120XP under rated
- Thread starter bsaint
- Start date
It's hilarious how much debate this engenders. The 120XP was made to fight in the tooth count war. I suspect it was also made to be cheaper to manufacture than the 84t. That's how Apex rolls. They have private equity overlords that need to be sated.
It isn't underrated, it just isn't as good as the 84t. Most people prefer new products to be improvements on the old design instead of a step backwards.
It is however one of a huge variety of cheap import ratchets. If you get a good deal on one and like it, more power to you. They will almost assuredly turn fasteners.
Personally I will continue to hate Apex, they've ruined more American brands than SBD, which is an impressive track record.
It isn't underrated, it just isn't as good as the 84t. Most people prefer new products to be improvements on the old design instead of a step backwards.
It is however one of a huge variety of cheap import ratchets. If you get a good deal on one and like it, more power to you. They will almost assuredly turn fasteners.
Personally I will continue to hate Apex, they've ruined more American brands than SBD, which is an impressive track record.
toddmorr
Well-known member
sure, have done it with several of my ratchets, but not with the 120 cause i don't own one. Easy to do, just start with a couple turns of the spring, re-install and see how it feels. Trim more than say 4 turns and you'll run into trouble with a spring that is now too short, likely.
of course, no trimming necessary when using the king of low-back drag Mr. Koken.
I'm a bit awash in poison these days - the last year has seen a lot of new ratchets as I've been doing a lot more work lately around the house and especially on my cars - a great excuse for new tools! Anyway, my job is competitive analysis and technical marketing about things like engineering, quality and usability, and I tend to dive into things that interest me like this.
Net: I over-analyze things (at least it pays the bills
) - apologies in advance for a mega-post.I fundamentally reject any argument based on taking a brand-new product and having to mod it for behavior considered negative to most people, in this case backdrag. I find it really odd that some people say they have it and some don't in the same product. Maybe it's manufacturing variance, maybe people are using it in different ways where backdrag isn't a problem or maybe people don't always recognize it for what it is (I didn't as recently as a couple years ago). Possibly all of those things are in play. I have to think if the manufacturer noticed/knew you modified the tool to "fix" it, they'd void your warranty (at least for the mechanism). In reality that's highly unlikely, but it isn't like adding wheels or a upgraded suspension to a new car - it's more like grinding down the intake manifold that you feel is kinda wonky for most people from the factory (or something like that - it's an imperfect analogy). Good on ya if that makes it better for you, but that's not a reasonable/rational product to me. I'm going to judge it for how it comes out of the box.
Anyway, here's how this whole thing breaks down for me in Moby **** form. It's admittedly heavy on opinion and hopefully-informed speculation, so I'm not telling anyone they're wrong (
It appears one of the marketing points these days is tooth count - 80, 84, 88, 90, 100, 120, 144, etc. It's one of those spec-driven arms race things that the average dude in a box store can grab on - more is better, right?? But in reality it's one of those things that seems to trade off on other things.
Both the 120XP and the Husky 144 both have the the snap-ring design that seems to result in a thinner mechanism, really thin/small pawls (the look nearly identical inside). The stacked/alternating pawl design seems to bring some backdrag along with it, though it seems like more teeth in general puts backdrag in the picture if you're not careful. I'm not an engineer, but it seems like the small amount of tooth-engaged surface area (whether from a small pawl with fine teeth or two alternating half-pawls) isn't enough mass to fight the movement of the gear and the result is backdrag (?). I'm thinking that's why Snap On went a completely different way with the Dual 80 - it's two full size, non-stacked pawls that are pretty beefy, so they have enough mass to engage/disengage the gear. (all of that is sorta-informed supposition on my part - happy if an engineer can explain if I'm missing something).
Add to that all the personal preference things (mechanism feel, handle shape, lever actuation, etc.) along with price, and it's a ball of mush.
For me, 80-90 teeth seems to be the reliable sweet spot for low swing arc with low back-drag and good feel. I'll live with fewer clicks in a tight spot because it's just not useful often enough to live with backdrag you'll experience often.
Last edited:
toddmorr
Well-known member
was doing a timing belt on an ES300 yesterday, plenty of tight spaces, a 36 or 24 tooth Koken was perfectly fine in almost all situations. Where they didn't work I just switched to a stubby 90 tooth Tekton.
Handyandy23
Well-known member
I fully agree it's silly to buy a ratchet and expect to have to modify it to work properly. I've opened some new ratchets just to add super lube on the odd one that's feeling a little tight out of the box. But if it requires cutting or changing a spring I'd just return it.
My take on the back drag issue is it likely comes down to lack of quality control / production variation. I'm not sure if that's differences in machining or spring rate or lack of factory lubrication. My lone 120XP has no more back drag than any of my Tekton 90T ratchets, or older 72T ratchets. I guess I got a "good one".
The Tekton 90T are generally my favorite, but I notice variation in back drag from ratchet to ratchet with them too. One 1/4" stubby had particularly bad back drag from new, and I had to lube it to try and help it out a bit. I already had several other Tekton ratchets I loved so I wasn't going to condemn them all based on that one. If it was the first Tekton ratchet I'd purchased then I probably would have returned it and never bought another one.
I guess what I'm trying to say is variation is going to happen, especially in a non premium brand ratchet. The big question is whether that means 1 out of every 5 is bad, or 1 out of every 1000.
My take on the back drag issue is it likely comes down to lack of quality control / production variation. I'm not sure if that's differences in machining or spring rate or lack of factory lubrication. My lone 120XP has no more back drag than any of my Tekton 90T ratchets, or older 72T ratchets. I guess I got a "good one".
The Tekton 90T are generally my favorite, but I notice variation in back drag from ratchet to ratchet with them too. One 1/4" stubby had particularly bad back drag from new, and I had to lube it to try and help it out a bit. I already had several other Tekton ratchets I loved so I wasn't going to condemn them all based on that one. If it was the first Tekton ratchet I'd purchased then I probably would have returned it and never bought another one.
I guess what I'm trying to say is variation is going to happen, especially in a non premium brand ratchet. The big question is whether that means 1 out of every 5 is bad, or 1 out of every 1000.
I'm a bit awash in poison these days - the last year has seen a lot of new ratchets as I've been doing a lot more work lately around the house and especially on my cars - a great excuse for new tools! Anyway, my job is competitive analysis and technical marketing about things like engineering, quality and usability, and I tend to dive into things that interest me like this.
Net: I over-analyze things (at least it pays the bills
I fundamentally reject any argument based on taking a brand-new product and having to mod it for behavior considered negative to most people, in this case backdrag. I find it really odd that some people say they have it and some don't in the same product. Maybe it's manufacturing variance, maybe people are using it in different ways where backdrag isn't a problem or maybe people don't always recognize it for what it is (I didn't as recently as a couple years ago). Possibly all of those things are in play. I have to think if the manufacturer noticed/knew you modified the tool to "fix" it, they'd void your warranty (at least for the mechanism). In reality that's highly unlikely, but it isn't like adding wheels or a upgraded suspension to a new car - it's more like grinding down the intake manifold that you feel is kinda wonky for most people from the factory (or something like that - it's an imperfect analogy). Good on ya if that makes it better for you, but that's not a reasonable/rational product to me. I'm going to judge it for how it comes out of the box.
Anyway, here's how this whole thing breaks down for me in Moby **** form. It's admittedly heavy on opinion and hopefully-informed speculation, so I'm not telling anyone they're wrong () or stupid. If you disagree, I'm 100% good with that. I'm a full believer in the 'different strokes' thing. So:
It appears one of the marketing points these days is tooth count - 80, 84, 88, 90, 100, 120, 144, etc. It's one of those spec-driven arms race things that the average dude in a box store can grab on - more is better, right?? But in reality it's one of those things that seems to trade off on other things.
Both the 120XP and the Husky 144 both have the the snap-ring design that seems to result in a thinner mechanism, really thin/small pawls (the look nearly identical inside). The stacked/alternating pawl design seems to bring some backdrag along with it, though it seems like more teeth in general puts backdrag in the picture if you're not careful. I'm not an engineer, but it seems like the small amount of tooth-engaged surface area (whether from a small pawl with fine teeth or two alternating half-pawls) isn't enough mass to fight the movement of the gear and the result is backdrag (?). I'm thinking that's why Snap On went a completely different way with the Dual 80 - it's two full size, non-stacked pawls that are pretty beefy, so they have enough mass to engage/disengage the gear. (all of that is sorta-informed supposition on my part - happy if an engineer can explain if I'm missing something).
Add to that all the personal preference things (mechanism feel, handle shape, lever actuation, etc.) along with price, and it's a ball of mush.
For me, 80-90 teeth seems to be the reliable sweet spot for low swing arc with low back-drag and good feel. I'll live with fewer clicks in a tight spot because it's just not useful often enough to live with backdrag you'll experience often.
The variation in back drag is an interesting topic, especially as it relates to same-model ratchets. Since you're a testing expert I will try to give an engineering opinion...
The "lighter mechanism" theory doesn't really hold much weight with me (in one sense - I'll address an opposing possibility later). The purpose of a ratchet is to engage teeth in a particular direction at one time and spin past them in the other direction. The weight of the pawl (as designed) should make little difference in the back drag because 1) the pawl is forced into place with a spring and 2) the mechanism should be designed to disengage in a certain setting. It seems to me lubrication/friction would have more do with this, and having two pawls that rub against each other and more pawl teeth to overcome would cause more drag than a single setup. Only half of this would apply to a dual-80 ratchet since the pawls are not stacked. To test whether or not a heavy pawl makes a difference would be simple - test for back drag using the ratchet handle down, then use it handle up and see if there is a difference. If you notice a difference likely there is more drag with the handle up as you have gravity assisting the spring to keep the pawl engaged.
More likely, however, is that these ratchets are produced with less tolerance control. Variation in the spring coil or length means more ore less force on the pawls, it's very possible that a company like Apex has a wider tolerance range than a company like Snap-On, and due to their production volumes and prices they may change suppliers more frequently or have to re-do tooling more often. It could be that they have higher labor turnover meaning ratchets are lubricated differently. Maybe some get worse tolerance stack-ups than others. Lots of possibilities
Thanks for that. Good point on lubrication - I'm could definitely see the amount and type of lubrication potentially having a big impact, and certainly I hear things like "I opened it up and lubed it, and things got a lot better" enough around here. Also, I'm not really trying to say "weight" with the pawls - since I'm not an engineer I communicate poorly sometimes on things like this - but it does seem like a small, stacked pawl on a mechanism that's already thinner because of the snap-ring design would create compromises that yield things like backdrag. 1/4" ratchets seem more susceptible to backdrag too - maybe because of the scale and the number of teeth we're talking about?
As for manufacturing variance/tolerances, that's just a fact of life. Speed and scale fight quality.
It seems like the split pawls of the Dual-80 design lets you really extend the area of contact for the pawl - the two pawls are spread to the edges instead of being trapped at the bottom in single-piece pawls. My F80 doesn't feel massively different than my Tekton or Icon pear heads though.
i don't get this comment on snap-ring style ratchets having thinner anvil gears or should i say the part that the pawls engage on. the pawls are thinner on the dual pawl apex style ratchets but the anvil is actually thicker if i recall. that is why the head is thicker.
i also don't buy the comment that the ratchet is faulty if it has more backdrag. it may not feel as nice but it isn't faulty. i ratchet with high backdrag in theory is as strong or stronger than one with low backdrag becuase it may engage the pawls and gears more solidly.
what some of us may be more guilty of is having as preference of how a ratchet should sound and or feel.
i also don't buy the comment that the ratchet is faulty if it has more backdrag. it may not feel as nice but it isn't faulty. i ratchet with high backdrag in theory is as strong or stronger than one with low backdrag becuase it may engage the pawls and gears more solidly.
what some of us may be more guilty of is having as preference of how a ratchet should sound and or feel.
If backdrag is the phenomenon where the ratchet will actually work the fastener both ways (i.e. it isn't ratcheting...) under low-load (usually late in removal of the fastener), then I don't understand how it can't be considered a negative.
If I misunderstand what backdrag is, educate me.
There's definitely a human-factors/preference thing in stuff like this, but backdrag isn't part of that, at least at the point where it isn't allowing the ratchet to ratchet...
visionguru
Well-known member
I've only experienced "backdrag problem" once, when I was taking off a timing belt cover. A long 10mm bolt is hidden in an impossible place, which means I can't reach my hand there to do anything. The bolt is loose, well too loose, the ratchet was not ratcheting, just moving back and forth. I had to turn the extension little by little to get the bolt out.
Frankly, no ratchet would work in that situation. It prompted me to buy a 1/4" Ingersoll Rand cordless ratchet.
Your understanding of backdrag is correct. I am only unhappy with my 1/4 120xp.
It is beyond annoying to have the ratchet moving back and forth and refusing to ratchet, then when trying to assist it by guiding the socket/extension you find that you have to apply far more force than if the nut/bolt was freewheeling.
It you are able to solve this issue simply by switching to a different ratchet, you now have a ratchet you avoid using as it does not perform to expectations. Does that make it a defective design? You decide. My 120xp sits while a loosey goosey $5.99 Kobalt gets used instead. Thats kinda pathetic IMO.
It is beyond annoying to have the ratchet moving back and forth and refusing to ratchet, then when trying to assist it by guiding the socket/extension you find that you have to apply far more force than if the nut/bolt was freewheeling.
It you are able to solve this issue simply by switching to a different ratchet, you now have a ratchet you avoid using as it does not perform to expectations. Does that make it a defective design? You decide. My 120xp sits while a loosey goosey $5.99 Kobalt gets used instead. Thats kinda pathetic IMO.
I had it with my Sunex ratchets and it made me instantly hate them. Think it was brakes, but can't remember now. Then I had the issue that the reverse switch was apparently easy to accidentally bump and switch positions without realizing it. After that, they went in the drawer and I went down the ratchet hole.
I have and really like the Milwaukee FUEL 3/8", but I still want a hand-ratchet in a lot of situations.
i think i didn't explain my thoughts very well. what i meant was that in say a group of ten ratchets(pick a brand, any brand) you may end up with one that has very little backdrag, one that has more and the rest fall somewhere in between those 2. i would guess any ratchet has several areas that affect backdrag. length and strength of spring, depth of spring location in the pawl and depth of spring location in the head or anvil depending on type of ratchet. the slightest variation of any of them can affect backdrag. throw in the effect of different types of lube and now you have lots of variables. one with a slightly more backdrag does not mean it is faulty.
then throw in the fact that backdrag is a matter of preference. what may seem like a lot of backdrag to one person isn't to another. some people think a dual 80 mechanism is the cats ***. i have one and no desire to have any more. doesn't make it a bad ratchet it just means i don't like it. some people don't like the single pawl armstrong 60 or 88 or matco and gear wrench versions which i like. doesn't make it a bad ratchet either. it's called preference.
use what ya like and at the end of the day if anyone tries to tell ya either one is junk.........well maybe you should question their motives.
I think I get what you're saying, but I think there's "feel" and then there's backdrag. Backdrag is non-operation when there should be. "Feel" is a lot more subjective. I do think people generally want the ratcheting twist to have some weight to it, but how much is going to vary. I'm positive there are human factors guidelines on it somewhere, but then there's making thousands of them with high yield off the manufacturing line, which is where your many variables come in. The company sets their tolerance for cost and pain for the customer, and off you go.
Designing and building something is a massive array of competing considerations that very often directly trade against one another. To solve for the best of things without trade-off is almost always significantly harder and more costly, so lots of companies pick their poison. I feel like that's what we're talking about here re: the 120XP
I totally get what you're saying about feel, and coming from an old, clicky 36T Husky and the clicky, back-drag-infested Sunex, my immediate impression of the new Carlyle was that it felt kinda limp/soft. The Icon/Tekton/Snap On ratchets that joined it were even "worse" - but when I was using them, that feel became something I really love. (I wasn't replacing the Carlyle, just rounding out a road kit for my old car and I generally prefer to work with two or more ratchets to minimize socket-swapping). For me, all of them communicate what's going on better than the old clicky stuff. It sounds like you prefer something different - I'm not trying to tell you you're wrong at all. My Snap On F80 is pretty new to me, so I can't tell you where it falls in the ranking, but it's not earth-shakingly better than my Icon and Tekton ratchets. Handle-design is a big preference-thing too (for me and in general, I'd say).
No ratchet is going to ratchet the air - it's one of the reasons I've been so happy with my swivel/roto heads and own a Milwaukee battery-ratchet. But failure to ratchet when it can/should is a bad thing, and while my "research" as I went down the ratchet-hole isn't anything remotely considered statistical information, there's enough whiff of backdrag in what I heard about the 120XP to convince me it's there and put my money elsewhere. YMMV.
Last edited:
I think the GW is a good budget ratchet. When I bought my first dual 80 Snap-on I wasn't impressed with the actin. After about a month of using it, I ended up buying two more. It's hard to judge a ratchet before it's broke in.
Fedwrench
ALLIANCE MEMBER
I'm simply amazed that a 120XP ratchet merits three pages of discussion. 
measuredtwice
Well-known member
120XP is number 11 on Amazon's best sellers--> https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Home-Improvement-Socket-Wrenches/zgbs/hi/553424/
Only 2 ratchets before it on the list. Right behind the Amazon Basics set. I've never seen the 120XP... or the Amazon Basics ratchet.
Who bumped a 59 page topic about HF Icon today??
Only 2 ratchets before it on the list. Right behind the Amazon Basics set. I've never seen the 120XP... or the Amazon Basics ratchet.
I'm simply amazed that a 120XP ratchet merits three pages of discussion.
Who bumped a 59 page topic about HF Icon today??
Fedwrench
ALLIANCE MEMBER
120XP is number 11 on Amazon's best sellers--> https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Home-Improvement-Socket-Wrenches/zgbs/hi/553424/
Only 2 ratchets before it on the list. Right behind the Amazon Basics set. I've never seen the 120XP... or the Amazon Basics ratchet.
Who bumped a 59 page topic about HF Icon today??
I did because, I was amazed at new ratcheting wrench sets being offered.
VolvoRyan
Well-known member
I'm simply amazed that a 120XP ratchet merits three pages of discussion.
What else do you expect on this forum? We haven't yet started critiquing the chrome finish yet, or put the tools into a socioeconomic context. That said, we do have Tekton and Carlyle mentioned, so we're getting close to the end.
-Ryan