Who has the biggest mouth?

[Grant Lamontagne]

I am sure with my post count I am opening myself up for a few snide comments but this is something I have been meaning to do for a while so it'll be worth it.

A typical method for checking how wide pliers open is to put two tools next to each other and see how they compare.  Well, here is perhaps a little more practical method I put together for comparison.  I used a set of calipers and measured the distance from the first "tooth" of each plier head at the tip.

Leatherman

Charge XTi- 43mm
Surge- 41mm
SideClip- 43mm
Blast- 43mm
Fuse- 42mm
Core- 41mm
Juice Kf4- 39mm
Juice CS4- 39mm
MiniTool- 34mm
Wave (Original)- 41mm
PST- 43mm
PST II- 43mm
SuperTool- 44mm
SuperTool 200- 45mm

Stanley

Watch Tool- 33mm

Schrade

ST1- 43mm

SOG

PowerLock- 54mm (Non-functional)
SwitchPlier- 21mm
ParaTool- 36mm
Pocket Power Plier- 48mm (Non-functional)

Coleman

Pro Lock- 46mm

Victorinox

AutoTool- 37mm
Spirit- 33mm
SwissTool RS- 38mm

Sheffield

Mountaineer- 23mm

Wenger

SwissGrip- 28mm
PocketGrip- 21mm

The SOGs are listed as "non-functional" at maximum extension because the handles are 180 degrees and really not useful.  I would have used a "useful" opening size, but since everyone's hands are different, some folks find them usable at different apertures.  The SwissGrip also doesn't seem that impressive for such a large tool until you take into account that it is a blunt nose plier- if it had a needle nose, or if the measurements were compared from inside the plier (or by angle) the SwissGrip would likely seem much more impressive.  In fact, I was very impressed with the amount that it actually opened compared to the others.

All in all, I thought it was an interesting comparison.  For those of you that don't understand millimeters, learn because I'm not converting this! 

Def

[Viper]

I though Rosie O-Donnel had the biggest mouth....

Also, my dad hates it when I use centimeters or millimeters. He was raised with inches and yards.

[665ae]

While I don't know who has the biggest mouth, I can definately tell who has the largest amount of free time! 

Go get a job slacker!

[Grant Lamontagne]

Well then tell your father not to join.

 

Def

[Mike, Lord of the Spammers!]

I,m suprised the the swiss entries did,nt do well

still i suppose they can,t be good at everything ;D

[J-sews]

Hmmm...this is a tough catagory to compare in a fair manner. By measuring how wide the jaws open at the first tooth, it gives a bias towards tools with long, skinny needlenose jaws. That's probably why the SwissTools didn't fair so well.

For instance, I suspect the Gerber Fisherman at 66mm will be the winner of the big mouth contest by a longshot.

But how else could a comparison be made?

 

[Viper]

How about comparing the open part closest to the handle? That way, long skinny jaws won't have an advantage, because it has nothing to do with the head.

[Grant Lamontagne]

I thought about that as well, but I figured as a reference it would work well enough.  We could post it as some kind of ratio like Open Width:Jaw Length or something similar.  Again, this seems like it's getting a little technical though.

Of course it is also complicated by the size of the first "tooth."  The Wenger SwissGrip's first tooth starts about a half a millimeter in, while most of the other models go right to the edge.

Def

[CQC-7]

Millimeters are definately the way to go.  I too was raised on the "English" system.  While in college I learned to embrace the metric system it is a lot better to say that somthing is 40mm rather than 2 16/17" in.

As for the biggest mouth, I agree that Rosie has em all beat.  You dont get that big eating through a straw.  

[Grant Lamontagne]

Canada is one of the only countries in the world where you can get directions like "go about a mile up this road, turn left, go about 5 klicks until the road forks, follow the left lane for another 20 minutes and you are there" and be able to follow them with no problem.

We are officially metric, but with the US still following the Imperial system, we are pretty good at both for the most part.  I just don't think fractions are as precise, nor are they all that reliable when comparing various sizes.  After all, even if you don't know what a millimeter is exactly, you know that 37 is smaller than 42.

Def

[ringzero]

We are officially metric, but with the US still following the Imperial system, we are pretty good at both for the most part.  I just don't think fractions are as precise, nor are they all that reliable when comparing various sizes.  After all, even if you don't know what a millimeter is exactly, you know that 37 is smaller than 42.

Using both metric and Imperial is good because it gives your brain a bit of a workout converting back and forth on the fly.

1 mm is about 1/25 of an inch, so:
1 in is about 25 mm.
2 in is about 50 mm.
3 in is about 75 mm.
etc.

So, a 4 in blade in about 100 mm long.

5 mm is about 1/5 of an inch, or 0.2 in.
10 mm is about 0.4 in.
15 mm is about 0.6 in.
etc.

So, a 150 mm gun is close to being a 6 inch gun.

3 miles is pretty close to 5 km.
5 miles is almost exactly 8 km (to within better than 1 percent,) because 100 miles is 161 km.

And on and on...


.

[Grant Lamontagne]

It's interesting, because up here most folks will talk in kilometers for distance (because that's what all the street signs are in, and the speedometer in your car), liters (because that's how most beverages and liquids are sold), yet when you ask how tall they are, or how much they weigh, you get it in feet, inches and pounds.  Mind you, temperature here is almost always in celcius instead of fahrenheit, although they use cups to measure things in the kitchen rather than milliliters.

Kinda funny when you stop to think about it!

Def

[ringzero]

It's interesting, because up here most folks will talk in kilometers for distance (because that's what all the street signs are in, and the speedometer in your car), liters (because that's how most beverages and liquids are sold), yet when you ask how tall they are, or how much they weigh, you get it in feet, inches and pounds.

In the UK, people still specify body weight in stones.

Even the UK newspapers use stones.  "The victim is a small woman, just over 7 stone" and "the dog that attacked her weighs over 11 stone."

.
 

[Grant Lamontagne]

Stone is about the only denomination we don't use here.

Def

[supratentorial]

Hmmm...this is a tough catagory to compare in a fair manner. By measuring how wide the jaws open at the first tooth, it gives a bias towards tools with long, skinny needlenose jaws. That's probably why the SwissTools didn't fair so well.

For instance, I suspect the Gerber Fisherman at 66mm will be the winner of the big mouth contest by a longshot.

But how else could a comparison be made?

 

J-sews, Measuring the angle of the jaws with a protractor would eliminate these biases.

[J-sews]

J-sews, Measuring the angle of the jaws with a protractor would eliminate these biases.

Oooh, very good idea. Total angle of jaw opening still doesn't quite tell the whole story, but it would be the best way to compare various plier types.

[supratentorial]

A while ago, I started writing a review of multi-tool wire cutters and wire strippers.  I was going to title the thread "stripping".    ...I didn't have time to finish up the review yet but I thought the following info might be somewhat relevant to this thread:



I didn't include the hardwire cutter in the measurements.  I also didn't include the Gerber Cable Cutter since it lacks pliers.  I included some "regular" tools for comparison: Klein 11045, Klein 11046, Knipex 1302160.  The Diesel and the PT-525 have the longest cutter length (compared to the other multi-tools).  The cutter on the PT-525 has the benefit of compound leverage and it is also a little sharper than the cutter on the Diesel.  The performance of these tools (esp. the PT-525) was very close to the "regular" tools.  The rest of the multi-tool cutters work but not nearly as well as the PT-525, Diesel, or "regular" tools.

[znapschatz]

J-sews, Measuring the angle of the jaws with a protractor would eliminate these biases.

Oooh, very good idea. Total angle of jaw opening still doesn't quite tell the whole story, but it would be the best way to compare various plier types.

Not only doesn't the jaw opening angle not quite tell the whole story, it is irrelevant.  What counts is how much length and width there is to get a purchase on what needs grabbed. 

A few times this year the sheer extra length of the jaws on my Core made a difference in getting the job done or having to go get another tool (not that far away, but you know what I mean  ).  After one of those times, just as a test, I brought to the project my other multi-tools to see how they would have fared.  The Super Tool and PST would also have worked, but not a Swisstool.   

[supratentorial]

Not only doesn't the jaw opening angle not quite tell the whole story, it is irrelevant.  What counts is how much length and width there is to get a purchase on what needs grabbed. 

A few times this year the sheer extra length of the jaws on my Core made a difference in getting the job done or having to go get another tool (not that far away, but you know what I mean  ).  After one of those times, just as a test, I brought to the project my other multi-tools to see how they would have fared.  The Super Tool and PST would also have worked, but not a Swisstool.   

znapschatz, Open the pliers on your Leatherman Core to a 2 degree angle.  Now fully open the jaws.  Notice a difference?  Obviously the maximum angle of the pliers is not irrelevant but J-sews is correct in saying that it gives an incomplete description. 

It is much easier to compare the capacities of wrenches since they have parallel jaws.  A wrench with a 1 inch capacity should be able to turn a 1 inch bolt whereas a pliers with a 1 inch maximum jaw opening (measured from tip to tip) probably won't work well (or at all) for turning a 1 inch bolt.  The maximum angle of the pliers jaws is an important component of the geometry of pliers.

[znapschatz]

Not only doesn't the jaw opening angle not quite tell the whole story, it is irrelevant.  What counts is how much length and width there is to get a purchase on what needs grabbed. 

A few times this year the sheer extra length of the jaws on my Core made a difference in getting the job done or having to go get another tool (not that far away, but you know what I mean  ).  After one of those times, just as a test, I brought to the project my other multi-tools to see how they would have fared.  The Super Tool and PST would also have worked, but not a Swisstool.   

znapschatz, Open the pliers on your Leatherman Core to a 2 degree angle.  Now fully open the jaws.  Notice a difference?  Obviously the maximum angle of the pliers is not irrelevant but J-sews is correct in saying that it gives an incomplete description.

It is much easier to compare the capacities of wrenches since they have parallel jaws.  A wrench with a 1 inch capacity should be able to turn a 1 inch bolt whereas a pliers with a 1 inch maximum jaw opening (measured from tip to tip) probably won't work well (or at all) for turning a 1 inch bolt.  The maximum angle of the pliers jaws is an important component of the geometry of pliers.

From context I had expected my comment to have been understood as "maximum angle."  Please excuse my lack of precision.
 
In one of my cited jobs, I didn't need a whole lot of grip, just enough to loosen a gas filler cap on a camping stove.  Due to a combination of angle and plier length, a Super Tool provided it, a Swisstool could not. 

The geometry of pliers is a matter of concern for manufacturers.  As an end user, only results matter to me.   

[supratentorial]

znapschatz, You're absolutely right that the results are the most important thing.  For example, the wire cutter on the PT-525 is a little shorter than the cutter on the Diesel.  But the cutter on the PT-525 has the benefit of compound leverage and it has a sharper edge.  The PT-525 worked best on solid and stranded wire.  It sometimes hard to quantify these things for comparison.

[supratentorial]

A pictorial comparison may be even more informative.  The following is a simplification but you get the idea:



The image is larger than scale and more detail could be added to the illustration.  Superimposed images from a scanner would also be a good means of comparison.