"Real Tool Reviews"?

[bimmer630]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...gxPY3Y&usg=AFQjCNFH_ZTgLqcSaUKDMJ44ISJqp5IJ9Q


Is this guy a member here? I was watching a video today comparing the SO flank drive to the Wright wrightgrip wrenches, which was pretty good.

Going through his videos I notice he reviews most of the big brands, but I havent seen anything done on cornwell yet

 

[Thumper68]

Yes he is a member here.

The only issue I have with his reviews is I have never seen him say a tool was bad, but I haven't watched all his videos.

 

[JohnDeere1]

He only reviews good tools he isn't an active member but is a member .

 

[Youngguns]

I was unaware that it has been almost two years since his last post..

 

[LB-1911]

Is this guy a member here?

woodstockva

 

[bcradio]

He has graduated from GJ... is better than the rest of us now.

 

[Thumper68]

He only reviews good tools he isn't an active member but is a member .

Then what exactly is the point of doing a review?

I just did a 2 year review of the Eastwood Versa-Cut 60 plasma cutter, it is adequate tool, and that is exactly what I say after using it for 2+ years.

All these guys who open a box do a few tests and call a tool or anything else "Good" are just shills, not even worth calling it a review.

IMO opening a box saying the fit and finish are good and showing it doing a bit of work is not a review it is a AD.

Almost all tools will do their designed purpose right out of the box. I prefer to see a guy who has used the tool day in and day out for 6 months or more calling a tool "Good".

I have a 27 year old Panasonic 9.6v cordless drill that still works, doesn't hold a charge for long but it does still work, now I can call that a good drill because I have used it over time.

 

[redwrench60]

Wow. Feel the love here. I always liked Woodstockva's posts and reviews. He's a regular affable guy with a garage and tools who can actually put together well spoken and interesting head to head tests of the stuff we like. We all have our own style. I applaud him for making a few bucks while doing what he loves.

 

[thesilverone]

real paid reviews

 

[Ign]

He has previously stated that he doesn't post the bad reviews. Tools that don't fare well just aren't mentioned/published.

I didn't really have a problem w that, note this is very different than saying a bad tool is good.

 

[bushmechanic]

Then what exactly is the point of doing a review?

I just did a 2 year review of the Eastwood Versa-Cut 60 plasma cutter, it is adequate tool, and that is exactly what I say after using it for 2+ years.

All these guys who open a box do a few tests and call a tool or anything else "Good" are just shills, not even worth calling it a review.

IMO opening a box saying the fit and finish are good and showing it doing a bit of work is not a review it is a AD.

Almost all tools will do their designed purpose right out of the box. I prefer to see a guy who has used the tool day in and day out for 6 months or more calling a tool "Good".

I have a 27 year old Panasonic 9.6v cordless drill that still works, doesn't hold a charge for long but it does still work, now I can call that a good drill because I have used it over time.

One look at that video, and I can tell you're an awesome dude to be around.

I'll try my best to remember that.

 

[Thumper68]

He has previously stated that he doesn't post the bad reviews. Tools that don't fare well just aren't mentioned/published.

I didn't really have a problem w that, note this is very different than saying a bad tool is good.

IMO it is worse than calling a bad tool good, it says that I am afraid of offending some tool company that might give me money or free stuff.

I have no issue at all with paid endorsement videos, as long as they say hey I was given/paid to show you this. In fact it is in YouTubes terms of service that if you are given a product or paid to do a video you must state it. There are many tubers who do not do this or hide the text saying so. Look to the disclaimers at the beginning of every Infomercial.

One look at that video, and I can tell you're an awesome dude to be around.

I'll try my best to remember that.

I think that was a complement and will take it as so.

 

[Snakebyt]

i have watched some of those videos, I would like to see some of the tools that didnt make the cut and why they didnt.

 

[SuperXero]

I actually like his videos, he does a good job with his tests and explains them well. Helps a lot when I consider certain tool purchases. I'm ok with not showing bad tools because I wouldn't consider buying them anyways.

 

[kythri]

real paid reviews

The above comment paid for by AvE.

 

[mspecperformance]

He does mention tools that aren't as good as others like his bisegrip groovelovk vs knipex vid where he doesnt outright shiit on the visegrips but basically highlighted that knipex were way better

 

[Brand X]

I tend to like his videos. Mainly for showing different type of tools out there..He puts a lot of thought into tests, and gives you a basic idea if you might like the tool or not..

Could be watching a sniveling welding pin head called Chuckie Cheese..

 

[sk farmer]

i don't care for the guy. thought he was ok at first but when people disagreed with him he got real chippy. doesn't look good to your "sponsors" when people disagree with you.

so chippy that he started pulling down and tearing apart everything he posted at the garage gazette. ruined a whole pile of material before we showed him the door. i tipped off the management here before he did the same with their material. not sure what they told him but that was about the same time he quit showing up here.

 

[cheechi]

The few videos I watched of his seemed to be him making a video on a topic we discussed in a thread here. Even after he stopped posting it was clear he was/is still lurking, which is fine, but I feel like it's a very thin line between presenting your own idea in a video, that is almost ver batim from a thread here that would be easily found in a web search.

I feel like if he posts a video and makes a claim that isn't right, that leaves us here looking responsible, or the flip side if you like it, he presented a good idea without giving credit. In contrast, most other tool reviewers either aren't coming straight from here with their ideas or comparisons, or those that do mention somewhere or at least link in the description.

I try to make the above be as far from personal as possible. To illustrate, I will say that in person he and I wouldn't get along, but to be fair I am an antisocial *******. I think I can keep that separate from my assessment of his work; I think he's a poor representative of our group to others.

 

[firworks]

Just to add a counter point, he did blast the Milwaukee Fuel nailers pretty hard. I don't think anyone would buy one after watching his video. Whether his test was actually valid is a point of contention but it was DEFINITELY not positive for Milwaukee.

Real Tool Reviews was the inspiration for my making my own videos actually. What kept happening was, I'd get interested in a tool, and search YouTube for videos only to find his and no one elses. There were many tools that he was the only one with a video about. So I started thinking I like making videos, and I like buying tools. Maybe I can atleast give people a second opinion on some things if I buy them and they are weird. It didn't exactly pan out that way because I found I was unable to make a video about anything I'd watched him review without accidentally saying the same things just subconsciously. Ironically I usually only watch his videos now if I think it's a tool I'd never purchase just to avoid the accidental brain taint.

I feel like people are really missing what at it's simplest level the tool reviews are for. Well at least for me. If someone wants to show that they use a tool hard in a shop every day for 10 years and it looks brand new and works better every single day they pick it up that's great. That's not what helps me purchase a tool though. What I look for in the review videos is, what would I want to know or check out if I had it in my hands right now. Because you usually watch a review BEFORE you buy a tool and sometimes you just wish you had it to know if you like it or hate it or whatnot. Basically if I could try before I buy with a tool or take a test drive in a car. A lot of times I'm actually watching to see if a specific feature is present or if it even works at all before buying it and I have to jump from superficial video to superficial video before I find someone who actually goes through the tool in depth rather than the TiA level of local improv level comedy club mixed with "hey tool company X sent us a stack of tools and we looked at one of them online and it looked cool."

Sometimes there are things you'll just never learn from a tool review no matter how good it is. I watched a million tool reviews on the 12" Bosch Glider miter saw before blowing a ton of money on one, and it was a terrible decision. My worst tool purchase by far. The thing is absolutely useless because it is so sloppy. It sits covered in dust as a reminder while I use a 30 year old Delta 10" miter saw that was 10$ at a garage sale. I don't believe that those people I watched who had great success with the Bosch glider were shills. I just think they ended up having a different experience than me and that's going to happen sometimes.

A lot of the failures I see in here when people post about some terrible tool that has besmirched them and they'll never buy another from the brand ever again are most likely infant mortality issues/supplier quality issues. The kind that you do your best to minimize but you can never prevent 100% of the time. I got a Wera chiseldriver one time that the tip cracked off the very first time it touched another piece of metal. I sent a picture to Wera, they shipped me out a new one and I haven't had an issue since. Would I make a video slamming them for their "cheaping out" and obviously inferior materials? No way. Was it a problem with metallurgy? Did they get a bad batch of steel from a supplier that regularly provides good quality? Did they have a manufacturing quality issue where some parts were getting out that they have since done a continuous improvement project to prevent? Maybe it was an act of god and he just went in there and said "BAM hairline fracture in that one to spite that guy!"

If you test tools to failure, then you have to take that into account. No science is done on one datapoint (beyond Mythbusters). No doctor's going to start recommending everyone take a drug that helped one person one time. You know why Ford trucks ****? Because I knew a guy who had one that broke down one time. I tell you they're pieces of ****.

These are the kinds of things I think you have to consider when you start blasting vitriol out. And, also when you are making a tool review. It's something I've actually been struggling with lately. For my own information and purposes, I take everything apart and I do current tests on stuff and I log the charge characteristics of things and analyze circuits and is any of that useful for your average tool buyer? Probably not. Do they even care to learn about any of that stuff? Also probably not. I've been collecting underhood lights to make a big underhood light shootout video. I'm going to be taking them apart and analyzing them and all that jazz, but someone starts considering these lights and all that stuff probably doesn't matter unless they're a huge nerd or they're addicted to teardowns on YouTube and buying based on nonsensical factors. If I compare 5 lights and show charge curves and battery protection circuitry and PCB designs it probably won't help anyone beyond overloading some people with information. If I do a really controlled head to head test and show which light is brightest, which light lasts longest, and can help someone compare their own needs vs the capabilities of the lights then that seems better to me. "Here's how the lights shook out. This one's brightest, this one lasts longest. This one lasts second longest, was second brightest, and was also the cheapest. That's probably the light you want."

This ended up as a big ramble I guess. Maybe someone will find something useful in it. If not then just feel free to call me a shill and move on.

 

[Ole Slewfoot]

Tool reviews...ok, but
I'd gladly pay Youtube $20 to never ever show me an unboxing again.

 

[Thumper68]

If I do a really controlled head to head test and show which light is brightest, which light lasts longest, and can help someone compare their own needs vs the capabilities of the lights then that seems better to me. "Here's how the lights shook out. This one's brightest, this one lasts longest. This one lasts second longest, was second brightest, and was also the cheapest. That's probably the light you want."

This statement right here is what keeps you from being a "Shill" You are doing a head to head test with data you collected, by taking the time to tear down the tools and seeing which ones are built with better parts you can form a much better conclusion to which one is better. And by listing out which one is brighter, lasts longer etc.. you are giving good info for someone to base a purchase off of.

Then you should for the next 30 or 60 days run all the lights through a charge discharge routine, charge them over night and let them run for 6 or 8 hours or till dead, then re run the tests, now which one is brightest, lasts longest etc.. and release a follow up video. That info will be the true test of which light works best.

Like I said before pulling something from the box, saying how nice the fit and finish is and using it for a few minutes and calling it good is a waste of your time and mine.

 

[Spacey_G]

The way this guy talks in his videos is really off-putting. It's like the furthest thing from a genuine, normal guy talking to you.

Also doesn't help that his videos are paid advertisements, not real tool reviews.

 

[bimmer630]

He does have an interesting way of saying words like "knipex" and "snapon". Must be a regional thing

 

[kythri]

The way this guy talks in his videos is really off-putting. It's like the furthest thing from a genuine, normal guy talking to you.

Also doesn't help that his videos are paid advertisements, not real tool reviews.

RTR? Got proof of that?

 

[Strouty]

RTR and AVE had a small firestorm as far as I remember. While RTR may or may not be paid, I can appreciate the fact that real test equipment is used and the youtube money is being invested in the reviews rather than more pixies and nut fuckers like AVE. Don't get me wrong, AVE can be entertaining, but I don't think he is any better than any other youtube ***** out there.

 

[kythri]

Yeah, I'm aware AvE claimed RTR was shilling (without having the balls to actually name him), but as of yet, I've yet to see anyone provide anything resembling any kind of evidence of such.

 

[PhysicsDude]

RTR? Got proof of that?

How could they NOT be paid? Or at least getting the tool for free? He reviews all sorts of tools, there's no way he actually owns all of them. For instance he's reviewed at least 5 cordless impact wrenches. Not even the biggest tool hoarder on GJ would own 5+ brands of cordless impact wrenches.

All the tools he reviews look like they've never been used, and he doesn't use anecdotes, like "I personally like the way the Makita fits in my hand, but I have some buddies at my shop who say they prefer Miluakee", or "I know this wrench is stout, I used it to take off a crank bolt in a pinch" etc. Everything he says just sounds like marketing BS.

His videos serve a purpose... they're tool demonstrations like you'd see at a Vender display at a tool store or event. For instance I liked his Makita brushless 6 1/2" saw video where he tested how many cuts it could do. It was very impressive.

Of course, after watching AvE, every other tool channel seems like boring BS to me!

 

[Fcvapor05]

Just to add a counter point, he did blast the Milwaukee Fuel nailers pretty hard. I don't think anyone would buy one after watching his video.

I watched his review... and I bought 2 of them.

He's not a woodworker.

 

[Fcvapor05]

How could they NOT be paid? Or at least getting the tool for free? He reviews all sorts of tools, there's no way he actually owns all of them.

He is over 100,000 youtube subscribers at this point- if he's not getting tools for free (which I think he is, why else would you never post bad reviews of anything) he's making enough money that he can buy them himself for testing.

 

[Fcvapor05]

so chippy that he started pulling down and tearing apart everything he posted at the garage gazette. ruined a whole pile of material before we showed him the door. i tipped off the management here before he did the same with their material. not sure what they told him but that was about the same time he quit showing up here.

What's the story here?

 

[CallumRD1]

He is over 100,000 youtube subscribers at this point- if he's not getting tools for free (which I think he is, why else would you never post bad reviews of anything) he's making enough money that he can buy them himself for testing.

If you listen to his podcast he is very upfront about how he gets his tools for review and what his commitments to the companies are.

 

[Stuey]

A few years ago, when he was first getting started, I liked him. He seemed motivated and confident. And he seemed nice. Some of what he asked me threw up some red flags. After a while people were telling me what he was saying about me behind my back. Over, and over, and over again, to peers, contacts at tool brands, anyone who would listen.

I never knew why, and didn't care. I ignored him, figuring he would burn himself out. It seems he has occupied himself with new feuds and targets.

Despite my very negative feelings towards him and how he does things - reviews included - he doesn't deserve a thread filled with rumors and criticisms. Well, maybe he does, but it doesn't make it right or fair.

A few weeks (months?) ago, there was a similar thread about the Tools in Action guys. I'm good friends with them, and it hurt to see some of the criticisms. Their approach is different than mine, but they're nice, they work hard, they're honest, and they care about their readers.

If you wouldn't say it to someone's face, don't say it in a thread they might not see.

I know I would certainly want to be confronted by anyone that doubted a post, review, or opinion of mine. One cannot defend or explain themselves if not given the chance.

Maybe Dan doesn't know that people are talking about him doing Paid Tool Reviews or Real Trashy Reviews. Recently I heard his channel described as Real Tilted Reviews.

Having been called a shill a handful of times over the years by those who didn't know any better - until I had the chance to respond to their concerns - I know I would want the chance to respond to a "Is Stuey's Content Awesome or Sucky?" thread.

Maybe someone should send him a link to the thread? Someone else would need to do it; he blocked me on social media ages ago.

 

[Stuey]

He is over 100,000 youtube subscribers at this point- if he's not getting tools for free (which I think he is, why else would you never post bad reviews of anything) he's making enough money that he can buy them himself for testing.

That means nothing. You can BUY YouTube subscribers, views, likes, comments, and all that, for pennies.

I've seen it done by several bloggers, magazines, and YouTubers.

One pop-up retailer that tried to get me to look at their marked-up generic import tool copy was talking about their "strong social presence," and their video of the tool indeed had >1M views, but looking at the comments and views, it was obvious that some were paid for, others came from paid ad views.

Anyways, I don't post negative reviews much of the time either. I have the time to do x-many tasks, but have 10x-many tasks to do. Bad tools are less worthy of my time, so they go into a "if I can get to it" pile. But it's rare for me to get to that pile. There are some exceptions, such as if a tool is of higher than average reader interest.

One magazine I worked for in the past doesn't want negative reviews either, saying that readers are more interested in tools we LOVE, rather than the "eh just okay" ones.

Uch, am I really defending this guy?

Also, "free tools" don't stop coming just because I post an unfavorable review.

But, there are some brands I work with that do favor sycophants. They'll be quick to deny it, but evidence proves otherwise. Maybe that can compel some to focus more on "I LOVE IT" reviews than "uch, this *****" ones.

Dan will need to defend himself, but I'll say this.

If you know right away that you don't like the taste of coffee or tea, are you really going to do a day-long Starbucks Fall Flavor review?

 

[Spacey_G]

The issue I have with paid reviews (including reviews of free tools) is not that they're all positive. It's that I simply don't know if the review is positive because it's a good tool or because the reviewer was paid.

 

[kythri]

Honestly, how can you tell if any review is legitimate?

All of the anti or pro-HF/Craftsman/Snap-on/etc. "independent" reviews could be bogus, simply due to the reviewer having a bias for or against a particular brand, and therefore puts out a review to justify their bias.

Really, that's why you don't rely on a single source, and you look for things that can't be faked - i.e. a tool tear down showing components clearly, or some kind of test that can't be fudged.

 

[T45]

Honestly, how can you tell if any review is legitimate?
..."independent" reviews could be bogus, simply due to the reviewer having a bias for or against a particular brand, and therefore puts out a review to justify their bias...

I don't mind honest bias, in the sense that if you have X years of experience, and it has taught you Y tool is the better tool (to your liking), that's a legitimate form of information.

What I am always skeptical of is people that review tools after using it for an hour or two, or people who seem to post up reviews or feedback between the time they buy the tool, and its arrival.

How many times have you hear something like this:

"This tool is awesome. I just bought it. It will be arriving on saturday. Will post up more thoughts after I've used it a bit"

That Sh#t drives me nuts.

Of course you love the tool if you just threw half a paycheck at it. To admit you bought something that sucked would be a bit awkward.

 

[Stooge]

I cant believe it, but I actually agree with Thumper on something! There are tools I've owned and used for years that I still couldn't confidently "review". no way you can confidently and honestly review and promote a product after fondling something for an afternoon and showing that a brand new cordless impact can take off a push mower's blade or something. I've never kept up with his channel or whatever drama he has on his channel. he seemed alright as a member, but to me, and what I noticed in threads with him, I think when he started to get some youtube recognition, he got a little too proud of himself and just started to seem obnoxious. I think I was accosted by him after I remarked something about a cheap, novelty ratchet looking cheap and toy like and I think I just started ignoring him after that.

Who are these people watching all of these tool reviews? other than when I was buying a compressor, I cant think of ever having to watch a video on a ratchet to convince me to buy it or not. Or just have negative reviews! probably harder to make money and get endorsements, but I think it would be a lot more useful. I dont need 20 minutes of someone showing me a Milwaukee impact gun, and repeating the same few facts about it, I already know it will be good without the video, show me something that's a big piece of junk, show it failing , point out the flaws, and then end the video with it being thrown away, stripped for parts or set on fire, then I'll watch

 

[T45]

Experience with tool-failure is important, as is tool-cost, tool inconvenience, tool service, tool life, and other things that need some time to become apparent in use.

I know I have biases my self for tools I "like", but its important to say how you developed these biases and what informed them.

Maybe its ergonomics, maybe its cost/benefit, maybe its easy availability, or portability, or all around "does the job with no glaring mistakes". Some times you want tools that are "remarkable" and other times you want tools "you don't notice" when using them (remarkable=either needs too much attention; or remarkable = simply not working).

 

[Trey T]

that's just the style of the millennial

Then what exactly is the point of doing a review?

I just did a 2 year review of the Eastwood Versa-Cut 60 plasma cutter, it is adequate tool, and that is exactly what I say after using it for 2+ years.

All these guys who open a box do a few tests and call a tool or anything else "Good" are just shills, not even worth calling it a review.

IMO opening a box saying the fit and finish are good and showing it doing a bit of work is not a review it is a AD.

Almost all tools will do their designed purpose right out of the box. I prefer to see a guy who has used the tool day in and day out for 6 months or more calling a tool "Good".

I have a 27 year old Panasonic 9.6v cordless drill that still works, doesn't hold a charge for long but it does still work, now I can call that a good drill because I have used it over time.