Wattage ratings for cordless tools

[YesIHaveAHammer]

Why none?

Key benefits I'd appreciate:

1. Indication of performance against other models
2. Matching the tool to the right battery for optimal performance

When I was last choosing some cordless tools, it seemed a lot of detective work was needed to figure out which voltage and tier would be suitable, and which models are equivalent between brands. Reading on here, watching videos of people doing timed testing. Same again with matching batteries, hearsay that this tool is fine with 5Ah but really impresses with more, or that other one really needs a big Forge. There's a community spreadsheet of battery performance but no data about the tools to match it against.

This just came to mind again because Milwaukee does give this information for their angle grinders, in terms of equivalent corded performance e.g. the 115mm Fuel is similar to 1200W.

 

[Nobody-named-Olli]

Meaningless because of too many variables/ options and no standard. “Too much information.”

With corded/ mains powered tools it is the max. rated input that is published, which is easy - but in the end equally meaningless.

Not interested in such a calculated/fictional number. I look at other data, (recommended max. drilling diameter, fastener size, cutting depth, speed, (…) ) then battery technology (what cells, how many rows) and then use common sense to pair them. Long enough in the game to not need another marketing approach like they did/ tried with Voltage.

If you find publications that expressly state a number to compare to corded tools, that is simply an attempt to sway people that are on the verge about their decision on cordless vs. corded, or if to purchase cordless at all. It has zero real world credibility, but it is what a vast majority of people will refer to. -> “Cordless is underpowered, the battery is always discharged when I need it.” that’s these people’s favorite phrases, build on decades old, past experience. It has zero credibility in 2025. For them, these marketing phrases are brought up by the manufacturers.

With today’s cordless tools & available battery technology it’s entirely a non issue. Look at what the manufacturers rates the tool for/ where they define the “sweet spot”, then you know if you need to go “higher” or “lower” in their portfolio.

Far more interesting when it comes to batteries, is stuff like weight to capacity to runtime to charging time and possible down time for rest/ cooling if applicable - and how it is actually going to be used.

So, I’m camp I don’t need that number.

Kind regards,
Olli

 

[YesIHaveAHammer]

Meaningless because of too many variables

I agree there are more variables in the cordless world.

With corded/ mains powered tools it is the max. rated input that is published, which is easy - but in the end equally meaningless.

I think it does have some use. Take corded hammer drills, I've used a few 750W ones, so when buying I could quickly recognise that ones way off that (600W, 1100W) are in a different league.

use common sense to pair them

I expect you have a lot more knowledge than common sense One useful and easy to obtain piece of information might be to see what battery a tool comes with when bought as a kit.

If you find publications that expressly state a number to compare to corded tools, that is simply an attempt to sway people that are on the verge about their decision on cordless vs. corded

With the grinders I already knew generally go for Fuel, but the wattages were useful to say where on the power spectrum they were.

 

[KnurledNut]

Why none?

Because corded tools have a consistent mains power.
Cordless tools are only as good as the battery powering it and that value can vary.
DeWalt’s solution was to come up with their own power rating called UWO or Unit Watts Out. This is the highest speed and torque output potential. Think best case scenario.

 

[Nobody-named-Olli]

I agree there are more variables in the cordless world.

And that’s why manufacturers would have a heck of a time trying to convey that to customers in an easy to grasp graphic or table. It would never be a single number. And if there is no standard, every manufacturer will come up with their own calculation to claim to be the “best”.

I think it does have some use. Take corded hammer drills, I've used a few 750W ones, so when buying I could quickly recognise that ones way off that (600W, 1100W) are in a different league.

Are they? I agree that in general one would assume that, but here’s just one example of why I call it meaningless:

My Hilti TE 2-M is rated at 600W (input) and my much later bought Bosch GBH 2-26 is rated 850W (input). The Hilti outperforms that Bosch in a couple of applications. Not because the Bosch is a bad machine by any means, but because they are build different. Just the number means nothing. It get’s a lot worse when you take non-brand machines into the equation.

I expect you have a lot more knowledge than common sense One useful and easy to obtain piece of information might be to see what battery a tool comes with when bought as a kit.

Likely if you look at a single tool with battery & charger. But larger, “nice price”/“starter”, kits almost always come with the cheapest battery available on that system. There a probably exemptions.


Kind regards,
Olli

 

[GeoBruin]

I agree there are too many variables, not least of which is the battery. A small "kit" battery will suffer heavy voltage sag under load, which will result in much lower output wattage than a larger battery. And then each platform is constantly updating batteries (18650, then 21700, then tabless, then pouch cells, etc.) with each advance having higher power deliver potential. So as soon as you put a rating on the box, it becomes obsolete.

So it would be a game of which battery was used to rate the tool, so each manufacturer would rate the tool with the biggest baddest battery on their platform, even if that battery was too big to practically use with (for example) a hand drill.

 

[Steve_P]

TTC has done some watt type testing on cordless tools. And I'm sure you will say that's not what you want....

If you want manufacturers to publish ratings, can I interest you in a 120V 5HP shop vac?

 

[YesIHaveAHammer]

And I'm sure you will say that's not what you want....

Why?

I can do without them. I was just wondering, and now have an answer from the posts above.

 

[neophyte]

Why none?

Key benefits I'd appreciate:

1. Indication of performance against other models
2. Matching the tool to the right battery for optimal performance

When I was last choosing some cordless tools, it seemed a lot of detective work was needed to figure out which voltage and tier would be suitable, and which models are equivalent between brands. Reading on here, watching videos of people doing timed testing. Same again with matching batteries, hearsay that this tool is fine with 5Ah but really impresses with more, or that other one really needs a big Forge. There's a community spreadsheet of battery performance but no data about the tools to match it against.

This just came to mind again because Milwaukee does give this information for their angle grinders, in terms of equivalent corded performance e.g. the 115mm Fuel is similar to 1200W.

Wattage ratings weren’t really a good indicator of tool performance two decades sho, and many corded motors back then were built more similarly.
I have older fine tools with motors with half the wattage ratings that performed as well as tools with twice the wattage/amperage ratings.
The Dewalt “3hp” plunge router, which I believe used to be rated at 12Amps actually beat out higher amperage rated routers in torque tests back in the day.
As for modern cordless tools, the current motors are routinely different designs going back to when brushless motors took over.
Performance in these motors can vary due to the varying number of poles the motir has, or the thickness of the copper wiring or components, or the quality of the circuitry and electronic controls, or even the heat sinking used for the circuitry.
The same goes for the batteries, and battery cells, which change over time.