Old vs. new Williams S-52?

[Applesauce]

I'll bet this has been discussed, but I haven't found anything directly comparing the old, dual-pawl S-52 "Superratchet" to the new single-pawl S-52A. Can anyone comment on the action or quality of the new one vs. the old one? Also, does anyone know the difference between the old one with the head that required a pin spanner to disassembled and the old one that require a flat-head or flat pin spanner? (That make sense? There seem to be two styles of the old S-52...)

I need a mid-length 1/2" ratchet, and am trying to decide on a vintage S-52 or a new something else.

 

[kc-steve]

I definitely like the old fine-tooth S-52 and B-52 ratchets. In today's models I think there are are two styles; a Snap-On 936 version also called s-52 and a round head. I did recently buy the Snap-On style with 36-teeth. It is nice but not as nice as the old style fine-tooth round head, IMO.

Steve

 

[SMKS]

You must not have seen this recent thread. There's another thread where I posted pics of the old mechanism, too. You can find it if you perform a search.

Member Oak Park was kind enough to provide pics of the new machanism, since multiple people have been asking this question recently.

I haven't owned the new design, so I can't comment on how it works.

EDIT - Here's a thread showing the old design:
http://www.garagejournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=36498

 

[Applesauce]

You must not have seen this recent thread. There's another thread where I posted pics of the old mechanism, too. You can find it if you perform a search.

Member Oak Park was kind enough to provide pics of the new machanism, since multiple people have been asking this question recently.

I've seen many of the recent threads, and really appreciated the picture. However, I'm not familiar with either ratchet, and was hoping someone could compare them and offer some sort of review as to why I would favor one over another.

Thanks for the links, though!

 

[Provincial]

I have an S-53 (the long version) with the new style mechanism. I got it cheap because it didn't work. My local welding supply gave me a repair kit (I do a lot of business with them) and when I installed it I found that it is quite tricky to get what I call the "heart-shaped" spring installed properly. It took me several attempts before I got it to work right. I now believe that someone had taken the mechanism apart before I got it and messed up the spring trying to get it back together.

I find the single-pawl mechanism to be very smooth. I haven't had a chance to compare it to the earlier version, but it is nicer than my old SK round heads.

 

[Mike007]

The old S-52 Superratchet is awesome!

Thats all I have to say about that.

 

[blackz26]

I have an older s-52 I'm going to be posting tomorrow in the classifieds here. It is very smooth. But with my other ratchets I feel someone else would get more use out of it. Sk also has a heart shaped thingy inside one of their 3/8 ratchets,man was that thing a pita to get right. I sold it after I rebuilt it. Lol

 

[Applesauce]

I have an older s-52 I'm going to be posting tomorrow in the classifieds here. It is very smooth. But with my other ratchets I feel someone else would get more use out of it. Sk also has a heart shaped thingy inside one of their 3/8 ratchets,man was that thing a pita to get right. I sold it after I rebuilt it. Lol

If you're willing to ship it to Canada, please PM me! I'll take it.

 

[bonneyman]

I have an older s-52 I'm going to be posting tomorrow in the classifieds here. It is very smooth. But with my other ratchets I feel someone else would get more use out of it. Sk also has a heart shaped thingy inside one of their 3/8 ratchets,man was that thing a pita to get right. I sold it after I rebuilt it. Lol

The S-K version is called the TUFF 1. They got it from FACOM during their 20 year partnership.

 

[jmm]

That's a LOT of extra space around the circumference for a ratchet with the Facom design. Most Facoms and ratchets using their mechanisms that I've seen are significantly thinner-walled than that Williams. I haven't opened up my old Williams in a long time, but I feel certain the outer wall is thinner.

Seems odd -- I don't see the advantage of such a design -- like it's unecessarily big. Can't see how such a large wall would make the ratchet that much stronger. Thoughts?

PS- I'm a huge fan of the old design. My old S-52 is older than I am and well used, but it still ratchets smooth and is incredibly tough. Love it.

 

[ganymede]

I can't comment on the new Williams stuff but I've owned several each of the older Superatchets in both 3/8 and 1/2 drive. They have 40 or so teeth in the head but require little swing to ratchet as though they have 80 teeth . they achieve that by having dual pawls that are offset. Craftsman rhft ratchets and and Bonney 702 series ratchets are very similar and I've owned a bunch of them too.
In all, many specimens regardless of condition will not work exactly as they are supposed. At some points in their range of motion both pawls will engage at the same time. The ratchet still works but what you get is a 40 tooth ratchet with say, 60 tooth action instead of 80 tooth action as its supposed to.
Of the 3 Williams are the worst and I think I've only run into 1 Bonney that did it and it wasn't really that bad. Unfortunately the Bonneys have a rather large head.
I like the Williams the best -when they work as they are supposed too- which from my experience is often not the case.

 

[Applesauce]

In all, many specimens regardless of condition will not work exactly as they are supposed. At some points in their range of motion both pawls will engage at the same time. The ratchet still works but what you get is a 40 tooth ratchet with say, 60 tooth action instead of 80 tooth action as its supposed to.
Of the 3 Williams are the worst and I think I've only run into 1 Bonney that did it and it wasn't really that bad. Unfortunately the Bonneys have a rather large head.
I like the Williams the best -when they work as they are supposed too- which from my experience is often not the case.

Do you know if this is an actual flaw in the manufacturing of those particular ratchets, or just in their assembly? i.e., can the pawls be reinstalled after an overhaul such that the "indexing" is off? It sounds to me like this might be the case - like the ratchet can be indexed wrong or indexed right...

Does anyone know what the difference is between the two designs below? One seems to be assembled with a pin spanner on a flat plate under the switch, while the other has the lock-ring design with which I'm familiar.

 

[kc-steve]

I think ganymede is speaking of rare occasions that I've never seen with older S-52s. The lubrication used can make a difference.

I have both of those in your post. One is older than the other and I forget which is which.

Steve

 

[kc-steve]

see attached

 

[ganymede]

Applesauce
The round head Superratchets were in production for 4 or 5 decades so it can't be a design problem. If the ratchets aren't assembled right they just won't work so it isn't assembly. I've owned specimens that were almost brand new and they still did it so I don't think it's that they don't wear well. Either the design isn't tolerant of manufacturing variance or I'm just really unlucky and almost always get misfits.
I think I'm the only one who's ever complained.
Kc Steve
Of your ratchets , the one with the screw on top is the first version and appears in the patent drawings if you look it up.

 

[SMKS]

In all, many specimens regardless of condition will not work exactly as they are supposed. At some points in their range of motion both pawls will engage at the same time. The ratchet still works but what you get is a 40 tooth ratchet with say, 60 tooth action instead of 80 tooth action as its supposed to.
Of the 3 Williams are the worst and I think I've only run into 1 Bonney that did it and it wasn't really that bad. Unfortunately the Bonneys have a rather large head.

Possibly just some gunk in either the pawl or the teeth in the head that are preventing one of the pawls from working as it should. I've had that happen with dual-pawl round heads.

 

[Joe B.]

kc-steve,

Are those yours? If so, what do you think about the two different 'older' versions. The one on top seems to be much more common and I believe it came later.

 

[kc-steve]

Joe, yes they are mine. I bought both from eBay at prices less than a new Craftsman RP ratchet. I can't really tell much difference. I like 'em both. In fact, I didn't notice they were different until someone pointed it out.

ganymede, after rereading your initial description, I'll keep eye out for that problem. It is entirely possible that it goes unnoticed by most of us. It's the 40-tooth action compared to 60 or 80 that might be unnoticeable. I don't know, but like I said, I watch for it now.

I have to swap out my hard drive. It's acting up so, . . . it might be a while before I'm back again.

Thanks,
Steve

 

[ganymede]

Possibly just some gunk in either the pawl or the teeth in the head that are preventing one of the pawls from working as it should. I've had that happen with dual-pawl round heads.

Thank you. The next time I've got them apart ill scrape around with a machinist scriber or a pic. You never know.

Joe, yes they are mine. I bought both from eBay at prices less than a new Craftsman RP ratchet. I can't really tell much difference. I like 'em both. In fact, I didn't notice they were different until someone pointed it out.

ganymede, after rereading your initial description, I'll keep eye out for that problem. It is entirely possible that it goes unnoticed by most of us. It's the 40-tooth action compared to 60 or 80 that might be unnoticeable. I don't know, but like I said, I watch for it now.

I have to swap out my hard drive. It's acting up so, . . . it might be a while before I'm back again.

Thanks,
Steve

Thanks.
Good luck with the swap!

 

[kc-steve]

Piece of cake. I just cloned the old drive on to the new one using a free cloning software, http://www.macrium.com/reflectfree.aspx

It took about an hour.

Steve

 

[jmm]

I can't comment on the new Williams stuff but I've owned several each of the older Superatchets in both 3/8 and 1/2 drive. They have 40 or so teeth in the head but require little swing to ratchet as though they have 80 teeth . they achieve that by having dual pawls that are offset. Craftsman rhft ratchets and and Bonney 702 series ratchets are very similar and I've owned a bunch of them too.
In all, many specimens regardless of condition will not work exactly as they are supposed. At some points in their range of motion both pawls will engage at the same time. The ratchet still works but what you get is a 40 tooth ratchet with say, 60 tooth action instead of 80 tooth action as its supposed to.
Of the 3 Williams are the worst and I think I've only run into 1 Bonney that did it and it wasn't really that bad. Unfortunately the Bonneys have a rather large head.
I like the Williams the best -when they work as they are supposed too- which from my experience is often not the case.

This must be caused only by internal wear of the teeth on the outer wall. If the outer circumference increases (by a hair, even) while the pawl stays the same size, the pawls will no longer engage evenly. The result -- 40 clicks.

 

[ganymede]

Piece of cake. I just cloned the old drive on to the new one using a free cloning software, http://www.macrium.com/reflectfree.aspx

It took about an hour.

Steve

This must be caused only by internal wear of the teeth on the outer wall. If the outer circumference increases (by a hair, even) while the pawl stays the same size, the pawls will no longer engage evenly. The result -- 40 clicks.

Could be. If I were a machinist I'd experiment making new, slightly larger pawls to see if its possible to compensate for wear.
Too bad rebuild kits for these things are so scarce . It'd be nice to throw one in and see what that does or prove your theory.