I always wanted to do a saw comparison on my MT’s, and yesterday I had some spare time. I wanted to compare cutting speed and ease of use, and use it to derive a measure of efficiency for the tools.
Let’s get right into it. I used some of my most carried and favorite tools in this test.
Tools for the test:Leatherman Rebar, Victorinox Spirit, Victorinox Ranger and Gerber MP600. I don’t own any SOG tools, so I could not test those.
The MP600 comes with a saw holder, so I used multiple saw blades with it: A Remgrit blade, a metal blade for thin metal, a fast cut wood blade, and a fine cut wood blade.
Here are the two items I used for testing:
To test the wood saws I used a soft wood dowel rod. It has a diameter of ~ 30mm. I used it because these Poplar rods are available in about every hardware store and the universal diameter makes it easy to compare cutting times.
The same goes for the welded chain I used to test the metal saws. The diameter of the metal used is ~ 5mm.
Both items should also be fairly common for arts and crafts, home or farm use, so they seemed appropriate.
Set-up and ExecutionPretty rudimentary, but it did the trick. Both items were held in a vise, so they did not move during the cuts.
This is by no means a scientifically accurate test, but it should give an idea of how these saws compare. I used every saw twice on the objects described, and got an average of the times needed to cut through both. I tried to use the same stroke length, and apply the same pressure to the cuts.
After each round I used a dedicated saw as a comparison.
Wood Saws:Tool Cutting TimesSpirit 25 sec
Rebar 16 sec
Ranger 17 sec
MP600 (Remgrit) 2 min 10 sec
MP600 (Fine Cut) 24 sec
MP600 (Fast Cut) 10 sec
Dedicated Wood Saw 6 sec
Pictures with tools and cuts:
Spirit
Rebar
Ranger
Remgrit
Fast Cut and Fine Cut
Dedicated wood saw with Ranger for size comparison
The result is pretty much as expected, besides the Spirit’s cutting time. I expected it to be the same or at least close to the Ranger, but that was surprisingly not the case.
The Remgrit saw did the worst, which is no surprise. It can cut almost everyting, but nothing really well. The instructions also state it should not be used on soft wood. I did it anyway, because I wanted to see if it could handle it.
There is also the chance that you find yourself in a situation where this is the only wood saw on hand, and you have to use it.
That’s at least one of the reason for me to carry a MT: Always be prepared!
Picture of all wood saws used in the test:
Metal Saws:Tool Cutting TimesSpirit 1 min 18 sec
Rebar 1 min 40 sec
Ranger 1 min 55 sec
MP600 (Remgrit) 3 min 07 sec
MP600 (Thin Metal) 34 sec
Dedicated Metal Saw 17 sec
Pictures with tools and cuts:
Spirit
Rebar
Ranger
Remgrit
Thin Metal Saw
Dedicated metal saw with MP600 for size comparison
The only surprise here is again the Spirit. This time on the positive side though. It did better than the Rebar and the Ranger.
The Remgrit saw is again the worst, but it is also the only saw that is able to cut wood as well as metal.
Pictures of all metal saws used in the test:
Result:As expected, the dedicated saws are of course much faster, and much more efficient cutting their respective material. Their MT counterparts mostly do a very good though, especially when the much smaller size is taken into account.
It is hard to announce a winner for this test. While the MP600 saw holder proved to be the most versatile, it also comes only with a Remgrit saw, the worst saw in the test. Only when adding dedicated jigsaw blades, does the blade holder shine.
The difference between Leatherman and Victorinox is also not large enough to be of any significance.
I hope this test was helpful to some folks, thanks for reading!