This review is written by contributor Stephen K.
I have been keeping my eyes open for a long-pattern flex ratchet for a while. I’m just a DIY’er, so I cannot justify spending big bucks for a brand like Snap-On or MATCO, but I still wanted something USA-made and good quality. I picked up this Armstrong Maxx 11-994 ⅜”-drive ratchet because it appeared to have the specs I was looking for. Plus, it was priced at around $60 (via Harry Epstein), placing it within my budget.
The first thing that struck me about this ratchet is its length; the ratchet is quite long at 11.5 inches.
Advertisement
Taking closer look at the ratchet head, you can see that the joint is held together with an adjustable machine screw. Some people prefer a screw to a pressed pin, as it allows you to tighten the joint if it starts to loosen up. You can also see the locking lever in this picture. You can lock the ratchet head in a total of nine different positions.
The handle has an hourglass shape that fits the contour of your hand. I found it to be quite comfortable.
Advertisement
This ratchet has a 60-tooth mechanism that is held in place with a snap ring. The ratchet head also has a seal around the gear which helps prevent dirt from entering the ratchet.
The mechanism features a single pawl that engages 11 teeth at a time. This is one of the designs used by Apex Tool Group, the parent company of Armstrong. You’ll find a nearly identical design used in other ratchets made by Apex, such as the Craftsman thin-profile ratchets and certain GearWrench ratchets.
The head of the Armstrong ratchet is pretty thin (left), especially compared to another one of my favorite ratchets, the Wright 3490 (right). The Armstrong is about 1 inch thick. At ~1.33 inches tall, the Wright is considerably thicker.
The longer length of the Armstrong ratchet provides extra leverage that allows you to apply a lot of torque when needed. I had no problem removing the lug nuts on my truck, which are torqued to 100 ft-lbs.
The flex-head mechanism comes in handy when you need to access fasteners in tight spaces. I’m not a huge fan of normal flex ratchets without locking mechanisms. I find such ratchets to be too hard to control when I’m really pulling on the handle – a sure recipe for busted knuckles. The locking mechanism on the Armstrong completely fixes that issue. It securely holds the head at the set angle, so you don’t have to worry about the ratchet flexing and slipping when you don’t want it to. You can also unlock the mechanism and use the ratchet like a standard free-flexing head if you prefer it that way.
I used the ratchet while replacing the serpentine belt tensioner on my girlfriend’s VW Beetle. The tensioner is located in a very cramped area in the engine bay of this vehicle, exactly the type of use I bought the ratchet for. The locking flex mechanism made it easy to remove the bolts holding the tensioner to the engine.
The locking mechanism seems quite strong. I was not able to overpower it and slip the joint to the next angle position. A few times I did bump the locking lever on something and unlock the head unexpectedly, but this was a pretty rare occurrence.
The locking mechanism does allow for a small amount of movement back and forth. I made a video to show the movement in the flex mechanism when it’s locked.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlH-RPTlRC4
At around $60, this is the most expensive ratchet I’ve purchased to date. It has some impressive qualities, including a 60-tooth design, and a sturdy locking mechanism. I think the Armstrong offers a lot of value. From what I can tell, you’ll likely have to spend considerably more money to find the same quality and features in another brand.
Buy Now (via Harry Epstein Co)
Buy Now (via Amazon)
Comparable locking flex head ratchets
- Matco 88-tooth – $136
- Snap-on FX80 – $133
Note: We searched for but couldn’t find locking flex head ratchets by Blackhawk, Cornwell, Proto, Wright, or Williams.
Ed. Note: Stephen noticed is a bit of play in the flex head, even when locked. We asked Armstrong about this, and they told us that the grooves are machined and that a bit of play is normal. There is a brief discussion about the movements, measurements included, over at the Garage Gazette forum, and it looks like some copies of the ratchet have less play in the joint than the one reviewed. Does a bit of play detract the quality or performance of the ratchet? In our opinion, absolutely not.
Dan Richards
I just opened a package with a Gearwrench 60T 3/8 flex ratchet inside, and was a bit disappointed that it wasn’t locking. Very similar to the Armstrong otherwise.
Jerrick
Good review!
harlan deike
i ordered one from hje a week or so back. i took it to the field with me as i pulled it out of the mail box. little did i know with in the hour i would need it to change a tire that had more than likely not been changed in 20 plus years. it worked flawlessly. i highly recomend and wish to order the 1/4 and 1/2 versions soon. i had been trying to buy the matco version from my local guy at a much higher price, glad i didn’t. for you high tooth count ratchet junkies, an 88 tooth matco rebuild kit should fit right in one of these but i doubt you would need it. they work fine as is.
Robert Brown
Armstrong has a real issue with quality control right now. I just bought one of these and it would not lock in all positions due to poor machining on the head gear. I got an exchange and the exchange ALSO would not lock in all positions for the same reason. However, both ratchets had almost NO play when the head was locked in position. The third (which came from Armstrong, not the dealer this time) had a TON of play in the head, but STILL did not lock in all 9 positions! This time I did an exchange through Fastenal which was not my original dealer and with the fourth ratchet I hit the gold mine. It locked in all positions and had very little play.
I decided to get the 1/2″ version and guess what.. the wrong gear was installed at the factory. This is supposed to be a 60 tooth ratcher, but it had an 88 tooth gear and the correct pawl designed for a 60 tooth gear. Of course the mech did not function properly and I got an RA. The replacement came with the proper mech, but the handle was bent and crooked. It was off by quite a bit!
Needless to say I just swapped the gear and send back the bend handle ratchet with the improper gear….
…but GOSH… what is going on with Armstrong QC these days./
Oh…. I should mention that I am very happy with the ratchets. They really are excellent now that I have made it through the 6 wee process of defective product.
Stuart
Wow, that sounds like an incredibly frustrating experience! Not sure what’s going on, Armstrong is usually very consistent with their QC.
Robert Brown
Sorry about the typos folks. I guess I was too tired to type correctly when I made the original post. I am sure my experience is unusual. The positives are that and the Armstrong reps were friendly and they ratchets are superb. YMMV.
stephen
There were reports on GJ about some ratchets being shipped with mismatched pawls/gears. More than one member reported having that problem.
Stuart
Thanks for the news/update. Sounds like a bad batch or short lapse in quality control. I haven’t seen too many complaints about Armstrong tools lately and am hoping that it stays that way.
Ben
I’ve had one or two Matco rebuild kits that have had a 60T pawl with an 88T gear. I thought it was pretty understandable, until last time I took my 3/8″ apart and noticed the pawls are marked with their tooth count. I guess the ones I got could’ve been mis-marked and not just mixed up, though.