anyone, anyone at all to calibrate their torque wrench, and see how accurate it still is. in fact, it's easier in some cases to have the cheaper wrench, because you save a ton of cash in the long run from calibrations because you don't need special tools to do it, you can adjust it yourself without tearing it apart. or needing a special tool.

in fact, even now, if somebody doesn't even want to do the math to figure out how accurate their torque wrench is, then they can just buy a digital torque adapter and calibrate it with that.

a tool is a tool, spending more does not mean you get more. a piece of mind that has been bought instead of thought over logically is good enough for the people who prefer a brand over function. that's all there is to it.

as much as you wish it was, it's not rocket science.

Hiball · May 9, 2013

Kracin said:
as much as you wish it was, it's not rocket science.

Hell Yeah... Nothing too it... Head on down to your local Hardware pickup a handful of Springs and your set.. We dont need to worry about things such as Fatigue strength, elastic Limits and such...

How much start up Capital do you think we will need? Im Pumped... Watch out PI your going down... Your Headstone is gonna read 1938-2013 after me and Kracin get done with you.

:lol_hitti

oilfieldtrash4 · May 9, 2013

Hiball said:
Hell Yeah... Nothing too it... Head on down to your local Hardware pickup a handful of Springs and your set.. We dont need to worry about things such as Fatigue strength, elastic Limits and such...

How much start up Capital do you think we will need? Im Pumped... Watch out PI your going down... Your Headstone is gonna read 1938-2013 after me and Kracin get done with you.

And you have no scientific evidence that the high dollar torque sticks are using the proper metallurgy to get the desired results vs what the HF torque stick is doing. You are ASSuming they are because of the higher price tag. Until you tear down several samples of each torque stick and have a metallurgist run tests on them then you are ASSuming quite a bit.

RCStocker · May 9, 2013

Re: Car Crafts has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

justanengineer said:
Not trying to start an argument, but Im not convinced for the same reason that 50%+ of the reviews on here dont convince me. Simply stated, reviewing a new, or like new tool (several months old = like new) is rather pointless IMHO. Even torque wrenches age due to use and the environment, so Id like to see a comparison done using 10 year old torque wrenches that werent babied but regularly used their entire lives.

If anybody is nearby and would like to volunteer their tools and join me for a brew or two, I am in the early stages of working with our instrument maker/repair guy to restore my CDI torque tester and may be convinced to do a truly unbiased public test once its finished. Admittedly, it will probably take awhile as Im rather deep in projects atm, but its something to think about.

You can test all the old ones you want but that will not change the test results on the new ones.

Hiball · May 9, 2013

oilfieldtrash4 said:
And you have no scientific evidence that the high dollar torque sticks are using the proper metallurgy to get the desired results vs what the HF torque stick is doing. You are ASSuming they are because of the higher price tag. Until you tear down several samples of each torque stick and have a metallurgist run tests on them then you are ASSuming quite a bit.

Yeah I know it's crazy for me to think that a company could stay in business for 75 years and specialize only in torque and not know a thing about the components required to claim there TW's are good for 60000 cycles.

Kracin · May 9, 2013

Hiball said:
Yeah I know it's crazy for me to think that a company could stay in business for 75 years and specialize only in torque and not know a thing about the components required to claim there TW's are good for 60000 cycles.

ok, still assuming. maybe you could back up everything you say with solid information because just plain claiming that high price = better, is a whole lot of funny

apparently, a high dollar torque wrench is so good, it's springs never wear, its handles never get loose, and the ratchet mechanism never breaks. ever.

so why the hell do they even bother calibrating them or even offering a calibration service if they are so damn good? who knows right :LOLOLOL

Hiball · May 9, 2013

Kracin said:
ok, still assuming. maybe you could back up everything you say with solid information because just plain claiming that high price = better, is a whole lot of funny

apparently, a high dollar torque wrench is so good, it's springs never wear, its handles never get loose, and the ratchet mechanism never breaks. ever.

so why the hell do they even bother calibrating them or even offering a calibration service if they are so damn good? who knows right :LOLOLOL

Please quote where I said price = better.. Now you funny too.

All calibration needs calibration service from time to time, that service is gonna vary from piece to piece.

Kracin · May 9, 2013

Hiball said:
Please quote where I said price = better.. Now you funny too.

All calibration needs calibration service from time to time, that service is gonna vary from piece to piece.

doesn't take an english major to see what you did here.

oilfieldtrash4 said:
And you have no scientific evidence that the high dollar torque sticks are using the proper metallurgy to get the desired results vs what the HF torque stick is doing. You are ASSuming they are because of the higher price tag. Until you tear down several samples of each torque stick and have a metallurgist run tests on them then you are ASSuming quite a bit.

Hiball said:
Yeah I know it's crazy for me to think that a company could stay in business for 75 years and specialize only in torque and not know a thing about the components required to claim there TW's are good for 60000 cycles.

besides, it's not like you took the wrenches apart and looked to see if they even buy the same parts or not. it's pretty funny to see the price difference on things, and then see the similarities and see the same parts in both of them, yet the price tag is way different because one can put a huge markup on it because of a brand name, and the other makes their dollar through sheer volume, but both pay near the same for parts.

still no scientific evidence, just a quote and some text, nothing to back it up.

TangoFoxTrot · May 9, 2013

Hiball said:
Absolutely.. If the DIY guy doesnt have a Torque Wrench, The HF is a Great Option.. Its Not Hard to make a Torque Wrench Accurate out of the Box, Making one that will be Accurate over Multiple cycles over a Various of different Torque Settings is a suspect a different story.

And even the most expensive ones... still have to be regularly calibrated.

Hiball · May 9, 2013

Kracin said:
doesn't take an english major to see what you did here.

besides, it's not like you took the wrenches apart and looked to see if they even buy the same parts or not. it's pretty funny to see the price difference on things, and then see the similarities and see the same parts in both of them, yet the price tag is way different because one can put a huge markup on it because of a brand name, and the other makes their dollar through sheer volume, but both pay near the same for parts.

still no scientific evidence, just a quote and some text, nothing to back it up.

I've been around tools long enough to know the "copy cat" tendancies that come from overseas.. I don't doubt the Torque test.. I've read lots of positives about the wrench itself. My only question/concern would be the longevity test.. Use the torque wrench on various settings/reset/storage rinse and repeat over a period of time. Of course none of that matters to anyone here, that's only my concern and a concern I remedy by purchasing from manufacturers who soley deal with torque. That doesn't mean my way of thinking is best, it only means that is the option I choose.

Hiball · May 9, 2013

TangoFoxTrot said:
And even the most expensive ones... still have to be regularly calibrated.

Your behind, catch up post #34

Hiball · May 9, 2013

ducksface said:
Pizza is pizza, torque is torque.
You master the manufacturing process or you don't. No secret to a torque wrench.

And yes, it might be crazy for you to think that. Or gullible for you to think that, or correct for you to think that.

Some here cannot afford a $300 torque wrench and must make do with a lesser in price. I have a set of 12 surgical wrenches that cost $3500. Does that now make you a mooch or stupid for not having them?

My consumer needs/wants/reasoning are soley Mine... Any opinions formed by me for the reasoning on why I purchase brand A versus B is no ones business by mine. If you desired/needed surgical wrenches why would that bother me? Let alone make me or anyone else feel stupid?

rlitman · May 9, 2013

TangoFoxTrot said:
And even the most expensive ones... still have to be regularly calibrated.

Well, here's the catch. Micrometer torque wrenches creep out of calibration when the spring is stored compressed.

My Stahlwille Manoskop, and Snap On torque wrenches (one "split beam" clicker and another torque meter) do not have to be re-zeroed after each use.

Will they require re-calibration less often than a properly kept micrometer torque wrench that has been re-zeroed after each operation. Perhaps not, but it sure is more convenient to not have to back out the micrometer all the time.

So, yes, you can spend more and get a better product. But if I were going to spend my money on a MICROMETER torque wrench today, it would be on an HF (I happen to own a bunch BTW, all of which were $10 with coupons).

Oh, and a micrometer torque wrench does not reliably torque left handed threads. My torque-meter and Manoskop can.

justanengineer · May 9, 2013

oldtools said:
Every torque wrench is calibrated before selling to consumer. There is a quality stamp on the wrench.

Ive actually wondered about that at times. Not that Ive looked in a few years, but Ive never seen a stamp or sticker on the HF torque wrenches. What Ive seen is a small "certificate of calibration" which doesnt say anything about standards it was calibrated to, much less list multiple individual readings recorded by that exact wrench. Maybe thats changed since I last looked at them but I dunno.

Kracin said:
aside from wanting to spend less than 50 bucks on a torque wrench that you want to last for 30 years of continuous use without being recalibrated...

it isn't hard for anyone, anyone at all to calibrate their torque wrench, and see how accurate it still is.

Kracin said:
so why the hell do they even bother calibrating them or even offering a calibration service if they are so damn good? who knows right

The reason for calibration many times isnt bc the tool needs adjustment, its simple accuracy verification so you can trust the tool and pros can qualify their work to meet a standard. In a past lifetime I ran a large shop's toolroom and its associated cal schedule. Year round I took a half dozen items or more in each week, and ~60% of the time nothing needed adjustment, but those were truck branded toolls in a busy shop with a ton of specialty tools and some were used constantly while others used rarely.

Could I verify the torque measurement of my wrenches accurately at home without a torque tester? I suppose anything is possible, but not sure Id want to piss around with trying to get within 5% on a 1/4" dr in-oz wrench, which is why Im cleaning up the torque tester. Once thats done, it will be cal'ed every year or two and my torque wrenches will be cal'ed off that. I supposed I could try one of those torque adapters, but Im not sure Id trust that to remain accurate any longer than a wrench from the same store.

As far as getting a cheap accurate torque wrench is concerned, my go to torque wrench is a SO dial Torqometer that is ~60 years old. Ive had it for quite a few years and had it calibrated several times using it professionally but its never been adjusted and always passed certification. Its been out of cal since 09 but I still trust it based on proven history. Could I trust a new cheapie for years on end? Maybe, maybe not. That was what I was trying to suggest testing.

DrunkSmurf · May 9, 2013

I have a couple of the HF models that have been laying around for a couple years that I've randomly used on minor things.

I recently did some front end work on my Jimmy, ball joints & new hubs etc. When I took it in for alignment, I asked the guy if he would double check all of it for me with his Snap-On torque wrench because I didn't have a lot of confidence in the HF unit.
I was somewhat surprised when he told me they were all spot on.

This is by no means scientific proof IMO, and I still would be afraid to use one on something like a high dollar engine rebuild etc.
I just thought I'd throw it out there...lol

Car Craft has posted their recent torque wrench test on their website

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Banned

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member