Top 3 makers of impact driver bits (If you believe Slash Gear)

It's amazing; if you read multiple forums you will see everyone think their chosen brands' bits are garbage and you should use anything else.

Milwaukee users think Shockwave is garbage and you should use DᴇWALT or Makita.
DᴇWALT users think theirs are garbage and swear by Milwaukee Shockwave or Makita.
Makita users dislike theirs and recommend Milwaukee or DᴇWALT.

Wiha users dislike theirs and recommend some other brand, the same for Weha owners. 🤷‍♂️

As far as Shockwave goes, perhaps it's older bits that are poor; I find the Gen 3 Shockwave bits (with the white bands near both ends) to be quite good.

View attachment 382140
The ones I buy in bulk from Temu look exactly like the Milwaukee one you posted. I pay around $10-$15 for a bag of 20, and couldn't be happier with them for the price.

I know they won't be as good as some brands, but I've been using two of them in my Makita impacts the last 2 years, which I consider has lasted way more than I expected.
 
A point not made often enough, in fact we as WW are to blame for giving the Phillips head an undeserved reputation due to the fact we misuse it as we do. This was the reason Pozidrive was developed as well as the other common drives we should all be using. Robertson missed the boat when it did not get used on the world's production lines unfortunately.
That is probably true, but to be fair, the choice was limited by availability of options. To this day, in retail locations, the only real alternative is Torx. Robertson is only used in cabinet shops and RV manufacturers.
If Ford had used Robertson screws someone would have invented a screw gun with torque limiting clutch way back then.
Sure, they would have made it work. Phillips was a compromise, but he could control it.
All my Philips insert bits are Wera bits. After you use a Wera Philips screwdriver, you realize nothing holds the same.
True, those blasted tips make a huge difference. I can only imagine that there is a lifespan to it, but I haven't found it yet.
The Robertson does not cam out as EASILY as the Phillips does. I have had Robertson bits cam out on me when I'm not careful, especially when using stainless screws as the stainless is relatively soft. And when a Robertson cams out, they can become almost impossible to remove.

That's the reason I've pretty much switched over to Torx for everything when that's possible.
A Robertson spinning is most likely either a quality issue or alignment. Too tight or too loose are both problems, with tips, along with screw manufacturing. There are more variables in a non-tapered fit.
The softness of stainless would fall into that too.
Some odd sizes don't even exist anymore in PZ, only in Torx. I needed 4x35mm, countersunk head, partial threading, stainless. Spax has them, but only in Torx. But the reverse is true too with some others.



Meet my employer... we have the same screw in PH, PZ, Slot, Allen, Torx. And when it's panhead, often also in external hex.
Yeah, that's a little crazy. I have always had to be able to drive anything, you never know what is coming, but the shop's supplies were consistent.
They even go to the trouble to have 1 1/4" and 1 5/8" cabinet screws in different finishes. You can almost blindly be sure of the size that way.
I don’t know if there is an intentional difference between R2 and S2 bits (nominally the same) but some hold much better than others. Same with “square drive screws”. The ones I find most annoying are the combination Phillips/square from McFeely’s. The fit with a good bit is sloppy and they even can out occasionally.
Yes, those combo screws are the worst. They don't hold well enough for Phillips and are likely to spin in Robertson too.
People have been saying this for years, but if you go back and look at the original patent documents, no such capability is mentioned.

I think this is a case of Mandela Effect where people are so used to cam out they believe it must have been a design feature rather than an artifact.
The cam out wasn't intentional, though it sure works for drywall guys.
If I had to guess, considering the times, it was probably the easiest. The taper takes some precision out of the specifications, both tool and fastener. Cam out was just a by-product. The goal was self-centering.
My house was built in 1953. All nails or slotted head screws.

I replaced a couple of interior doors. I learned to hate slotted head screws.
I took way longer to replace slotted screws in residential construction, mostly because of drivers. Cabinet shops used Yankee drivers, for small hardware screws, but major construction was all about nails.
 
That is probably true, but to be fair, the choice was limited by availability of options. To this day, in retail locations, the only real alternative is Torx. Robertson is only used in cabinet shops and RV manufacturers.

Sure, they would have made it work. Phillips was a compromise, but he could control it.

True, those blasted tips make a huge difference. I can only imagine that there is a lifespan to it, but I haven't found it yet.

A Robertson spinning is most likely either a quality issue or alignment. Too tight or too loose are both problems, with tips, along with screw manufacturing. There are more variables in a non-tapered fit.
The softness of stainless would fall into that too.

Yeah, that's a little crazy. I have always had to be able to drive anything, you never know what is coming, but the shop's supplies were consistent.
They even go to the trouble to have 1 1/4" and 1 5/8" cabinet screws in different finishes. You can almost blindly be sure of the size that way.

Yes, those combo screws are the worst. They don't hold well enough for Phillips and are likely to spin in Robertson too.

The cam out wasn't intentional, though it sure works for drywall guys.
If I had to guess, considering the times, it was probably the easiest. The taper takes some precision out of the specifications, both tool and fastener. Cam out was just a by-product. The goal was self-centering.

I took way longer to replace slotted screws in residential construction, mostly because of drivers. Cabinet shops used Yankee drivers, for small hardware screws, but major construction was all about nails.
I demoed my 1953 bathroom vanity, which was site built, all nails and no glue. Tearing it out was way harder than ripping out modern cabinets.

As a tribute to the original , I built a wall mounted cabinet that was all nails and butt joints (except for the shaker doors).. Of course the wall is now part of the structure, but I am confident it is good for 50+ years. Just 7 years old, but no sign of wear and tear.

The other cabinets were all glued and doweled. But still I was impressed by what sensible use of nails and butt joints could accomplish.

(I did use screws to mount it to the wall.)



 
Last edited:
How does someone specify an image on AI? Is it “make me look like a sailor in whites”? Or is there some sort of algorithm that requires a detailed questionnaire be filled out?
I do a bit of image creation for 3D models for laser and CNC using ChatGPT, and it's pretty easy to generate images or scenes. You sort of present the question as a story describing the overall shape, object inclusion and placement, colour scheme, etc.

The really tricky part is creating alterations to a generated image, AI tends to perform unintended changes of other aspects in applying a change, so you have to get really pedantic about spelling out the change you want while maintaining the overall design as is.

For one off images it's fantastic however, attached is a monogram I created to laser on a large brass insert.

This is a script I used to generate another similar monogram (directly input to ChatGPT as is):

An elegant monogram featuring the letters A and D intricately intertwined in luxurious gold calligraphy. The letters flow together in ornate script with delicate flourishes and swirls. Surrounding the monogram are subtle floral embellishments including small roses, leaves, and vines that complement the letters without overwhelming them. The design has a sophisticated, timeless quality with rich gold tones against a soft cream or white background. The calligraphy style is reminiscent of traditional illuminated manuscripts with fine detail work and graceful curves.
 

Attachments

  • Monogram.BD.png
    Monogram.BD.png
    1.9 MB · Views: 2
Last edited:
I do a bit of image creation for 3D models for laser and CNC using ChatGPT, and it's pretty easy to generate images or scenes. You sort of present the question as a story describing the overall shape, object inclusion and placement, colour scheme, etc.

The really tricky part is creating alterations to a generated image, AI tends to perform unintended changes of other aspects in applying a change, so you have to get really pedantic about spelling out the change you want while maintaining the overall design as is.

For one off images it's fantastic however, attached is a monogram I created to laser on a large brass insert.
It looks like a very expensive cameo—if the raised portion was cream colored, and the background was pastel.
 
It looks like a very expensive cameo—if the raised portion was cream colored, and the background was pastel.
It does! It looks absolutely awesome lasered, I'll try to find the image I took of it.

I added a script to my earlier response that I used to create similar images that will give you a good idea of how detailed you can make it.
 
Back
Top