pedrodagr8
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2013
- Messages
- 613
This is a follow-up to my Tronex review. If you would like to see the unboxing, various images and to learn more about this company making precision cutters and pliers in the USA, see this thread. Because of the precision of the tools, I had a hard time getting good photos using my cellphone camera; time to bust out a microscope.
Under the microscope
This turned out to be MUCH harder than anticipated. The microscope is a standard slide-type inverted stereoscope. It has no camera so I had to take pics via the eye pieces. This is surprisingly hard. Anyways, since I was going to this trouble, I decided to turn this review into more of a comparative. On the chopping block today are some Chinese made Radio Shack flush cutters (red handles), USA-made Xuron flush cutters (teal handles) and the USA-made Tronex cutters and pliers.
In this section ,I also test how strong the cutting edges are on the tools. To do this, I performed 100 cuts on some spare copper wire and then compare the before and after of the edges under a microscope. I was curious if I would see any signs of wear and tear on the cutters.
First, three images showing the various magnification levels used. These all focus on the Tronex text on the handle.
Radio Shack 5" Nippy Cutters (China)
First up we have the china made Radio Shack 5" Nippy Cutters. I didn't have much hope for these as they are more or less the bottom of the barrel in quality. They were as expected.
In the first microscope image, we are checking how well the cutters come together. These are being held closed by my hand and they should come gracefully closed at the tip. They should not be fully overlapped nor should they be fully apart. Fully apart means that you likely have to squeeze harder to make the cut. Fully overlapped means that the edges are hitting each and over time this can dull the cutting edges. What we see here is that they never come fully together. Meanwhile, in the second we can very clearly see the rough grinding marks. By the third and fourth microscope images, the lack of quality even on the cutting edge has become clear. The cutting edge is large, rough and uneven.
On to the 100 cut test:
The benefit of having such a rough cutting edge is that you can't really tell what is damage from the cuts and what is just bad manufacturing. Additionally, the final image shows a representative cut on a copper wire. Some "tail" is expected due to the nature of a cutting edge but this tail should be minimal. You can see the wire is cut but it leaves a VERY long thin tail in the middle. This is likely a direct result of the gap between the cutting surfaces. Across the board, this cutter screams cheap! I didn't expect quality and it didn't provide it. It doesn't so much cut the wire as mangle it into submission.
Xuron 170-II Micro-Shear Flush Cutter (USA)
Next up is the Xuron 170-II Micro-Shear Flush cutter. I had more hopes for these as they are made in the USA. Unfortunately, while they are better made than the RS ones in some ways, in others they are MUCH worse. This just goes to show that not everything that is USA made is high quality. The cutters have a Rockwell C Scale hardness of 53-56, which implies stainless steel. They were purchased directly from Amazon.
With these, the grinding marks and the edge are MUCH more fine than on the RS versions. Unfortunately, this is where the good points end. In the second image you can see that the tips of the cutters don't line up properly. While there is NO light visible between the cutters, these use a shear cut instead of a compression cut so the overlap is expected. The tips not lining up is much more worrisome.
Two problems here. First, we can see the softness of the steel coming into play. After 100 cuts, we are starting to see small pits in the cutting edge. If you look closely you can see them, they are much more obvious in person under the microscope but this was the best I could do to capture them. In the second image, we see something MUCH more worrisome. So much for flush cutting. This is the new Z-cut style
This is completely unacceptable for a supposed flush cutter. The 'Z' easily catches your finger nail, so the cut is far from flush. The cutter surfaces don't match up and quality control didn't catch this or worse possibly didn't care. This is unacceptable to me, even the Chinese cutters at least got THIS right. If I had to chose between these two I am not sure if I could. So maybe support the American manufacturer I guess.
Tronex 7222 (USA)
The last for comparison is the Tronex Ergonomic Handled Taper Relief Flush Cutter Model 7222. I have the highest expectations for these and at this price point, they better perform more or less flawlessly.
Now THIS is what we are looking for. In the second image, the cutting tips gracefully come to a close at the very tip. We can see that the grinding marks are very fine (similar to the Xuron, maybe slightly better). The edges are very nice and sharp. You may see a few blurry distortions or spots along the edges. THis is the tool oil on the surface and/or dust sticking to the tool oil. In the final image, near the bottom you can see a small clear item along the edge. This is either a micro-droplet of tool oil or it might be a large unicellular organism (no joke as this is the magnification we use to count cells). Either way, the edge is clearly straight and uniform even at this magnification. VERY nicely done so far, on to the 100 cuts.
There is ZERO signs of wear after 100 cuts. Not ANYWHERE along the cutting edge. Considering this cutter is rated for hundreds of thousands of cuts, this is exactly as expected. It's still damn nice to see confirmed. Lastly, the cuts made are EXACTLY as I would expect them to be. There is a slight hump from the cut and that is it. If even that slight hump is unacceptable they offer a Razor Flush version which will make it dramatically smaller than even this. Frankly, at this point these cutters are clearly showing their greatly superior quality. If you can afford them, they are likely the last cutter you will ever buy.
Tronex 521 (USA)
The last one up is the
one isn't involved in the comparison but I still got a few images of it under the microscope.
Clearly, the same precision that went into the cutters went into these needle-nose pliers. The sides of the pliers meet perfectly at the tip in a well machined junction. The edges are rounded where needed and sharp where needed. VERY high quality stuff. Unlike more industrial needle-nose pliers these pliers have smooth jaws. This is to minimize marring on components or jewelry.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while in person the differences in quality are obvious. Under a microscope, the differences really become crystal clear. The Tronex tools are clearly hands over fists better quality, warranting every penny of the cost. Not only are you supporting an american manufacturer who supports american materials companies; you are getting a quality product that will last generations.
Under the microscope
This turned out to be MUCH harder than anticipated. The microscope is a standard slide-type inverted stereoscope. It has no camera so I had to take pics via the eye pieces. This is surprisingly hard. Anyways, since I was going to this trouble, I decided to turn this review into more of a comparative. On the chopping block today are some Chinese made Radio Shack flush cutters (red handles), USA-made Xuron flush cutters (teal handles) and the USA-made Tronex cutters and pliers.
In this section ,I also test how strong the cutting edges are on the tools. To do this, I performed 100 cuts on some spare copper wire and then compare the before and after of the edges under a microscope. I was curious if I would see any signs of wear and tear on the cutters.
First, three images showing the various magnification levels used. These all focus on the Tronex text on the handle.
Radio Shack 5" Nippy Cutters (China)
First up we have the china made Radio Shack 5" Nippy Cutters. I didn't have much hope for these as they are more or less the bottom of the barrel in quality. They were as expected.
In the first microscope image, we are checking how well the cutters come together. These are being held closed by my hand and they should come gracefully closed at the tip. They should not be fully overlapped nor should they be fully apart. Fully apart means that you likely have to squeeze harder to make the cut. Fully overlapped means that the edges are hitting each and over time this can dull the cutting edges. What we see here is that they never come fully together. Meanwhile, in the second we can very clearly see the rough grinding marks. By the third and fourth microscope images, the lack of quality even on the cutting edge has become clear. The cutting edge is large, rough and uneven.
On to the 100 cut test:
The benefit of having such a rough cutting edge is that you can't really tell what is damage from the cuts and what is just bad manufacturing. Additionally, the final image shows a representative cut on a copper wire. Some "tail" is expected due to the nature of a cutting edge but this tail should be minimal. You can see the wire is cut but it leaves a VERY long thin tail in the middle. This is likely a direct result of the gap between the cutting surfaces. Across the board, this cutter screams cheap! I didn't expect quality and it didn't provide it. It doesn't so much cut the wire as mangle it into submission.
Xuron 170-II Micro-Shear Flush Cutter (USA)
Next up is the Xuron 170-II Micro-Shear Flush cutter. I had more hopes for these as they are made in the USA. Unfortunately, while they are better made than the RS ones in some ways, in others they are MUCH worse. This just goes to show that not everything that is USA made is high quality. The cutters have a Rockwell C Scale hardness of 53-56, which implies stainless steel. They were purchased directly from Amazon.
With these, the grinding marks and the edge are MUCH more fine than on the RS versions. Unfortunately, this is where the good points end. In the second image you can see that the tips of the cutters don't line up properly. While there is NO light visible between the cutters, these use a shear cut instead of a compression cut so the overlap is expected. The tips not lining up is much more worrisome.
Two problems here. First, we can see the softness of the steel coming into play. After 100 cuts, we are starting to see small pits in the cutting edge. If you look closely you can see them, they are much more obvious in person under the microscope but this was the best I could do to capture them. In the second image, we see something MUCH more worrisome. So much for flush cutting. This is the new Z-cut style
This is completely unacceptable for a supposed flush cutter. The 'Z' easily catches your finger nail, so the cut is far from flush. The cutter surfaces don't match up and quality control didn't catch this or worse possibly didn't care. This is unacceptable to me, even the Chinese cutters at least got THIS right. If I had to chose between these two I am not sure if I could. So maybe support the American manufacturer I guess.Tronex 7222 (USA)
The last for comparison is the Tronex Ergonomic Handled Taper Relief Flush Cutter Model 7222. I have the highest expectations for these and at this price point, they better perform more or less flawlessly.
Now THIS is what we are looking for. In the second image, the cutting tips gracefully come to a close at the very tip. We can see that the grinding marks are very fine (similar to the Xuron, maybe slightly better). The edges are very nice and sharp. You may see a few blurry distortions or spots along the edges. THis is the tool oil on the surface and/or dust sticking to the tool oil. In the final image, near the bottom you can see a small clear item along the edge. This is either a micro-droplet of tool oil or it might be a large unicellular organism (no joke as this is the magnification we use to count cells). Either way, the edge is clearly straight and uniform even at this magnification. VERY nicely done so far, on to the 100 cuts.
There is ZERO signs of wear after 100 cuts. Not ANYWHERE along the cutting edge. Considering this cutter is rated for hundreds of thousands of cuts, this is exactly as expected. It's still damn nice to see confirmed. Lastly, the cuts made are EXACTLY as I would expect them to be. There is a slight hump from the cut and that is it. If even that slight hump is unacceptable they offer a Razor Flush version which will make it dramatically smaller than even this. Frankly, at this point these cutters are clearly showing their greatly superior quality. If you can afford them, they are likely the last cutter you will ever buy.
Tronex 521 (USA)
The last one up is the
Clearly, the same precision that went into the cutters went into these needle-nose pliers. The sides of the pliers meet perfectly at the tip in a well machined junction. The edges are rounded where needed and sharp where needed. VERY high quality stuff. Unlike more industrial needle-nose pliers these pliers have smooth jaws. This is to minimize marring on components or jewelry.
Conclusion
In conclusion, while in person the differences in quality are obvious. Under a microscope, the differences really become crystal clear. The Tronex tools are clearly hands over fists better quality, warranting every penny of the cost. Not only are you supporting an american manufacturer who supports american materials companies; you are getting a quality product that will last generations.
I probably should expect better, but I still see this type as disposable vs. the premium models/brands.
Looks like a blade alignment issue under load to me (lateral spread of jaws during cut). 
YMMV for those that don't use them very often.
