To avoid these ads, REGISTER NOW!

Armstrong 11-994 VS Snap-On FX80

I

IMStuner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
483
Location
MA
I purchased a new Armstrong 11-994 ratchet for $73.74 and super pleased at that price. I was going to purchase another FX80/FX80A for $149.95 but decided to be cheap and buy smarter. But I wanted point out the handle didn't feel as comfortable and head locking mechanism was not as easy to operate or smooth like the Snap-On.

Here's my lame comparison video.

Armstrong 11-994 VS Snap-On FX80 3/8 flex locking head Ratchet

Armstrong 11-994 VS Snap-On FX80 VS GearWrench 3/8 flex locking head Ratchet

DSC04026_zpsmtoxtixy.jpg

DSC04025_zpsqc8kw0ne.jpg
 
Last edited:
To avoid these ads, REGISTER NOW!
T

T45

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2014
Messages
3,253
I wouldn't write off SO given the troubles with Armstrong.
 
P

Pontiac787

Well-known member
Joined
May 31, 2016
Messages
801
Location
New Hampshire
Does the Snap-On have the ability to function as a non-locking head? I love my dual 80 ratchets but I went with the 10-994 and 11-994 for locking heads. It just seems that the snap-on release mechanism would get in the way. Plus I got the 11-994 for $61 and the 10-994 was around $35.
 
OP
I

IMStuner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
483
Location
MA
T45 said:
I wouldn't write off SO given the troubles with Armstrong.
Click to expand...

What's the issue with Armstrong?

Pontiac787 said:
Does the Snap-On have the ability to function as a non-locking head? I love my dual 80 ratchets but I went with the 10-994 and 11-994 for locking heads. It just seems that the snap-on release mechanism would get in the way. Plus I got the 11-994 for $61 and the 10-994 was around $35.
Click to expand...

Yes the Snap-On does.
 
S

Skin

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2010
Messages
11,713
Location
Boston
Pontiac787 said:
Does the Snap-On have the ability to function as a non-locking head? I love my dual 80 ratchets but I went with the 10-994 and 11-994 for locking heads. It just seems that the snap-on release mechanism would get in the way. Plus I got the 11-994 for $61 and the 10-994 was around $35.
Click to expand...

The button locks to the side on the SO but a light breeze bumps it back so, realistically, no it cannot function as a normal flex.

I really like my dual 80s but their locking flex design is garbage. The Matco/Armstrong system might appear more crude but is far more functional.
 
W

WittHay

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2016
Messages
2,157
Location
Surrey, BC Canada
Interesting to see the side by side ratchet comparison. No Matco, not much Armstrong up here in Canada.
Had a Snap-on 3/8 locking flex that went missing. Never got it replaced. Didn't like the way that ratchet was designed.
 
A

anndel

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 28, 2015
Messages
3,270
Location
Hawaii, USA
Pontiac787 said:
Does the Snap-On have the ability to function as a non-locking head? I love my dual 80 ratchets but I went with the 10-994 and 11-994 for locking heads. It just seems that the snap-on release mechanism would get in the way. Plus I got the 11-994 for $61 and the 10-994 was around $35.
Click to expand...

Yes it does - I have the soft grip handle version. The only thing I don't like about the non-locking switch is if you set it as non-locking and it bumps something, it'll lock. I hated that but I found good uses when it's locked, such as removing/tightening caliper mounting brackets and others.
 
T

T45

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2014
Messages
3,253
hautpot said:
$30 for an armstrong rebuild kit???? you gotta be pulling me leg.
Click to expand...

:dunno:


mrjaw14 said:
I just called the warranty number for Armstrong, which is really an Apex number.

I said I've got 3 ratchets that I'd like rebuild kits for since Armstrong is being discontinued. The ratchets supposedly have a "lifetime" warranty, and with the brand being discontinued I wanted to try to get kits for them before the closure. They would not send them to me, said I had to buy them. I said normally I would agree that proactive rebuild kits isn't a valid request, but since the brand is closing can you help me out. They replied no. So unless I want to pay $20-30 each for a rebuild kit for a lifetime warranty product that won't be available anymore. I declined to invest any more money in a brand that's closing.

I was hoping Apex would handle it more gracefully to build some goodwill for other Apex brands. What would it have hurt to send a few kits out?

I wonder what the match 88 folks will do for rebuild kits since Armstrong/Apex was making the 88 ratchets? is another supplier making them now? I know Matco changed ratchet suppliers, but is it the same ratchet?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
L

Loscaldazar

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
2,385
Locking flex mechanism on the Armstrong/Matco ratchets is far superior to the Snap On. Both can be left "off" so that the ratchet free flexes or engaged on a specific detent (which is how a locking flex should work). The Snap On can be bumped back into its locking mode pretty easy while working on something, which can be frustrating to have to disengage the lock so it goes back to free flexing. The Armstrong/Matco, because of the low profile lever, stays where you put it.

As far as ratcheting mechanism, the Snap On has a smoother feel and less back drag after it has been used a bit. The Armstrong, despite having more teeth, feels clunkier and less smooth. Back drag is still pretty light, but a broken in Snap On F80 has less. The armstrong has a less thick head, but also has a longer anvil, making clearance almost the same between the two of them.

Both are good bets in 3/8 drive, but I ultimately went with Snap On because they will still be supported and I can get rebuild kits when needed.

In 1/2 drive, Snap On is way better than Armstrong/Matco. In 1/4 drive, I'd take the Matco/Armstrong over the Snap On. 3/8 is more of a wash. Hopefully I can get some measurements and photos comparing Snap On and Armstrong in 3/8 and 1/2 drive soon....
 
S

Stevenn1

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
345
Location
USA
Top to bottom:
FLF80
FX80
FL80


If I were to buy all over again, I would of just gotten the FX80. It would do the work of all. Snap-on Dual 80s RULE!!!
 

Attachments

  • 20170226_145733.jpg
    20170226_145733.jpg
    133.3 KB · Views: 150
S

shockwave

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2012
Messages
2,125
Location
Marietta,ga
IMStuner said:
I purchased a new Armstrong 11-994 ratchet for $73.74 and super pleased at that price. I was going to purchase another FX80/FX80A for $149.95 but decided to be cheap and buy smarter. But I wanted point out the handle didn't feel as comfortable and head locking mechanism was not as easy to operate or smooth like the Snap-On.

DSC04026_zpsmtoxtixy.jpg

DSC04025_zpsqc8kw0ne.jpg
Click to expand...

I still prefer the matco version over the Armstrong because of the round handles on matco chrome ratchets
I never really liked snap on locking flex ratchets thou just my oppionion but love the hard handles
 
OP
I

IMStuner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
483
Location
MA
shockwave said:
I still prefer the matco version over the Armstrong because of the round handles on matco chrome ratchets

I never really liked snap on locking flex ratchets thou just my oppionion but love the hard handles
Click to expand...



I prefer the round handle as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
To avoid these ads, REGISTER NOW!
M

mrjaw14

Well-known member
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
1,958
Location
Nashville, TN
gdocktor3 said:
And don't try getting free repair kits like a few members on here have already done. You get DENIED. Rightfully so too.
Click to expand...


we'll just agree to disagree on that. Now on to something that's useful commentary:

The Armstrong ratchets are the same as the matco 88's with a different handle. Armstrong made them for matco. The head is thinner than the snap on, however the mechanism snap on uses is stronger. I've got both Armstrong and snap on and I'll say the Armstrong, with the recessed lever, gets into places better and the switch doesn't get bumped as easily. If the fastener is rusty or torqued real well I prefer to use snap on. Each has its place, and each has strong points.
 
OP
I

IMStuner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
483
Location
MA
Here's the side by side pictures with my Gearwrench 3/8 ratchet. The Gearwrench set was $100.00 for set. I definitively prefer the Snap-On and ArmStrong more but than again it cost a lot more.

DSC04046_zpsx18eec11.jpg

DSC04045_zpsx2wvuanm.jpg

DSC04044_zps2glnbzmb.jpg

DSC04043_zps3hasuaf0.jpg

DSC04042_zps8lpatpqv.jpg

DSC04041_zpshieuebj2.jpg

2017-02-28_20-41-34_zps0sbi6rym.jpg
 
S

stage20

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 5, 2013
Messages
3,722
Location
pcola FL
ChrisLS8 said:
They look nothing alike...you kidding?
Click to expand...

LOL LOL LOL

the core of the ratchet is the exact piece. its made my armstrong.
the matco gets the matco logo of course....and a round handle similar to snap on ratchets.

i prefer the armstrong handle myself.
 
T

T45

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2014
Messages
3,253
OP, just out of curiousity...what jobs are you looking to do with the new ratchte vs the previous ones?
 
T

T45

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2014
Messages
3,253
stage20 said:
thats interesting. 84 tooth setup works in 88t head? one taiwan, one usa made. what are the odds? mmmm
Click to expand...

It is the same company -- a common entity owns both brands-- and so share common intellectual property (ie, designs/engineering etc).
 
OP
I

IMStuner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
483
Location
MA
T45 said:
OP, just out of curiousity...what jobs are you looking to do with the new ratchet vs the previous ones?
Click to expand...

I was a mechanic before and I understand the meaning of having quantity tools. I'm pretty much using these tools to repair my motorcycle and car at the house.
 
L

Loscaldazar

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Messages
2,385
stage20 said:
LOL LOL LOL

the core of the ratchet is the exact piece. its made my armstrong.
the matco gets the matco logo of course....and a round handle similar to snap on ratchets.

i prefer the armstrong handle myself.
Click to expand...

*Formerly made by Armstrong*

Now AJ manufacturing does the Matco ones, and Armstrong is being shut down.

The ones made by AJ manufacturing are identical to the armstrong ones as far as I can tell sans a stiffer spring on the pawl and better stamping on the AJ units.
 
OP
I

IMStuner

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
483
Location
MA
Here's my lame comparison video.

Armstrong 11-994 VS Snap-On FX80 3/8 flex locking head Ratchet

Armstrong 11-994 VS Snap-On FX80 VS GearWrench 3/8 flex locking head Ratchet
 
T

Tuc04

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 30, 2014
Messages
273
Location
AZ
Here are some pictures of an 11-994 and an Armstrong era Matco BFR128LFT side by side.

There are only a few minor cosmetic differences and then internals can be swapped with no issues.
 

Attachments

  • Rat1.jpg
    Rat1.jpg
    128.5 KB · Views: 43
  • Rat2.jpg
    Rat2.jpg
    142 KB · Views: 41
  • Rat3.jpg
    Rat3.jpg
    119.6 KB · Views: 42
  • Rat4.jpg
    Rat4.jpg
    126.5 KB · Views: 41
J

JDon99

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 8, 2013
Messages
1,039
Location
Desoto, MO
How well does the locking mechanism lock the head on the SO? I've never held a SO locking flex ratchet to compare to the Armstrong/Matco.
 
B

bobcatdan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
9,948
Location
Kaukauna,WI
Based on owning both matco and Snap on, they are a horse a piece overall. All matco I own have the same jamming issue when trying to switch direction one handed. The pawl has to be rocked slightly to shift. That one thing I will give the edge to SO. Strength wise, I'd say equal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
To avoid these ads, REGISTER NOW!
Top Bottom