Matco vs AirCat: Will They Make Their 1,000+FT-LB's on the Dyno? 

Cornwell super duty

The link won't work. But I wish you check the aircat 1375 xl , thanks

Me too! I also love how he uses a left hand thread bolt/nut for the reverse torque, so he’s technically tightening in reverse. This is a much more controlled test, since Nut Busting / Breakaway torque figures can vary significantly based on the specific bolt, threads, and lubricant used. Different manufacturers can cheat a little since there is no standardization for testing Nut Busting torque.

Was planning on getting my hands on the 1250K, but I can go this route if preferred.

Unless the bolt is yielding (which a 1-14 grade 9 bolt should not be) then this should be representative, yes. I throw the 231H on each day I do these to make sure it makes 440-460ft-lbs and the new bolt is broken in correctly. This channel's purpose was never to recreate a Skidmore, not trying to and honestly don't find it that useful to know how much bolt tension psi it makes then converting with a static multiplier for torque. I'd rather know how much it makes compared to X, which in this case is compared to an IR231H or these two impacts compared to each other. If all torque ratings followed the same rules, the 1150 should be spot on 200% more powerful than a IR 231 if advertising 900. This test seems to indicate it may not be, and considering their size and shared overall design (rotors, blades, twin hammers), it would be quite the feat of physics to literally double the power. That's not the say the 1150 is not powerful, its beats the pants off the 231 - and I think everyone knows that. It just may be something like 1.35X as powerful and a Matco MT2769 may be 10% more powerful than that, which is what the goal of the channel is. Not to call manufacturers liars, because i don't think they are, they just don't all use the same method. Which is what we're trying to do.

AirCat also has a video here on YT where their 1250K makes 55,000 psi on a skidmore, and Matco has one where they make 54,000psi. Which would be 785ft-lbs and 771ft-lbs with the Skidmore /70 process. Which also don't match their box ratings despite if being their own test method. Again, not saying they are wrong - just maybe not otherwise comparable. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-z1GL0wxV-Ao.html ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-S3UOebgDbbo.html

@@TorqueTestChannel I understand better now, thanks for the clarification. Again, I love the channel and the tests you perform. Thank you for taking the time to do all this for us.

@@AlexMaysonetNo problem, and I'm sure my test method is not without issues, but i welcome the discussion as the more we (tool community) talk about this stuff the less inclined tool manufacturers might be to allow their marketing department go buck wild with the numbers.

@Buddy B I use 1/2” line with 3/8” fittings.

You think THAT"S bad, try the Mac air impact!

@@TorqueTestChannel luckily there's no Mac dealer near me!

We'll definitely be doing a few of those things! We're trying to get a good foundation of popular impacts on here and data recorded, then we'll try changing a thing here or there to see what it does to their power.

I can't speak for reliability, but based on my testing you'll need around 130psi static line pressure in a 3/8" hose with hi-flo fittings to get the advertised power at 90PSI. However, this is one of the few impacts we've tested that make more and more power over time linearly without flattening out, so I'd say as much as you can feed it!

Mac is. Matco is fortive previously apex tool