mobiledynamics
Well-known member
Does anyone know the release date on the Framer ?
Does anyone know the release date on the Framer ?
I have the 2783 angle grinder and use it extensively for light fabrication. For my uses it's perfect. If I'm using it a lot, I'll get 20-30 min from a 5.0 battery, but I'm usually picking it up here and there for a minute or two at a time, so a pair of batteries can last me all day.
For auto/home DIY, what would you guys recommend? The new M12 FUEL™ Installation Drill/Driver Kit or a M12 FUEL Hammer Drill and Impact Driver Combo Kit
I'm wondering if it will be annoying switching out attachments on the 4-in-1 tool.
For auto/home DIY, what would you guys recommend? The new M12 FUEL™ Installation Drill/Driver Kit or a M12 FUEL Hammer Drill and Impact Driver Combo Kit
I'm wondering if it will be annoying switching out attachments on the 4-in-1 tool.
Just the opposite actually. If the Impact is Fuel such as the High Torque model it will get more power out of the 3.0 HO where as the vacuum doesn't need the high output battery to produce more torque. It needs the longer run times of a bigger battery. If they're anything like their Ryobi little brothers, the 3.0HO and 5XC would be fairly close in runtime depending on device. I find the Ryobi 3ah HP+ outperforms the older 4aH HP batteries in all areas.
The release has evidently been pushed back to the first quarter of next year.
So the 3.0 HO on a impact wrench would be better than a 5.0? Assuming the high torque was designed for a 5.0 XC, could it benefit power wise (not runtime) from a 6.0 or 8.0 HO? I thought that if the tool was designed for a certain amp rating, a bigger battery just lengthens run time but does not provide more power
Sent from my iPhone using Garage Journal
Yep, and for as long as this is taking, Milwaukee better not get it wrong.
At this rate if it's anything less than stellar they'll be a laughing stock, and the nailers are already not that well regarded
So the 3.0 HO on a impact wrench would be better than a 5.0? Assuming the high torque was designed for a 5.0 XC, could it benefit power wise (not runtime) from a 6.0 or 8.0 HO? I thought that if the tool was designed for a certain amp rating, a bigger battery just lengthens run time but does not provide more power
Sent from my iPhone using Garage Journal
All the HO batteries have 21700 cells and will supply more power to the tools when they demand it. 21700 can charge and discharge faster than 18650 cells is the reason why. Tools that draw hard like most of the saws will see the biggest benefit. Any fuel tool capable of harnessing the power will see a difference if it demands it. Real world tests show the 3HO (single row) performing comparably to the 5XC (double row) in initial performance, but it dies faster as expected.
Like I stated a few posts back though the new HO batteries are enormous compared to the XC size. For example, the 6HO is roughly the same in dimensions as the 9HD. They are awkwardly large on a drill, driver or pistol grip style tool. There is definitely a trade off to be made and your tool choice will dictate it.
I get confused over HO and HD?
HD was the labeling for the largest packs, originally the 9 then 12, at first. With the converison to 21700 cells, HO will be the naming for batteries with those cells going forward including the 12. I expect the HD naming to fade away, along with the 9.0 battery because of the HO series. In the meantime, the 9HD and older stock of the 12HD will still carry the HD name until newer models just stop having it.
All the HO batteries have 21700 cells and will supply more power to the tools when they demand it. 21700 can charge and discharge faster than 18650 cells is the reason why. Tools that draw hard like most of the saws will see the biggest benefit. Any fuel tool capable of harnessing the power will see a difference if it demands it. Real world tests show the 3HO (single row) performing comparably to the 5XC (double row) in initial performance, but it dies faster as expected.
Like I stated a few posts back though the new HO batteries are enormous compared to the XC size. For example, the 6HO is roughly the same in dimensions as the 9HD. They are awkwardly large on a drill, driver or pistol grip style tool. There is definitely a trade off to be made and your tool choice will dictate it.
For auto/home DIY, what would you guys recommend? The new M12 FUEL[emoji769] Installation Drill/Driver Kit or a M12 FUEL Hammer Drill and Impact Driver Combo Kit
I'm wondering if it will be annoying switching out attachments on the 4-in-1 tool.
I recently bought a NON fuel M12 1/4" ratchet and am looking for a rubber boot for it. I can't seem to find one anywhere. Does anyone have a source for one?
HD was the labeling for the largest packs, originally the 9 then 12, at first. With the converison to 21700 cells, HO will be the naming for batteries with those cells going forward including the 12. I expect the HD naming to fade away, along with the 9.0 battery because of the HO series. In the meantime, the 9HD and older stock of the 12HD will still carry the HD name until newer models just stop having it.
I recently bought a NON fuel M12 1/4" ratchet and am looking for a rubber boot for it. I can't seem to find one anywhere. Does anyone have a source for one?
Actually, to make it a bit more confusing, HD is only referring to 3 rows of cells, so the 12.0 is actually an HO HD pack.

My you are right, that is confusing!
Can you explain what you mean here to us previously Yellow folks who are doing a conversion?
There are three main sizes of batteries.
1 row of cells - slim pack = CP pack
2 rows of cells - "normal" pack = XC pack
3 rows of cells - 9.0 and 12.0 = HD pack
There are now 4 different HO (High output packs)
1 CP 3.0 pack
1 XC 6.0 pack
1 XC 8.0 pack
1 HD 12.0 pack
Here's a much more detailed explanation https://toolguyd.com/milwaukee-m18-cordless-power-tool-battery-sizes-explained/
I believe I got mine from Snap On, but it was for 3/8"
So what are the thoughts on the 2457 non-fuel M12 ratchet- enough torque to be worth getting for a DIYer, or too weak (35 ft-lb) to bother with unless you have a specific task involving a lot of low-torque fasteners?
Part of a set on today's HD deal of the day- $99 for ratchet, battery, charger, bag, and screwdriver- cheaper than the bare tool price for the ratchet!
https://www.homedepot.com/p/Milwauk...h-Battery-Charger-Tool-Bag-2401-21R/310446584
So what are the thoughts on the 2457 non-fuel M12 ratchet- enough torque to be worth getting for a DIYer, or too weak (35 ft-lb) to bother with unless you have a specific task involving a lot of low-torque fasteners?
Part of a set on today's HD deal of the day- $99 for ratchet, battery, charger, bag, and screwdriver- cheaper than the bare tool price for the ratchet!
https://www.homedepot.com/p/Milwauke...-21R/310446584
So what are the thoughts on the 2457 non-fuel M12 ratchet- enough torque to be worth getting for a DIYer, or too weak (35 ft-lb) to bother with unless you have a specific task involving a lot of low-torque fasteners?
Part of a set on today's HD deal of the day- $99 for ratchet, battery, charger, bag, and screwdriver- cheaper than the bare tool price for the ratchet!
https://www.homedepot.com/p/Milwauk...h-Battery-Charger-Tool-Bag-2401-21R/310446584



Depending on what kind of automotive work you are doing NEITHER may be acceptable. They are not going to do lug nuts !For auto/home DIY, what would you guys recommend ?
I am learning this the "hard way". I need a bigger M12 battery. I was hoping to go with the 3.0 Ah, but I probably should get the 6.0 Ah.But generally, if a tool has to dig deep - even for a second or two - a deeper well is better.
.
.
.
Larger batts also stay in the "sweet spot" much longer,