I am really digging the expanded content TTC is putting out. The flashlight stuff has been really nice IMO. As far as wrenches go I am just a poor schlub that wrenches as a hobby. The vast majority of my stuff is Husky, So while I enjoy seeing the differences between high end tools, I am all about the cheaper brand comparisons. Getting the most bang for my buck. I think my husky wrenches basically cost less than a dollar a piece lol.
Torque Test Channel - open-end wrench testing
- Thread starter Squankum
- Start date
scooby074
Well-known member
Genuinely surprised about the SK. Snapon preformed as expected. Gearwrench also was a pleasant surprise.
Id love to see some Canadian content. Canadian made Gray vs. Gray's imported Dynamic line and of course some Canadian Tire Professional (older tools offered by CT) vs CT Maximum (replacement for "Professional" vs the standard Canadian Tire offerings. And Napa's Ultrapro.
Id bet 99% of Canadians have or have used a Canadian Tire tool, no joke. Many of the shop supplied tools Ive used in lower end shops are Canadian Tire or Ultrapro.
Id love to see some Canadian content. Canadian made Gray vs. Gray's imported Dynamic line and of course some Canadian Tire Professional (older tools offered by CT) vs CT Maximum (replacement for "Professional" vs the standard Canadian Tire offerings. And Napa's Ultrapro.
Id bet 99% of Canadians have or have used a Canadian Tire tool, no joke. Many of the shop supplied tools Ive used in lower end shops are Canadian Tire or Ultrapro.
71firebird400
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2016
- Messages
- 142
It hurts to see SK do that poorly, what a shame. Not surprised that Snap-On puts out a high quality product pretty much across their entire line. Wright is the obvious sleeper, but not to GJ where they have always been appreciated. My primary set is Wright and it would appear there's no sense in changing that up anytime soon.
Bubba Fett
Well-known member
I do believe the quality increased after SBD took over the Craftsman name. They don't seem to have as much lobster claw as the Sears Chinese-sourced wrenches.
I don't recall, did the video comment on the thickness of the jaws? I grew up using Dad's snap on wrenches but my first wrenches were Cman. One of the differences I noted was the snapons seemed to be a bit thinner. For example a Cman wrench might be 5mm thick at the jaw while the snapon was 4mm. If that wasn't accounted for I could see it making some difference in the overall results though I'm not sure how much.
Exactly. If you can apply even the slightest force on the wrench in the direction of the nut, you mitigate any issues that could result from reversing the head.
It was discussed and actually reported in the scoring. The "torque" ratings were actually expressed in terms of psi per millimeter of jaw thickness.
OK, good to know. I'm not sure that it's correct to treat it so simply but it also isn't correct to ignore it. Due to edge/boundary conditions around the contact area I do not believe that say a 2mm thick wrench could apply exactly 2x the torque as an otherwise identical 1mm wrench. However, it's well beyond my mechanics of materials knowledge to suggest how much the boundary conditions would impact things.
the psi per mm was just 1/3 the score, so was factored but wasn't the make or break for any 1 wrench
A quick way to reduce his viewing audience by 1/10th too.
Don't take that the wrong way, I'm a Canuck too and I agree with everything you said. EVERYONE has some Mastercraft or Maximum in their toolbox here, including me. I also encountered them when spinning wrenches for money.
My suspicion is that the Mastercraft line is mostly Stanley Black & Decker production. The Maximum line seems to be mostly Apex (Gearwrench). So results from those brands more familiar to Americans might be relevant to us too.
One caveat though - recently Canadian Tire rebranded all non-ratcheting wrenches (except specialty ones) as Mastercraft, all ratcheting wrenches are Maximum. I think, but haven't yet confirmed, that this means the polished non-ratcheting Mastercraft wrenches are Apex - blurring the manufacturer ID between the two lines.
I am also interested in Ultrapro. I bought a big set after using my neighbor's - they felt noticeably different. My prediction is that they have tight tolerances and high hardness, relatively speaking. No fancy jaws though. My ratcheting Proto's remain my favorite, but there is something going on with Ultrapro that I like.
Iridium rand
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2021
- Messages
- 218
I just see it as more data, maybe not “fair” to rank them in the same list in a way but it’s good to have an actual measurement of how much of a torque improvement the anti-slip designs actually provide, and it is sort of a niche requirement that fasteners not be marked up at all
mike93lx
ALLIANCE MEMBER
Pro tip. You tube channels are businesses and hobbies, not charities. They don't exist for the greater good and are not independent, audited, testing labs
2ndGearRubber
Well-known member
However, it does confirm I am the superior tool connoisseur, as I had already seen real world testing of Wright being the best wrenches I've seen. I've felt they're better than FD+ for years. Counterpoint, FD+ exists in long pattern, wright does not.
In the "real world", a 9/16 hex hut ain't see 300ft/lb. Thing is, other sizes may actually require 300ft/lb to remove. Being that the same tech is used on a 9/16 and a 24mm, one can expect the results to scale. Personally I don't see the huff. I WANT to snap heads off things with the open end. I want more grip than the fastener can hold. Why? Because the thing is rotted in with rust, a 6 point socket can easily snap it, but due to access I can only use an open end. Or it's the only quick way to do the job. So I want ALL the grip, while I have a torch on the backside and I'm praying I can get this out without disassembling the POS vehicle.
scooby074
Well-known member
A quick way to reduce his viewing audience by 1/10th too.
Don't take that the wrong way, I'm a Canuck too and I agree with everything you said. EVERYONE has some Mastercraft or Maximum in their toolbox here, including me. I also encountered them when spinning wrenches for money.
My suspicion is that the Mastercraft line is mostly Stanley Black & Decker production. The Maximum line seems to be mostly Apex (Gearwrench). So results from those brands more familiar to Americans might be relevant to us too.
One caveat though - recently Canadian Tire rebranded all non-ratcheting wrenches (except specialty ones) as Mastercraft, all ratcheting wrenches are Maximum. I think, but haven't yet confirmed, that this means the polished non-ratcheting Mastercraft wrenches are Apex - blurring the manufacturer ID between the two lines.
I am also interested in Ultrapro. I bought a big set after using my neighbor's - they felt noticeably different. My prediction is that they have tight tolerances and high hardness, relatively speaking. No fancy jaws though. My ratcheting Proto's remain my favorite, but there is something going on with Ultrapro that I like.
Oh I agree. A complete Cancon test would cut down viewership considerably lol. Im thinking more about him just adding a couple to the testing. CT is very much the Canadian equivalent to Sears, history and all. Of course there would be the issue of getting tools to him in the states.
Big issue like you indicated is CT changing suppliers.
I know my older flexhead Mastercraft gearwrenches (10ish yr old) are actually branded Gearwrench on one side, CT also lists actual GW branded tools as available on their website as Online Only. So their is definitely a long term Apex connection. Interestingly the GW branded tools are considerably more expensive than their Mastercraft/Maximum equivalents.
I was under the impression that Stanley was making the Standard Mastercraft wrenches and GW the ratcheting models? But moving all wrench production to GW makes sense.
I think, could be wrong, but Stanley is making all the ratchets and sockets except the newer high tooth Maximums? I dunno.
Deciphering all the OEMS and who makes what for CT would make a great thread on its own if you ask me. I dont know enough about their current production other than GW making the ratchet wrenches to really comment. Strength tests between CT house brands would be eye opening I think.
Ultrapro is really under-rated for being import tools. Great warranty. Like CT not sure who all the OEMs are but I know that my Ultrapro ratchets are rebranded Carlisle , that is rebranded GW. Not sure who makes their impact sockets or their pneumatic tools etc.
Seeing Canadian Gray in a test would be nice. If I had to pick just one Canadian brand to see added to the testing it would be Gray. Id put it against Snapon anyday
Last edited:
For a silly test that means nothing and is not relatable to the real world, the cheap wrenches sure did poorly, the wrenches with a reputation for being decent middle of the road options did decent, and the couple wrenches known for causing the least amount of cussing won.... on a test bench that just spits out numbers.
personally I'm glad these silly channels exist, it didn't cost me anything to watch. I can take the data and use it or not. Maybe complaining about everything is a generational thing?
personally I'm glad these silly channels exist, it didn't cost me anything to watch. I can take the data and use it or not. Maybe complaining about everything is a generational thing?
Jswain
Well-known member
YouTube tests always end up with 33% of the discussion being guys that loved it, best test ever and they knew forever ** brand was da bomb. Then you have 33% who hate it, they did all the wrong tests, they are stupid, misspelled this word and they should have used that bolt. And then there is the 33% who realize it's just comparative testing.
33% of you will love this post, hate this post, and just read this post and move on
33% of you will love this post, hate this post, and just read this post and move on
neophyte
Well-known member
Years ago, Consumer Reports did a test on circular saws, and unlike any woodworking magazine or construction magazine would have, Consumer Reports just tested the saws using the blades the saws came with.
At that time, Skil was still including a basic steel sawblade without carbide tips, likely to keep costs down compared to competitors whose saws were likely less expensive to manufacture.
The Skil wormdrive saw did poorly in the CR tests due to the basic steel blade.
Any actual magazine for Construction/woodworking used a batch of the same blades on all the saws they tested to eliminate the sawblade as a variable, although they sometimes also tested the included blade a bit as well.
Consumer Reports is supposedly a proper testing laboratory.
Independent tests by dome guy on Youtube or on a blog aren’t necessarily going to be as high quality as some laboratory done test, but that doesn’t mean the tests are worthless, especially if they explain how the tests were done, and show video of the testing.
mike93lx
ALLIANCE MEMBER
Consumer reports are not independent at all. You missed that part.
Their legacy of giving the corolla a high rating but the prism a crappy one will never die. They are not credible, IMO
I'm not sure how any of that has coherent relevance to my point.
71firebird400
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2016
- Messages
- 142
Welcome to Page 3, where the Boomers are out in full force Monday-morning quarterbacking the video, complaining about everything under the sun, and using their pocketbook thesaurus' to debate one another.
Nothin' to see here, folks!
Nothin' to see here, folks!
mike93lx
ALLIANCE MEMBER
Get off my lawn!
mark-NJ
Well-known member
I need something explained to me because I honestly don't understand: My takeaway from this test is that, when misused, wrenches will distort and slip. Wrenches like this are not supposed to be used with "cheater leverage" applied. The fact that failure occurs when unintended force is applied ought not surprise anyone. Surprising that S-K failed before cheaper brands? Ok...yes...sure. But I would imagine that ALL of these wrenches failed at a force well beyond the tool's intended force.
If you must apply that much torque, then an open-end wrench isn't the right tool.
So, seriously....and I'm not trolling at all...but what does this (otherwise well-produced) video prove? That an over-torqued wrench will fail? That shouldn't surprise anyone. So what was the point of this?
If you must apply that much torque, then an open-end wrench isn't the right tool.
So, seriously....and I'm not trolling at all...but what does this (otherwise well-produced) video prove? That an over-torqued wrench will fail? That shouldn't surprise anyone. So what was the point of this?
Well yes, of course. Theoretically an open end is NEVER the right tool for a hex bolt, only for things with 2 flats. Yet they are still used due to space constraints, so here we are.
If how well an open end grips on X fastener is irrelevant to you fair enough, but it may be to most people otherwise brands probably wouldn't falling over themselves making ever newer anti slip grip open end designs.
The amount of total force or torque required in this test is obviously a function of bolt size and how new and pristine everything is. Apply this to a smaller wrench and you're 100% be able to overcome the bolt head or nut by hand. Apply this to rusty and corroded beyond belief stuff and you have scenarios where they do take an absurd amount of torque to start moving. More than even new hardware can handle, because of that rust interface basically welded together.
But you can't measure stationary nuts and have consistent rust to overcome when you need data. So makes sense to me.
As with all their videos, its the comparison between the tools that's super useful, not any single figure or total.
If they all appeared to be more than worthy of gripping on stuff with hand use, then you my friend are about to save A LOT of money by buying stuff at the bottom of the list if it makes no difference to you. I wish i felt similarly, it would definitly help with the credit card payments
2ndGearRubber
Well-known member
I think they did that for ease of testing. I can break off a 9/16 (their test size) headed bolt with normal wrench lengths. It's very easy on an alignment or similar, where you have to use open ends, to round or slip with normal force and hand tools.
You could 100% generate that force by hand. But 3 test per wrench, all those samples, would have been a workout.
Ton ton
Well-known member
I use a lot of force on the open end of the sk xframe wrench. The key is to have a super snug fit for the bolt or nut. Just my limited experience. I'm not a mechanic.
Handyandy23
Well-known member
The soft grade fasteners were used so that they could measure the point at which the fastener rounded. If you use hardened fasteners you're either going to break the wrench, or start deforming the nuts/threaded rod, and neither of those results gives you much data, other than a pass/fail.
Theoretically, if a wrench doesn't round a new, soft fastener at a low torque, then it should be able to better handle a higher torque on a rusted fastener without stripping the head.
It's also "not the point" that you shouldn't be using a cheater bar to apply that much torque to a 9/16 fastener, they are just using smaller, soft fasteners so they don't have to go up to a million bazillion foot pounds to get a result. The value in the data isn't the exact numbers they're measuring, it's in comparing the numbers between the different wrench brands relative to each other.
In any kind of problem solving or lab testing scenario, you want to find ways to aggravate the issue you're testing for. If you have a car part that is suspected of failing due to high temperatures in Arizona, for example, you don't test the parts at 100 degrees just because that's what temperature it was in Arizona on that day. If you did that you might be standing there testing for the next year. You take it in a lab and crank the temperature up until you start seeing failures, and then compare at that temperature to known good parts. It doesn't matter if the temperature is higher than it is "in real life", you just need to quickly rank parts from best to worst so you can look closer at what characteristics make the best ones better.
Theoretically, if a wrench doesn't round a new, soft fastener at a low torque, then it should be able to better handle a higher torque on a rusted fastener without stripping the head.
It's also "not the point" that you shouldn't be using a cheater bar to apply that much torque to a 9/16 fastener, they are just using smaller, soft fasteners so they don't have to go up to a million bazillion foot pounds to get a result. The value in the data isn't the exact numbers they're measuring, it's in comparing the numbers between the different wrench brands relative to each other.
In any kind of problem solving or lab testing scenario, you want to find ways to aggravate the issue you're testing for. If you have a car part that is suspected of failing due to high temperatures in Arizona, for example, you don't test the parts at 100 degrees just because that's what temperature it was in Arizona on that day. If you did that you might be standing there testing for the next year. You take it in a lab and crank the temperature up until you start seeing failures, and then compare at that temperature to known good parts. It doesn't matter if the temperature is higher than it is "in real life", you just need to quickly rank parts from best to worst so you can look closer at what characteristics make the best ones better.
Iridium rand
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2021
- Messages
- 218
What would you suggest for a more “real world” test?
The primary goal of testing wrenches against each other is to see how the WRENCHES perform, if the bolt just breaks or thread strips every time then you would have a useless test, every result would be the same bar the absolute worst maybe. fresh grade 8 bolts are far less likely to round/slip than most common situations so using the worst case you can easily replicate consistently, the soft coupling nuts, make the most sense to test how well each wrench can maintain a grip without rounding.
TTC is by far the least clickbaity and most objective channel on tools in general that exists today, buys all their own products and the guy literally almost ended the channel because he got a job at astro
dnschmidt
Well-known member
The test is completely legit. There is no other way to do it. Use super hardware and everything passes. What we expected to happen happened indicating that he did something right. If Wright grip fell on it's *** that would have been odd and brought the methodology into question. Those that did well were expected to do well and those that sucked didn't shock me at all. The only problem I saw was considering 16mm and 5/8" to be equal. They are not and in such a test, which frankly is more or less a fitment test, thousands of an inch matter. The tighter the fit between the wrench and the nut the better it's going to score. That's why I like TOPTUL even though they don't have a Wrightgrip type of design. Their wrenches are very tight on an appropriately sized fastener. In fact it was one of the complaints that Eric O. had with the TOPTUL wrenches that I sent him. The swollen rusted nuts that is his life's work often were too big for the appropriate TOPTUL wrench to fit.
rancherbill
Well-known member
Breaking something is not a test.
It is supposed to be a real world test. First of all the bolt should break or strip the treads. Why go through with the charade of making it look like a 'Real World" bolt. For what it's worth you could hook a wrench onto bucket of a really big excavator and break every one.
Secondly he could get the meter analyzer that machinists use and show the composition of the wrenches. I suspect that they all using a very similar alloy.
He even states in the beginning that he does not have the equipment to properly conduct the test.
Then some analysis by a forging guy that addresses the hardness and toughness that is done by the heat treating.
Accurate measurement of how much they spread and whether they return to dimension later.
Then armed with lots of data make some conclusions.
This video and many other vids on you tube are just adult versions of Science Fair projects. This one is as scientific as all the volcano projects you see - not a science project.
He is just creating a YouTube for him to make $3 per 1000 views
I watch this channel and others that test various hand tools. As soon as the tester uses any kind of helper, (another wrench or a length of pipe), on the tool being tested, the rest of the video is just entertainment. As a weekend warrior, I'll never put that much stress on a wrench or ratchet. A pro might have to in some instances, I won't.
Fedwrench
ALLIANCE MEMBER
A long time ago, Real Tool Reviews also did an open end wrench test on You Tube using harder fasteners with similar results. Perhaps all of you peeps whining about the test conditions can find that video and view it. At that time, I mentioned that if SK could take the anti slip open end off of their X Frame ratcheting wrenches and place it on their long pattern combination wrenches, they would have a winner-winner chicken dinner wrench. Of course, they will still have to address the wide in the hips boxed end but, that's another issue 
Yep I look at it like that just confirms to me the cheaper stuff is adequate.
Because if I'm in fear of rounding a fastener off with an open end wrench, that just means I need to remove more stuff to gain access for the box end, a ratchet, impact, heat, or whatever.
IMHO open end wrenches are mostly just for stuff that isn't much more than finger tight.
I bought a set of the Snap On combination wrenches to replace a set of Hazet 600n that I used for over a decade professionally.
It was the first I heard of these new open end designs. The first nut I cracked open with the Snap On was telling. The confidence it inspired in it's positive lock on the nut could be felt easily by hand. The difference was night and day. I am not surprised that these objective results backed up my subjective hand sensations.
The Snap On open ends felt miles ahead of the Hazets I owned. And the Hazets were top wrenches.
It was the first I heard of these new open end designs. The first nut I cracked open with the Snap On was telling. The confidence it inspired in it's positive lock on the nut could be felt easily by hand. The difference was night and day. I am not surprised that these objective results backed up my subjective hand sensations.
The Snap On open ends felt miles ahead of the Hazets I owned. And the Hazets were top wrenches.
American Locomotive
Well-known member
I'm a weekend warrior, I put cheaters on things all the time. Besides, the force he was putting on those wrenches could be done without a helper - especially on the wrenches that gave up rather early. The cheater just makes his life easier.
There are so many applications where it's just not feasible to use box ends. Hydraulic applications come to mind (and I've worked on tractors with lines so close together that not even a line wrench would work). Jam-nuts, brake fittings, adjusters, and a myriad of other things.
Rabid Badger
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2018
- Messages
- 1,338
If you're testing a product and it breaks, that is absolutely a valid test result. That said, the only things they damaged in this video were the nuts. Considering they were testing to see which wrench could apply the most force before slipping/rounding off the fastener, that was literally integral to what they were doing.
As stated above, they were testing to see which wrench could apply the most force before slipping/rounding off the fastener. The test was designed to obtain that data, and succeeded.
You've never rounded off a fastener with the open end of a wrench? I have. They were all "Real World" fasteners.
Unless, of course, we're all living in a simulation. Thanks for the existential dread, Bill.
I'm not sure what makes you think this statement is relevant to the current conversation. It isn't.
Why?
I suspect you're wrong.
Why would the bargain bin manufacturers use high-grade alloy if they aren't going to bother to harden it properly?
Really? When?
Why? If you don't know how heat treating works there are plenty of YouTube videos explaining it. Rehashing it here serves no purpose.
They weren't testing for jaw spread. If any of the wrenches permanently deformed they would have said so.
They gathered the data necessary for the parameter they were testing.
Is it a science project or not? I'm afraid you're going to have to pick a position and stick to it. Not that you'd recognize a scientific test if you saw it.
They created an informative video about a specific aspect of wrench performance. It's pretty clear you wanted it to be something else and now are attempting to criticize them for not making that instead. That's not so much a "them" problem as it is a "you" problem.
Jswain
Well-known member
I suspect if FD snap on would have held more then this video would be more welcome here. Gotta be a tough pill to swallow forking out that change to get walked on by your buddies Capri he bought off Amazon 
Y'all better go sendem' off to warranty for unpolished open ends...hahaha
Y'all better go sendem' off to warranty for unpolished open ends...hahaha
Last edited:
Perhaps in their minds. Their tests are riddled with subjectiveness and poor methodology so I quit looking at them long ago. They should never be confused with a real lab like say UL.
Agreed. If they show their test methodology and have honest results the viewer can decide for themselves the validity of the data.
Iridium rand
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2021
- Messages
- 218
The jaws spreading and/or rounding the nut isn’t a realistic outcome to you? Obviously you’re either working in a way different field than the rest of us or you don’t use them at all, because that’s why there was demand in the first place for him to make this video, that open ends are known for doing that and people want to see which one they can get the most torque with when a box end isn’t usable as he mentioned
The parameters you mentioned testing are not relevant to the one being tested, the amount torque each one can achieve before the wrench loses it’s grip. Testing hardness and alloy composition may help explain WHY the wrenches performed as they did, but does not do anything to show how much torque they can handle before slipping
They literally do everything a channel possibly can to prove it’s not a cash grab or clickbait, declining offers for free tools and sponsorships, explaining what the results mean and what they don’t, their limitations and strengths in addition to everything I said before, if that’s not good enough for you then you’re being deliberately obtuse or Expecting him to be NIST entirely out of pocket, and you’d probably still say the same thing if he actually did that