Ratcheting box end wrenches

[cgv69]

Seems like ratching box end wrenches have been around forever in this style...

But were never very popular? Now we have this newer style that look more like standard combo wrenches and it seems like everybody has to have a set...

So stupid question time, what makes these new ones some much more popular then the original design? I imagine the newer one are probably more comfortable but they don't look as strong to me?

 

[sometoyotaguy]

That's a good question. Maybe it's because engine bays are so much tighter these days. The older ones were probably pretty expensive as well, but the price for lower end versions have come down quite a bit over the last few years.

 

[Outlawmws]

Well I have both (the newer style in reversible with the slight angle which is nice...).

Your question made me go look at them and compare. The ratcheting gear wrench is about the same size as the old style, (flat non reversible) at least in snap-On (the older (50's) and newer (70's) Craftsman were a tad larger in the old style).

I'd say having a standard wrench handle is a plus, and having the angled box is another plus. I always felt the grip on the old style was uncomfortable, and only used them where a regular ratchet would not go, and a wrench was just too painfully slow. In short, rarely.

I use the gear wrench style a lot more, as its about like a standard wrench, and much faster.

As to strength; I'd agree the older style, at least the better ones, are probably stronger, assuming you can pull on them hard enough without hurting your hand. The Craftsman I have, both older and newer, are not what I would call a strong design...

 

[G_P]

I never liked those open frame ratcheting wrenches due to the fact that they would get bits of rust and other debris off of whatever you are working on in the mechanism and they would jam up.

They are also rather uncomfortable to use and they have a VERY coarse gear on them requiring a wide swing to the next "click"

 

[Skin]

So stupid question time, what makes these new ones some much more popular then the original design? I imagine the newer one are probably more comfortable but they don't look as strong to me?

Quite a few things.

Old
Exposed teeth were prone to debris
Around 30 teeth
Depending on the model the box ends could be quite fat
In general they're super short so you had very little leverage

New
Mostly sealed design to keep dirt/debris out
72 teeth allowing you to use the wrench in very tight spaces
Thin box ends
Many models ranging from stubby all the way up to wrenches that have flex heads and ones that are nearly 2ft long.

 

[crewchief888]

That's a good question. Maybe it's because engine bays are so much tighter these days. The older ones were probably pretty expensive as well

i use the old style

guess cuz i'm old

i only have use for one size of the newer design, so thats the only one i have.

 

[Fedwrench]

The new fine tooth action is vastly superior to the ratcheting wrenches of old. My personal favorite is this type: http://www.armstrongtools.com/ECommerce/product.aspx

Fixed boxed end on one side to break fasteners loose or to tighten up. 72 tooth Ratcheting boxed end on the other end for speed. US made sold as Armstrong or Matco.

 

[unslow1]

I have had a set of the old style for years. Rarely ever use them. They don't seem to ever fit in a tight space. They also seem clunky and feel like they aren't smooth at all. The new ones I bought after using someone's on transmission bell housing bolts. They have a much better feel.

 

[tjmonsen5]

I had a pair of the old fashioned ratcheting wrenches, I think I used them once. They just plain ****. They feel like they have maybe 10-25 teeth, are extrememly bulky and hurt your hands. I gave mine to a buddy who has a wimpy set of tools. Hey, ratcheting wrenches are better than no ratcheting wrenches.

 

[gwunsch]

I have both, but typically prefer the newer style for the finer action and comfort of the handle. both work.

 

[Krokodil]

The old style just seems a bit more rugged to me.

 

[shampoop]

I can't think of a single situation where the older style style would be useful.

 

[Danglerb]

I suppose some good old style were made, but they look like junk made from stamped metal and ones I saw/have have terrible clearance issues. Ratcheting does you no good if it won't fit or swing enough to click.

I am really liking my EZRed long pattern double box end flex deep socket ratcheting spline wrenches. They are problem solvers as well as speed ups for a lot of tasks.

 

[el tanque prohibido]

The old style varies a lot in quality from one manufacturer to the next. A lot of them are loose and clunky, but the Snap-on version is tight and very smooth.

 

[Krokodil]

The old style varies a lot in quality from one manufacturer to the next. A lot of them are loose and clunky, but the Snap-on version is tight and very smooth.

My "old" style Stahlwille ones are also tight and strong.

 

[Outlawmws]

The old style varies a lot in quality from one manufacturer to the next. A lot of them are loose and clunky, but the Snap-on version is tight and very smooth.

My "old" style Stahlwille ones are also tight and strong.

I have Snapon, Proto, 50's Craftsman and 70's Craftsman in the old style and honestly cant tell any noticeable difference between them for ratcheting.

Smoothness in ratcheting compared to the new greawrench style, no comparison. new wins hands down. I'm reasonably certain the old style ratchet mechanism would be stronger.

For wrench strength, I think the Proto and SO are about the same, with the 50's Craftsman following close behind, and the 70's trailing.

I don't think the new wrench handles are any less strong.

 

[Outlawmws]

I can't think of a single situation where the older style style would be useful.

I've used mine many times, but I can say I'll use the new style even more. The only real issues with the old style is hand pain if you need to really pull hard on them, the flat pull, (yes I know they made then offset, but that offset is very clunky) and the very coarse ratchet teeth.