Dear Greenworks,
I posted about your cordless power tools the other day, specifically your cordless drill and impact driver combo kit.
Your brand has an interesting selection of tools and OPE, and for various reasons I started looking at your 24V Max power tools.
Advertisement
There were some errors in your specs. Specification and transcription errors are commonplace online, and I generally consider them to be forgivable.
I am happy you informed me that no, the cordless drill does not output 2,000 lumens of illumination from its built-in worklight.
But you make 3 broad claims about your cordless drill and impact driver, and I am having a hard time understanding where you’re coming from.
Here’s what you say:
20% more power**
35% more runtime**
2X more torque*
Advertisement
** Compared to similar 18V power tools.
* Versus brushed motors.
ALL Greenworks 24V Max tools (at least all that I checked) are said to deliver 20% more power and 35% more runtime.
Greenworks 24V Max battery packs have 6 Li-ion battery cells (and 21.6V nominal), and 18V batteries have 5 cells. One more cell means 20% greater voltage. But that’s voltage, not power.
Now, if there are two tools, one 24V Max and one 18V/20V Max, and they both draw the same current, say 2.0A (amps, not amp-hours), then yes, the 24V Max tool will be operating at 20% more power.
BUT when you step up to a higher voltage, the current draw is usually lower. So, that 20% more power is not universal. It could be true, or it could not be, it depends on different tools and comparative baselines.
If these are higher-performing tools, then they could be delivering more power, but are these higher performing tools?
The same goes for your 35% more runtime claim. Saying “compared to similar 18V power tools” isn’t enough.
Most other brands point to their own older models when they make comparisons, and this gives them a fixed reference point. In your marketing claims, there does not seem to be any fixed reference points.
Even Harbor Freight will usually say something like “compared to stated specifications of our standard product.” You know it’s bad when Harbor Freight is used as the positive example.
I don’t like vague comparisons. But, let’s move on.
I was told:
For the 2x more torque, we use that claim for brushless versus brushed motors.
Ah, okay. Their cordless drill delivers 2X more torque than brushed motor tools. I asked them how this claim is substantiated, and have not yet heard back. Let’s look at it ourselves.
Greenworks 24V Max Cordless Drill Specs
- 0-380/0-1450 RPM
- 310 in-lbs max torque
Harbor Freight Bauer 20V Max Cordless Drill Kit
- 0-450/0-1700 RPM
- 450 in-lbs max torque
Hart 20V Max Cordless Drill Kit
- 0-440/0-1600 RPM
- 370 in-lbs max torque
Let’s Compare Specs
Speed
- Greenworks: 0-380/0-1450 RPM
- Bauer: 0-450/0-1700 RPM
- Hart: 0-440/0-1600 RPM
Max Torque
- Greenworks: 310 in-lbs
- Bauer: 450 in-lbs
- Hart: 370 in-lbs
Pricing
- Greenworks: $130 for the kit
- Bauer: $65 for the kit
- Hart: $69 for the kit
Harbor Freight and Bauer are the least expensive and lowest spec’ed 18V/20V Max cordless drills I could find. Both brands can be characterized as being entry-level, or maybe higher entry-level?
There are some lower-spec’ed 18V/20V Max cordless drills, usually single speed and sub-$50 models with 3/8″ chucks, but that would not be a reasonable comparison to make.
Both Bauer and Hart cordless drills are faster and deliver more torque than your’ higher voltage and brushless motor-equipped drill. Not only that, their kits are far less expensive as well.
So that brings up the question – which brushed motor models are you comparing your drill and impact driver to?
So What’s Going on Here?
I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt.
Maybe you got your torque specs wrong and this drill delivers plenty more than 310 in-lbs of max torque.
Maybe you have a particular brand or model in mind for these claims?
I cannot see where the “2X more torque” claim could be coming from, and I compared it to quite a few other 2-speed and 1/2″ chuck brushed motor cordless drills, in hopes of making sense of it.
Any clarification you could provide would be most appreciated.
Sincerely,
A Curious and Concerned Tool User
P.S. If anyone is wondering why this type of marketing bugs me so much – if it’s not an error – that’s because there are so many users who might take these claims at face value. I have seen so much of this over the years, and I have taken the bait and been hooked from the water a couple of times myself.
We should all do our due diligence when researching tools, but that doesn’t always happen – how many of us buy tools on impulse? Keep in mind that quite a few people believe that 20V Max is better than 18V. How many new tool users or DIYers might mistakenly be led to believe this is a higher-torque tool when, according to on paper specs at least, it is bested by two of the most entry-level brushed motor models on the market today?
Update: Greenworks’ Response
For the Cordless Drill…
The brushless drill/driver, DD24L00, its rated torque (310 in-lbs) delivers 2X more torque than their brushed drill/driver, DD24B00 (150 in-lbs).
There’s not a lot of information about the DD24B00 online, and it’s not exactly an apples to apples comparison – I found an ebay listing that shows via the on-tool sticker that DD24B00 is a single-speed 3/8″ drill, but it looks like the claim does pan out.
For the Cordless Impact Driver…
For the impact driver, IS24L00, the torque spec is rated at 2,666 in-lbs, which is ~2X that of the brushed model, ID24B00 (1,375 in-lbs). Greenworks also shared new specs (they are in the process of updating their ratings to reflect recent testing results) that show more than 2X the max torque rating. The claim looks to pan out here too.
Overall
I feel satisfied that Greenworks was able to substantiate and clarify their “2X more torque” claims, although the references should have been clearer.
I was now able to verify that Greenworks DID sell a 24V Max cordless drill and impact driver combo kit, with the drill delivering 150 in-lbs of torque and the impact 1,375 in-lbs of max torque. You can still see the listing on Amazon.
There is another older brushed motor drill and impact driver combo kit, with the drill delivering 500 in-lbs of max torque and the impact driver 2,650 in-lbs of max torque.
Ultimately, the “2X more torque” claim for Greenworks’ 310 in-lbs max torque brushless drill is indeed true when compared to one of their older 24V Max brushed motor cordless drills that delivered an advertised 150 in-lbs max torque.
Advertisement
Wayne R.
We’re in a “your facts don’t matter, only my vapid opinion” world. Too many of the powerful dump openly on “inconvenient truth” and encourage everyone to cuddle up to “comfortable lies”.
Facty truthiness is the coin of the realm these days. And way too many of our compatriots don’t even see it, let alone are troubled by it. Not to mention an outright lack of recognizing the absence of critical thinking: A global, deadly pandemic isn’t as scary as a new vaccine, so says my “Facebook research”.
As a society, too many of us are dumb as rocks, and the capitalists are going to town.
Stacey Jones
Amen. It’s disturbing. I frequently debate with my best friend online and he is frequently whining about fact checking and citing facts in debate. It’s shocking what people think is a matter of opinion versus what are facts or lies. Truth is under attack and this is not good for our country!
Jim Felt
We’re here devolving into nearly partisan politics with your logic and use of observable facts.
And now some out of touch MarCom bozos are leading us here down that same rabbit hole.
Where’s Grace Slick’s song when we again need it?
;-)~
Jared
I expect companies can get away with marketing claim like this because the product probably still works ok for their target audience. Their ideal consumer probably hasn’t owned a drill before – or is comparing it to something that was also entry level from the Ni-Cd days.
This may be the weakest “brushless” drill of all time.
Joe H
At this point, with those weak specs for a brushless drill, and their shady marketing tactics and level of competence, I don’t know if I’d trust if they are even using a brushless motor at all in their drill and instead paid someone to make up a brushless infographic because its cheaper than redesigning an old drill and selling that with these claims. I don’t know who they are and probably haven’t put their tools in my hands so I can’t tell.
Stacey Jones
Standard BS. I just ignore these claims.
Felipe
Muy buena reseña amigo
OldDominionDIYer
I am also in the truth in advertising camp. And I recognize there is a bunch of latitude for MFRs to make claims, and ultimately the consumer needs to give their purchase due diligence if this is important to them. However these types of unsubstantiated claims are laughable and immediately allow me to disregard this brand, in one way they’re making my choice easier. Still it seems insulting to the average interested and even somewhat informed consumer to make these claims and expect us to blindly accept them. Tragic really.
DC
Fake news, just marketing BS.
Jeremiah Ducate
It looks like something sold late night on tv
RMS
I have no idea how genuine their claims are, but you can indeed get more power out of the same battery if you have a more powerful and/or more efficient motor. The battery will just run for a shorter time and maybe hotter.
A 2A battery can actually deliver 3A, 4A or even 20A continuously. Of course, it will discharge much faster, and if used always in this way it might affect the life of the battery because it will run hotter, but yes it can deliver more power!
The extra battery cell will provide a higher power, or a longer run at a lower consumption rate. So it helps their claims.
Anyway, I agree that these claims they make are useless unless you know all the exact technical conditions for that claim to be real and what they’re comparing with. Often companies market real parameters but in unrealistic conditions just to obtain a bigger number (power, torque, runtime, etc) for advertisement, which is pointless and just create confusion.
Other industry sectors sometimes get together and try to work on standardizing parameters and test conditions in a fair and more realistic way, so the customer can actually compare the spec sheets if different brands. Maybe that’s that way we should push this industry to.
Again, I have no idea about their claims or their strategy, I’m just a power electronics engineer that wants to provide some technical information trying to help the discussions in this great community.
Stuart
That is true, but when a drill delivers 310 in-lbs of max torque, it’s certainly not delivering more power. And if it’s not true here, is it true for any tools in the same lineup that have the same boiler plate claim?
RMS
The spec of any motor is way more complex than simple numbers for “max torque, max voltage and speed”.
Who said that all the power tool manufacturers use the same motors?
One way to obtain more torque is utilizing a more powerful motor that provides a torque curve that will enable you to utilize a higher torque for the desirable operating point.
What I’m trying to say is that we simply don’t know what are the exact characteristics of their motors, also we don’t know at what conditions they’re specifying those parameters. And this is valid for probably any other power tool manufacturer.
In other words, they (tool manufacturers) need to provide more information.
RMS
And if most manufacturers provided more information, we would be able to do fair and objective comparisons.
John Blair
Just for some fun historical perspective on 2X torque. Teh Craftsman 11812 Nextec 12V from 2009 was rated at 195 in-lbs of torque and measured in at 182. Doubling the worst drill I could find (at 12 v) from more than a decade ago would mean they needed at least 365 in-lbs of torque. Embarrassingly, I found 12v brushed drill drivers that had similar specs released 5 years ago. But hey, they totally beat my first 9.6v Makita cordless drill hands down.
Kane
Heck, there are 12v drills that outperform this 24v.
0-450/0-1700 rpm, 350 in./lbs. torque.
https://toolguyd.com/skil-pwrcore-12-brushless-drill-review/
PETE
Maybe they’re comparing it to a hamster.
Jeremiah McKenna
This sounds like an issue that needs to be sent directly to the FTC. since you have given them more than one opportunity to clear it up and/or make the appropriate corrections, and now have failed, I highly recommend and suggest that you send your information there immediately. (And keep is all informed)
From the FTC website…”When consumers see or hear an advertisement, whether it’s on the Internet, radio or television, or anywhere else, federal law says that ad must be truthful, not misleading, and, when appropriate, backed by scientific evidence. The FTC enforces these truth-in-advertising laws, and it applies the same standards no matter where an ad appears…”
Chris
Milwaukee has been doing this for years lol Their whole marketing team is full of lies and made up BS for the most part
Stuart
How so? What are some examples of this?
Aaron
I actually was going to make almost this comment but then I did the research and they mostly call out specifically what they are comparing to when they make their marketingspeak claims.
Alfredo M Claussen
Truth in Advertizing? How about testing most (if not all) the wet or dry vacuums, with outreageous “power”claims of several “Horsepower”, many times their Wattage data?
BS, MS, PhD. (Bullshit, More of the Same, Piled High and Deep).
MM
Ah yes, the classic method of using peak power numbers when customers are expecting honest *continuous* ratings. The audio business is full of this nonsense as well. Read amplifier power ratings very carefully.
Peter Fox
Like shop vac horsepower number.
I always figure they are telling us the instantaneous peak horsepower when struck by lightning.
Stuart
Right. But maximum stall power HP conversions or what-not can still be substantiated, even if it’s misleading.
When you say “2X more torque” and a well-informed individual like myself cannot find a single reasonable comparison example where this is true…
Joel
I agree that statements like “2X more torque” are misleading but I don’t think it is any more misleading then other claims that manufacturers make.
To me, this claim is quite vague. They don’t say what they are comparing to or whether they are comparing maximum torque or the torque at a given speed.
Doing an image search for “dc motor torque curve comparison” reveals a lot of charts showing the various torque curves for different motors. It seems unlikely to me that it would not be possible for someone to find a comparison that supported “2X more torque”.
Misleading? Absolutely. But not necessarily untrue in their eyes.
Stuart
If they could substantiate this claim, then they should.
I’m sure there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation and that they have specific examples that I haven’t been able to find yet.
Brands can be very creative when it comes to marketing. “5X LONGER RUNTIME!” *compared to our smallest battery size from 10 years ago.
But you still need 2 points of reference for a comparison.
You can’t go by motor torque curves, since the claim is being made of a product, not individual components independent of the drive assembly. Consumers would make the reasonable assumption that claims are being made of the drill.
Personally, I’m giving them the doubt and assuming maybe the torque spec is inaccurate. Or maybe they’re comparing their 24V Max 1/2″ drill to a 12V Max 3/8″ brushed motor drill?
Peter Fox
A worthless measurement is a worthless measurement.
I could care less if it is repeatable. it is not a useful measure of actual performance.
I would much rather have actual specs such as a torque versus RPM curve or CFM versus static pressure curve. The 2x more power power than an arbitrary reference even if it exists or misleading peak ratings are nothing more than marketing wank and should be banned and violation punished by significant fines.
Tom D
Any of these comparisons- unless they explicitly list what it was compared to (usually a previous generation of the tool when they do list it) – effectively saying “twice as much torque as a drill with half the torque” – often based on a lower power motor sold by the same supplier they got their motor from.
Dustin
Yea it sucks that we live in a world where flat out lying about a product carries no consequences
aaron
I just got a ryobi email with a 3x more power headline and I thought I’d catch them doing this, but they actually were claiming 3x more power than a specific previous ryobi product…
Michael Veach
I’m still trying to wrap my head around and using uwo with no formula or conversion.
Stuart
https://toolguyd.com/dewalt-cordless-drills-uwo-torque/
UWO is a good measure, but only for same-brand comparisons. Or look at EU specs which often have hard and soft torque ratings.
JoeM
Ah… Okay, I checked out the specs on my original DeWALT entry-level DCD785 compact hammerdrill. From back before the lineup went brushless. I couldn’t find a max torque setting, but even its highest speeds were 0-600rpm/0-2000rpm for the two settings. Plus it has 13 Torque settings, plus hammer and drill modes. Premium, this is not. But it’s still a significant jump over the Greenworks.
I can assure you, when I bought the original 785/885 Hammerdrill/Impact Driver combo with 2 batteries and a charger… They were considered “Entry Level” and the price I paid would have placed the 785 right around $40USD out of the set.
Now that I see it’s “Greenworks” it makes a lot of sense why they’re so deceptive. Even the bottom-of-the-barrel market brands for “Entry Level” class tools can outclass them. I’ve yet to see a “Greenworks” tool that brought anything to the table besides the thought that it’s As-Seen-On-TV, or from a Dollar Store. They’ve always appeared to look, and feel (figuratively), like something they’re not, plus a gimmick that doesn’t seem to fit the rest of the tool. This is a lot of words to say the brand has always seemed to depend on tricking the consumer, rather than producing a quality product. They know they’re doing this, and they very well could produce a quality product in the process, but their reputation and their marketing habits have everyone scared to trust them.
At least that has been my own impression of them. I can hope to be wrong here, but revealing the name does finally make this make sense.
Stuart
The DCD785, which launched more than 10 years ago, is rated at 60 Nm max (hard) torque. That’s 531 in-lbs.
This was not an entry-level hammer drill, this was Dewalt’s flagship compact hammer drill before they launched brushless options.
JoeM
…Oh… My bad, Stuart… My 785 (Walter) just seems like such a step down from all its successors, and its bigger brother the 985 Premium 3-speed… (Also Brushed, also the original, this time I named it Waltham. The Impact Driver is Dewie, yes I know I sound like a lunatic, but I do have a solid reason for doing this.)
Frankly I didn’t think it was ever top of the line, until at least the release of the 771 and 777 holiday special drills within a few years of me buying the kit. I thought it was the standard low-end edition of the new 18 volt line that was completely redesigned to use Lithium Ion batteries. For that matter, I thought the non-hammer version was the flaship of the initial release.
I guess I was wrong. Apples to Oranges for a comparison.
Does not change my thinking on Greenworks though. For some reason they… and I know this is not a scientific examination at all… have the vibe of some sort of knock-off, or cheap replica brand. There’s always a gimmick, and there’s always a mystery as to what the specs are, versus the market-speak release.
Now if someone out there actually has Greenworks tools that are absolutely amazing… I’m cool with that. That’s good to know that the negative “Vibe” they have doesn’t reflect their products in reality. But I’ve yet to hear such claims, so I am still suspicious.
Aaron
I feel like these specs are about in line with my 14.4v Makita that was upper mid range in 2004
Stuart
UPDATE: It seems that Greenworks once sold a 24V Max cordless drill that delivered 150 in-lbs max torque, and that is where the “2X more torque” comes from.