Milwaukee’s M12 and M18 FUEL cordless power tools are often their best and higher performing models.
A Milwaukee M18 Fuel circular saw, for example, will deliver greater cutting performance than a non-Fuel model.
From the beginning, Milwaukee Fuel cordless tools featured brushless motors. More specifically, most (if not all) M12 and M18 Fuel tools feature Milwaukee POWERSTATE brushless motors and REDLINK PLUS electronic controls and “intelligence.”
Advertisement
But now there are a growing number of brushless M18 and M12 tools that aren’t part of the “Fuel” product family.
For the longest time, most users associated Milwaukee’s “FUEL” branding with “brushless.”
However, Milwaukee also has non-Fuel brushless tools.
Milwaukee launched their first M18 compact brushless drills and impact driver in 2015.
Milwaukee has launched additional non-Fuel brushless tools since then, such as the recent M12 brushless rotary tool.
Despite being described as “the most powerful 12V planer on the market,” Milwaukee M12 brushless planer also does not have “Fuel” designation.
Advertisement
At around this time last year, Milwaukee had just announced their new M18 brushless SDS Plus rotary hammer. It was advertised as having RedLink Plus intelligence, although it’s now described as having RedLink inteligence.
Brushless vs PowerState Brushless? RedLink vs RedLink Plus? Fuel vs Brushless?
What’s the difference? I asked Milwaukee about all this about a year ago.
Here’s what they said:
When we set out to develop a new product, solving user frustration and meeting their demands is the core of everything. The main difference between FUEL and regular brushless tools is the level of torque and drive power. The FUEL range is considered the premium of our brushless power tools. FUEL tools have all the benefits of brushless motor technology paired with the most power possible. Look at it this way: all FUEL tools have brushless motors, but not all of Milwaukee’s brushless motor options have the power that the POWERSTATE brushless motor delivers to the FUEL tools.
The Brushless Threaded Rod Cutter is a great example of this. For that specific product, we decided not to make it FUEL because we didn’t create this tool to deliver sheer power. The biggest problem we were trying to solve with this tool was the need for a more ergonomic solution. Therefore, it’s brushless instead of FUEL. Just because something isn’t FUEL doesn’t mean it’s not for professionals. Not all professional tools have the goal of raw power.
For the two most recent products that you have asked this question about the answer is simply that the products did not need the power of FUEL to meet user expectations. There will be periods where you may see more brushless then FUEL but I can assure you we are committed to the technology of FUEL and will continuously produce products that deliver the most power possible when that is the true user need.
As I understand it, Milwaukee Fuel-class cordless tools deliver higher performance, and they have beefed up supporting components to make everything work as expected.
Considering Milwaukee circular saws, for example, a Fuel model can be expected to deliver higher performance than non-Fuel brushless (or brushed) motor models.
What gets confusing is when there’s the absence of a Fuel designation or model.
Milwaukee makes an M12 Fuel detail sander.
But tools like the M12 brushless pruning shears are not Fuel-branded?
Milwaukee also recently launched new M18 brushless telescoping pole pruning shears, also without Fuel branding.
Just because a tool is designated “brushless” but not “Fuel,” that doesn’t suggest an upgraded model exists or is on Milwaukee’s development roadmap.
Tools like the M12 pin nailer don’t have brushless motors, Fuel PowerState or otherwise.
There’s a brushless rotary tool, but M12 Fuel brushless die grinders. Milwaukee has an M18 Fuel belt sander, non-Fuel orbital and quarter sheet sanders, and an M12 Fuel detail sander.
I asked a senior product manager if hypothetical Fuel versions of non-Fuel brushless tools would be engineered and built differently, and the answer was an unequivocal “yes,” with the main differences being related to power delivery and performance.
I’ve been seeing a lot of “Fuel or bust” types of sentiments, but the truth is that not every tool needs the level of power or performance that would justify such a designation.
Are non-Fuel brushless tools any good? Having tested quite a few, I would say definitely yes. While perhaps they don’t deliver the same performance as hypothetical or higher-tier Fuel models, they’re generally well-suited for their designed use.
When you look at Dewalt’s 20V Max cordless power tool lineup, there are brushed, brushless, Atomic, and XR series cordless power tools, plus 20V Max with FlexVolt Advantage and Power Detect. Such labeling also creates confusion and all kinds of questions.
Maybe Milwaukee could designate all of their brushless tools as “Fuel,” as many users have long grown accustomed to, and assign highest-performing tools as “Fuel MAX” or similar. But would that change anything?
In every case I’ve seen, “Fuel brushless” is better than “brushless,” except where there’s no Fuel-designated product. In those cases, “brushless” is often Milwaukee’s “best and only” tool in its category.
The svelte M12 detail sander is part of the Fuel line, while the M18 telescoping pruning shears are not. I have given up trying to completely understand this. In my opinion, the presence of Fuel branding – and whatever engineering that entails – doesn’t add to or diminish the tools’ performance or functionality if there’s no target for comparison.
Where there’s a brushless tool but no Fuel version, it’s the result of a deliberate choice, and we’re just not privy to the fine details.
Sometimes FUEL tools are the best Milwaukee offers, such as in “good, better, best” types of tool tiers. Other times, where such FUEL-designated tools don’t (yet?) exist, “brushless” is their best and only option.
Every Milwaukee Fuel-series cordless tool features a brushless motor, but not every brushless Milwaukee tool is part of their Fuel line of tools.
xu lu
Marketing hype is all. Internally there may be some MTF differences and other subtle differences. This is similar to how features migrate down from luxery to mainstream auto brands.
Stuart
From the conversations I had, there *are* internal differences. It comes down to power and performance, but there are also layers of marketing differentiation, and that’s where everything gets confusing, at least for me.
With auto brands, luxury vs mainstream is usually a matter of putting polish and shine on the user experience. They won’t get you from point A to B any faster, but you might be more comfortable or pampered. That’s not the case here for when there are Fuel and non-Fuel tools.
We had an extended conversation about the types of features specific brushless tools lacked, or were incorporated into Fuel brushless tools. I typically consider such discussions off the record, and didn’t take detailed notes. But it was enough to nudge me back from a “is it just marketing?” stance.
John E
It really is just marketing though, isn’t it.
“Best in class”. “Power Advantage Plus”
“Anti-vibration system (AVS) that helps to deliver maximized user comfort.”
While there may be important internal differences this is not how things get sold in America.
However, important real-world features such as actual noise levels, vibration specs are sorely missing but are required by law in Europe.
Munklepunk
I bought some brushless Milwaukee by accident, I meant to buy the fuel impact/drill kit. I exchanged it at lunch. There is absolutely a difference. I’m not sure what it is, but they are not as good. What funny is I had a legit reason for return because the charger didn’t work, they didn’t care though.
Badger12345
The Fuel designation is more than hype in my experience. As an example, I’ve noticed that my M12 Fuel impacts are more powerful than the M18 non-Fuel brushless impact I used to have. I expected the Fuel version to be more powerful in the same voltage, but I didn’t expect the M12 Fuel to beat the M18 non-Fuel. I’m Fuel exclusive now in both M12 and M18 unless a Fuel version doesn’t exist such as lights.
Blythe
I agree. I bought a the non-fuel brushless drill/impact set on clearance, expecting them to be similar to my older fuel tools. While they are fine, the power difference in driving 3” screws is very noticeable
Lance
Eventually brushless motors will achieve cost parity with brushed motors and we’ll see all new power tools move to brushless.
Milwaukee (and others) enjoys marketing two tiers of tools, so it makes sense that there would eventually be brushed non-Fuel tools.
Goodie
The more I look at DeWalt and Milwaukee’s marketing for their product lines, the more I like my Metabo HPT tools. 18V deliver good performance. Multivolt deliver 36V and additional performance. There is some stratification in the 18v line (particularly in drills). There are a few low tier tools that the purchaser needs to research on the 18v line. But, I think their overall product line is much more coherent than the other two.
Jared
To play devil’s advocate I’d argue that’s a consequence of having less tools in the portfolio. E.g. if you sell 3 or 4 drill drivers it’s easier to explain the differences than if you have 6 or 12.
Rog
To play devil’s advocate to your devil’s advocate, does a manufacturer really need 12 drills in their lineup?
Jared
I’m not sure – but I only picked drills as my example because you did. 😛
For another one, here’s Dewalt’s current lineup of cordless circular saws:
DCS570, DCS512, DCS574, DCS577, DCS391, DCS578, DCS571, DCS573, DCS565, DCS373.
There’s a lot of variety there and that’s just the different saw models, not the various sku’s associated with each one depending on how it’s kitted.
You could ask the same question of course – but which saw would you cut from the lineup?
There’s the basic-budget 6-1/2″ version that is often included in multi-piece kits, a flexvolt -specific saw, a 4-1/2″ compact, a flexvolt worm style, a couple of 12v saws (premium and budget), flexvolt advantage and powerdetect models so Home Depot and Lowes have exclusives…
It’s not that there’s no overlap – it’s that there’s a reason for each model. You could lose a couple without making Dewalt uncompetitive – but part of being the “big dawg” is having models for every niche.
If you have so many models, it only stands to reason that it would be tricker to differentiate them for the humble consumer…
MM
I think those numbers of tools must sell otherwise they wouldn’t be making them. Like Jared mentioned they fit various specific roles. And, of course, different people have different purchasing preferences. Some people are only going to buy whatever the biggest baddest top end model is at a given time. Other people are going to want an economy model, want some specific “line” of tools like Fuel or Atomic, some want a hammer function and some don’t, etc.
I bet if we made a list of what different kinds of drills various Toolguyd readers use there would be a lot of overlap but I don’t think we could cover everyone’s needs with just four or five different models. And furthermore, while some roles can overlap sometimes people don’t want them to. Personally I don’t want a hammer function in most of my drills. I have a rotary hammer for those jobs, I’d rather have my other drills a little smaller and lighter without the hammer mechanism, so I avoid buying those. Other people might be the exact opposite, they don’t have a rotary hammer so a hammer function is a big plus for them.
Nate
It is a consequence of a smaller line, but I assert that’s not relevant to the discussion. The topic is communicating effectively to the prospective buyer on products within the brand. If DeWalt wants to be all things to all people – from starter homeowner tools (that should really be Black and Decker) to 60v pro tools – they need to work to make the messaging and product lines coherent. DeWalt’s exclusives to the big box stores makes it even tougher. I think this is hurting their brand. This article correctly points out that the “Brushless” and “Fuel” monikers generate similar confusion on the Milwaukee buyers as well.
David Bushika
Well I give the credit at least they are honest enough (at the moment anyhow) to differentiate between FUEL and just “brushless” technology for us consumers, professional or otherwise. It certainly would have been easy enough to put a label FUEL on each brushless product. How would we actually know the difference. One might assume FUEL labeled products are built to better specs overall and not just performance increases. Curious now do all brushless carry the traditional 5yr warranty that sold many buyers on the Milwaukee name?
Stuart
The M12 rotary tool and planer both have 5 year warranties.
The pruners look to have 3 year warranties, which are the same as the Fuel outdoor tools I checked.
David Bushika
My Brushless FUEL air compressor is also only a 3 year warranty.
Stuart
That’s not because it’s a Fuel tool, but because it’s an air compressor. The warranty period is different depending on the type of tool.
The question is whether Fuel and non-Fuel brushless tools of the same type have different warranty periods, and the answer to that seems to be “no.”
MFC
I have learned that Fuel means that it costs more, has better performance and heads to the landfill sooner. None of my fuel tools, unless they’re seldomly used, have survived for more than 3 years. Most last a year and a half. Same thing for DeWalt XR tools.
Brushless tools seem to fail electronically from harsh conditions way sooner than brushed variants. I still have old brushed tools from decades ago that saw 5x the amount of work and still function. The brushed tools just don’t have the same oomph as the brushless, nor are they as portable.
I just keep using the warranties and getting new tools every so often. Cost of business.
Josh Walters
If your tools are failing that often across multiple platforms… the problem probably isn’t the tools. I haven’t had a single issue with my XR purchases or my handfull of Makita and Milwaukee purchases. A couple of the triggers on my boss’ milwaukee tools have gone out but I chalked them up to being lemons and they were serviceable.
Shane
I have close to 30 tools in the M12 lineup. I never gave the labels(Fuel, brushless, yada) much thought. I bought every one with a purpose in mind of how that tool was designed to preform and the purpose that I had in mind. Some are even “task specific” tools….meaning I bought them to accomplish a specific thing that makes my job easier and I don’t need them for much else. The common theme is that I’m rarely disappointed when I add a new tool to my collection and I can’t think of any that have underperformed to my expectations. That’s a safe bet to me. Whether it’s brushless, fuel or whatever makes no difference to me as long as it does the job.
So Milwaukee only makes a tool as good as it needs to be? It’s worked out fine for me. The fact that we are tackling something as trivial as branding decisions is proof that their marketing is performing exactly as it should. Don’t get me started on the “branding “ of the battery ecosystem that goes with it!
MM
I don’t give the labels much thought either, same with Dewalt’s branding like XR or Atomic or whatever. They’re just marketing words. I look at numbers, and I handle the tool to get a feel for it. I couldn’t care less what fancy words they put on the box. You have to be careful about assuming that the premium branded tools are automatically better because they sometimes are not, or there are trade-offs to consider. For example look at the the M12 Hackzalls. The Fuel model is more powerful than the basic model. However, it is also a lot bigger and bulkier which makes it a lot more difficult to work in tight spots, like pruning. Depending on what you want it for the Fuel model might be a big upgrade or it might be significantly worse.
Jared
Very good point! Made me think of my drills. I still use my compact brushed drill I got over a decade ago more than my newer one that’s far “better” in every spec because the old drill is so light and controllable.
I gave away a Porter Cable 20v reciprocating saw when I replaced it with a heavy duty brushless model. I missed it almost right away because I could easily wield the PC saw one-handed – not so with my new one.
TomD
It makes sense to me now – FUEL means it’s a tool where power can/does matter, like a saw or drill or similar.
But if you can’t really imagine having an “underpowered” version you probably won’t have a FUEL version either. Measuring equipment of course, but also tools that just need to “spin at a certain RPM” and power’s not a factor. The shears and cutters either can cut the branch/pipe that fits in them, or they can’t.
Dominic S
Lately I’ve been leaning toward the “Fuel or Bust” camp. I recently had a M18 1/2″ impact driver that was “supposed” to have enough power to easily get the lugs on and off of my (properly torqued to 140Ft-lb) truck. Well let’s just say it left some to be desired. Shortly afterward I bought my father a M18 FUEL Medium Torque 1/2″ impact gun and it literally blew my standard M18 version out of the water. There was no comparison. I sold my impact immediately and bought the fuel version.
The hassle of buying something and being disappointed and having to go get somthing better is just not worth it when it comes to the comparatively menial price difference between a standard and a FUEL tool.
Michael F
This is one area where I think Milwaukee’s marketing is just fine, although I frequently disagree with it (seriously, SCREAMING CAPS is cringe). You can expect tools with the FUEL designation to provide the most absolute power. Everything without the FUEL designation isn’t designed to provide MAX POWER, regardless of the motor technology. Makes total sense to me.
Johnez
This. It shows the level of honesty in marketing to not slap the “Fuel” label on something they either can’t or won’t bring to what is considered the fuel standard. They could easily feed into the “Fuel or bust!” mindset many fall into by labeling those shears as “Fuel” but they don’t. Perhaps they’re focused on their long term brand integrity over a quick buck, seems strange but I appreciate that.
James
Given the explanations, which are clear for me, I think the questions become murkier when next gen tools come out. Because then we’ll have Fuel tools that do not provide max power, because the new gen Fuel tool is actually the max power version. So do they change names then? Just a thought…
Michael F
I think it kind of still makes sense given Milwaukee going with a generation naming scheme. For example, the Gen 2 FUEL blower can be expected to generate more power (or better efficiency at the same power) than the Gen 1 FUEL blower, etc.
eddiesky
Stuart, HD has the Milwaukee M12 Fuel Brushless Pruner, along with sprayer listed.
https://www.homedepot.com/p/Milwaukee-M12-FUEL-12V-Brushless-Cordless-Brushless-Cordless-Pruner-w-M12-2-Gal-Handheld-Sprayer-2-2-0-Ah-Battery-Charger-2534-21-2825-21G2/325668499
In brushed motors, the power supply runs through two brushes (little blocks made up of small carbon filaments) on opposite sides of the motor’s shaft. A brushless motor, however, requires an additional set of electrical components (circuit board and sensor) to produce the opposing electromagnetic fields. A brushed motor will create more noise, more heat via friction, along with wear of the brushes and even commutator. There is always the same amount of current in a brushed motor. Where a brushless motor will run cooler, have less noise (no contact from brushes), and more efficiency (for battery conservation). Brushless will also be lighter from not having the additional wires, contact holders, brushes, etc, that a brushed motor device will have. And you will see Brushless tools being more compact. Brushless will have an additional controller and electronics for the motor. And brushless will cost more for these advantages.
Jake w.
Why are you explaining what the difference between brushed and brushless is? I would bet money, 99% of the people visiting this site are well aware of the difference.
scott
And also when the electronic fail on the brushless it done, replacing the brushes on a brushed motor is usually easy and cheap. Brushed tools seem to last much longer for me, never had one fail, where the brushless ones it seems hit or miss.
JR Ramos
I think that when Milwaukee started to follow in B&D’s (DeWalt’s) footsteps with flashy (and sometimes disingenuous) marketing, that’s where they messed up. Assigning exciting labels to features is nothing new, but they just got stuck on red-this and red-that and muddied their own waters, without doing a great job truly explaining the differences (which are often simple…and which makes the marketing look as shady as it is). It was an exciting time as both battery cells and motors improved by leaps and bounds in the same period, but good educational information was in short supply (or was only given perfunctorily)…so a lot of people didn’t learn and/or were confused. Natural and expected…and now here we are.
My chief complaint with Fuel tools at the moment is that Milwaukee seems to have dug in and refused to actually improve their batteries/charging. They really are substandard and waayyy to many of them die early deaths. Part of this was cell choices at various times but the biggest part is that they just choose to manufacture “dumb” batteries with terrible circuits (and the chargers aren’t much better but they can only do so much off the pack). They really should revamp their lineup. The Forge batteries are great, nice to finally have, and they sure deliver, but most Fuel tools seem to be able to just let the juice flow and it is super taxing on the batteries. They may hide marketing numbers behind things such as “with the 5.0Ah” or “with HO”, which is fine, but they’re just ignoring the health of all the other batteries when used in these tools (and the resulting dissatisfaction of their customers). Adding some smarter circuits to the batteries (and/or actually developing some communication between battery and tool circuit boards) would be much welcomed…12v and 18v both but especially the 12v platform where it hurts worse.
They seem to make decent choices with “Fuel” or “Non”…sometimes it makes more sense when you learn how the mechanisms work…but they fall short sometimes like with their cutoff tools (compared to others). I was surprised the little 2-1/4” planer wasn’t Fuel but it holds its own (until it upsets the battery or kills it by minor unbalancing of the cells where the charger thinks it’s so smart…). The vacuums perform fantastic but also eat batteries like no tomorrow if you run them on high most of the time…and Milwaukee could fix that easily.
Tool Junkie
One thing I didn’t see mentioned. I tell my customers the can tell if it’s brasher as a Fuel model, as the lightning bolt on the handle is all black rubber mounded. The brushless non-Fuel & older Gen tools have a red lightning bolt (for example, the newer rotary tool shown above).
Jronman
I see the difference confusing. I thought I had a good idea between the differences of brushless vs fuel, but I am now just as confused as everyone else. If more power and better performance is a fuel tool then explain why a detail sander needs the fuel designation when the larger 5 in eccentric and rectangular sanders do not?
Chip
It can be confusing for their tools and batteries.
Milwaukee has made their tools available to an enormous tool network.
Every PEHVAC store offers only premium fuel tools for example, while Ace hardware and HD offer lessor versions for homeowners.
M12 fuel is my tool of choice if available, over even 18 v options …exceptions are any drills, lights,impact wrenches above 3/8 and saws.
For example M18 brushed vs m12 fuel impact using 2.0 battery are almost even.
M12 with 3,4 or 6 made a huge jump in power.
2.5 and 5 have provided a very small jump in power of the former.
Drills and saws in 12v fuel are not enough power for a holesaw and 3/4 plywood yet…but getting closer.
Stuart I saw on Instagram that a new m12 fuel circular saw is coming out soon?
And any word on the packout 3 drawer rolling box as well?