New HF electronic torque wrench - a game changer?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would say so. Even the CDI has some models made in Taiwan.
I am not fan of HF but a good quality tools is a good quality tool, for the price it seems to be a bargain.
 
Looks real good.....Thanks for sharing!

The only negative thing that stood out in the report is......"The accuracy of test equipment used is +-1%". Which would still land real close to +-2% CW.

The CCW tolerance would alarm me only because I find myself doing a lot of left hand Ring Gear Bolts.
 
When I studied torque and torque wrenches some years ago, the consensus at engineering forums was that the torque process itself is very crude, even when carefully controlled. They state that the huge amount of variables (fastener quality, thread quality, contaminants, lube, human error, and on and on) results in the torque process having a +/- 25% accuracy. It seems like a moot point to worry about 1 or 2 percent difference in a wrench's claimed accuracy. Precision and repeatability seem more important to me.

This is repeated all over the engineering forums: https://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=107427
Accuracy of bolt preload application methods:

By feel +/-35%
Torque Wrench +/-25%
Turn-of-nut +/-15%
Preload indicating washer +/-10%
Strain Gauges +/-1%
Bolt Elongation +/-3 to 5%
Ultrasonic Sensing +/-1%
 
I have a lot of issues with that report for various reasons. The thing is even bad information gets parroted again and again as if it were gospel all over the web.
The first point is, it doesn't really matter the number given to the spec as long as the same type of equipment and conditions are being met.

For example, If the equipment I use to assemble something is set with my tool at say 100 lb-ft and I see the amount of crush is what I was looking for is correct and I make it the "spec" and you have the same tool using the same bolt in the same conditions eg clean, dry threads the chances are the amount of crush achieved will be the same as mine.
Then an "engineer" comes along with his ultrasonic tester and claims that is not 100 lb-ft, your tool is 25% off he may be correct but at the same time is off the rails. He is not taking into account that almost no one in the trade had the equipment he is using but does have the ones I used to create the spec.

If a manufacturer were using an advanced method of determining the torque value and had the service depts for his vehicles trying to achieve those specs with inferior equipment that would be a major mistake at all levels. As long as the same type of tools (they may be pneumatic at the manufacturing level but use the same type mechanism) are being used to tighten the fastener as was used to assemble it they accuracy of the tool matters.

I would say 35% is being a bit charitable for hand guessing in many cases. I could go on but I think you get where I am coming from.
 
Originally Posted by clinebarger
The only negative thing that stood out in the report is......"The accuracy of test equipment used is +-1%". Which would still land real close to +-2% CW.

But the tolerance of the test equipment used on your Snap On calibration doesn't apply ? Your Snap On could be 2.5 - 2.8% inaccurate in CW and up to 4.3% inaccurate in CCW.
 
Quote
The first point is, it doesn't really matter the number given to the spec as long as the same type of equipment and conditions are being met.


I think I get where you are coming from and mostly agree. I work in research. There are research report results and real world results. Often times they don't correlate. That's why I said that precision (different than accuracy) and repeatability is more important.

I communicated with a tool room manager at a large aviation manufacturer that was using Snap On Tech Wrenches and his explanation mirrored yours (I think). It didn't matter so much that the final result was 100% of the engineered specification. What mattered was the achieved desired result using controlled techniques and tools, if that makes sense.

The problem, in my opinion, is that many laypersons assume that if you do a job with a sophisticated tool, it automatically insures accuracy. That's why I toss out those numbers above. It would be like a person assuming that a Bernelli will automatically improve results over a Mossberg. You understand the torque process. A lot of people don't. That's why I question people when they get worked up over a wrench that claims 1% accuracy vs. one at 3% accuracy. I'm sure that clinebarger understands the process also and he feels more comfortable using the best wrench he can have. For others, that 1% accurate wrench won't help when they jerk the wrench to a final reading on dirty, rusty, oil soaked fasteners.

It's been too many years to remember, but I think that guy at Lockheed said that Stahwille torque wrenches could be slid across the concrete floors all week long and still remained accurate and precise the best, in his opinion (could have been Sturdevant-Richmont too?).
 
Thanks for a very interesting discussion. Yes, the Stahlwille are considered by many to be the RR of this type of tools, they are dependable and seem to take abuse no torque wrench should ever be subjected to but remain fairly accurate especially the split beams. Sturdevant-Richmont always made a quality tool.
 
Originally Posted by hallstevenson
Originally Posted by clinebarger
The only negative thing that stood out in the report is......"The accuracy of test equipment used is +-1%". Which would still land real close to +-2% CW.

But the tolerance of the test equipment used on your Snap On calibration doesn't apply ? Your Snap On could be 2.5 - 2.8% inaccurate in CW and up to 4.3% inaccurate in CCW.


Accuracy of Equipment per the COC I posted .125%
smile.gif
 
It says a warranty of 90 days in the warranty information. It looks like a good tool for the money, certainly a great addition to HF's lineup. Is it up to professional standards , time may tell. I know when I'm doing short blocks with tty head bolts, I trust my tech angle 100%. Doesn't Lowe's have a very similar torque wrench as well under the kobalt line?
 
Originally Posted by Thax
It says a warranty of 90 days in the warranty information.



that be a dealbreaker.

Quote
We guarantee this product to be free from defects in materials and workmanship 90 days from the date of purchase


I bought one of their digital torque adapters.. used it once.. batteries died... used it again with fresh batteries.. went to use it a 3rd time and batteries were dead again.
They wouldnt take it back/replace 4 months old.
 
Originally Posted by Rand
Originally Posted by Thax
It says a warranty of 90 days in the warranty information.



that be a dealbreaker.

I'd buy the ICON with the lifetime warranty. Anything at HF with a 90 warranty automatically leaves me uninterested. It tells me that they have no confidence in it.
 
My experience with HF electronics is their freebie multimeters. To get the cost out, the electronics are cheapened, and the end result is short-lived equipment that has calibration drift and ultimate failure.

Not sure if this becomes a total loss with failed electronics...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top