Which Cordless Ratchets Brand Wins?

drive, battery powered or manual operation, variable speed up to 230 RPM, built-in battery, includes carrying case, made in China, has LED light (not very bright), battery level indicator, trigger lock

made in Taiwan, 2 Ah battery, has trigger lock, no battery level indicator, LED not quite as bright as Ryobi or Husky; the transcript's trigger-style sentence is internally contradictory, stating both that Husky and Ryobi use paddle triggers while AC Delco uses a button 'just like the Robi and the Husky', which cannot both be true as captioned, kept verbatim and flagged rather than resolved

tool and battery, battery made in Taiwan, charger made in China, 2 Ah battery, brushed motor, has a battery level indicator (unlike every other brand tested), no trigger lock (the only brand tested without one), LED brighter than AC Delco but not as bright as Ryobi

comes with two 2 Ah batteries, LED described as seeming like the best of the lineup, has trigger lock, has battery level indicator, brushless motor (confirmed later alongside AC Delco), made in China

microlithium cordless kit, manufacturer-claimed maximum torque of 40 ft-lb and 275 RPM, designed and engineered by Snap-on and assembled in the US with US and imported components (the only US-assembled brand tested), brushed motor (explicitly contrasted with the cheaper, brushless Milwaukee), comes with two 2.5 Ah batteries (largest battery capacity in the lineup), no trigger lock, no battery level indicator, LED described as pretty bright

total (2 lb 2.5 oz); 578 front, 484 back (front+back does not sum to the stated total, kept verbatim, same non-summing pattern recurs for every brand in this video)

captioned as '2 lb 13.9 oz' and '131 G' in the same sentence, which are inconsistent (2 lb 13.9 oz is roughly 1310g, not 131g, almost certainly a dropped digit); the closing weight recap independently states 'AC Dela 1,31', consistent with approximately 1310 to 1315g, used here as the better-supported figure while the literal 131g caption is flagged, not silently discarded; 843 front, 542 back

total (2 lb 3.2 oz); 484 front, 601 back

total (2 lb 13.4 oz); 859 front, 512 back

total (2 lb 9 oz); 77 front (verbatim as captioned; implausibly light next to every other brand's front-weight reading of roughly 480 to 860g, almost certainly a dropped digit such as 770, not corrected), 542 back

(verbatim as captioned; implausibly small next to every other brand's 28 to 45mm range, almost certainly 39.1mm with a misplaced decimal, not corrected)

(verbatim as captioned; implausibly small next to every other brand's 28 to 45mm range, almost certainly 43.8mm with a misplaced decimal, not corrected)

called the most compact tool yet at that point in the video; the front-to-back figure and a stated 200 RPM max spec are merged into an unreadable run of digits in the transcript ('28.432177 Tor 200 RPM'), a clear caption garble; front-to-back size not recoverable

more compact than Milwaukee and Ryobi from side to side

called the loudest yet at that point in the video (later brands top this figure)

not stated anywhere in the transcript, unlike Husky, AC Delco, Milwaukee, and Snap-on, an apparent gap

called the loudest tool of all six brands; described as just not very compact

described as pretty loud

minimum, described as not very good low RPM control; 419 RPM max

minimum, described as pretty good low RPM control; 294 RPM max

minimum, described as the best low RPM control of all six brands; 381 RPM max

minimum, described as good low RPM control; 321 RPM max

minimum, described as the second best low RPM control of all six brands; 407 RPM max

lost to Ryobi in the head to head (Ryobi faster off the line and faster to stop); finished sixth (last) in this bracket's final tally

narrowly beat Ryobi off the line and at stopping, beat Ingersoll Rand, tied Milwaukee (narrator says the less expensive AC Delco 'will advance' from that tie), beat Snap-on; the bracket's final tally lists AC Delco and Milwaukee 'tied for first', which sits oddly against the earlier 'AC Delco will advance' phrasing from their tied matchup, both statements kept verbatim and flagged as an internal contradiction rather than resolved one way

lost to AC Delco; finished fifth of six in this bracket's final tally

tied with AC Delco; see the AC Delco entry for the transcript's internally contradictory phrasing about whether AC Delco 'advances' from the tie or the two are tied for first

beat AC Delco (edged it out both starting and stopping); finished fourth of six in this bracket's final tally

(1 minute 19 seconds); finished fourth of six in the final timed ranking

(1 minute 53 seconds), the slowest time of all six brands in this test

(1 minute 16 seconds), second fastest of six

(1 minute 50 seconds), fifth of six

(1 minute 18 seconds), third fastest of six

finished fourth of six in this second live elimination bracket's final tally

finished sixth (last) of six in this bracket's final tally

finished third of six in this bracket's final tally

finished fifth of six in this bracket's final tally

beat Ryobi 3 wins to 0, the only brand to beat Ryobi in this bracket; finished first (fastest) of six in this bracket's final tally