A philisophical examination of the inherent functional deficiencies of multitools

V

v8_andrew_m

Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
71
...or why everybody should have at least two multitools.

Problem #1: A multitool can't fix itself (e.g. You can't fix a bent metal on multitool using the same plier on a multitool. You can't measure the exact length in millimeters of a blade using the ruler on the same tool. You can't turn a screw on a multiplier using the screwdriver on it. Except for the LM Surge, most tools can't file a dull blade with the diamond file on the same tool.).

Problem #2: A multitool can't do a job that requires using two functions of the tool at the same time (e.g. You can't turn a screw with the screwdriver and hold the nut with the plier at the same time.).

Problem #3: If one part of a tool is broken, you have to send the whole thing in for repair (Tools are bound to break at some point in the future. Hence, the need for a backup tool when the other tools is sent in for warranty repair).

Problem #4: There's always one feature that is missing on a multitool (no multitool has it all-even the Victorinox XAVT doesn't have hard wire cutters, full size pliers, nor the lightness of other tools for that matter).

Can you think of other reasons why we should (or shouldn't) at least have two multitools or other examples of the problems above?

I believe that a tool maker who can eliminate some of those problems would have come closer to making the holy grail of multitools. Until then we just have to have at least two multitools :D
 
v8_andrew_m said:
...or why everybody should have at least two multitools.

Problem #1: A multitool can't fix itself (e.g. You can't fix a bent metal on multitool using the same plier on a multitool. You can't measure the exact length in millimeters of a blade using the ruler on the same tool. You can't turn a screw on a multiplier using the screwdriver on it. Except for the LM Surge, most tools can't file a dull blade with the diamond file on the same tool.).

Problem #2: A multitool can't do a job that requires using two functions of the tool at the same time (e.g. You can't turn a screw with the screwdriver and hold the nut with the plier at the same time.).

Problem #3: If one part of a tool is broken, you have to send the whole thing in for repair (Tools are bound to break at some point in the future. Hence, the need for a backup tool when the other tools is sent in for warranty repair).

Problem #4: There's always one feature that is missing on a multitool (no multitool has it all-even the Victorinox XAVT doesn't have hard wire cutters, full size pliers, nor the lightness of other tools for that matter).

Can you think of other reasons why we should (or shouldn't) at least have two multitools or other examples of the problems above?

I believe that a tool maker who can eliminate some of those problems would have come closer to making the holy grail of multitools. Until then we just have to have at least two multitools :D
Click to expand...

Excellent analysis. I feel a lot better about having two now, thanks.
 
Good points.

Its is also good to have mutiple tools so that you can rotate them so that you don't completely ware them out, or at least slow the process.

Another good reason is for variety.
 
I thought it was pretty funny that I needed the pliers on my SAK to change the small screwdriver bit on my Leatherman Wave.

Multitool, heal thyself.
 
v8_andrew_m said:
...or why everybody should have at least two multitools.

Problem #1: A multitool can't fix itself (e.g. You can't fix a bent metal on multitool using the same plier on a multitool. You can't measure the exact length in millimeters of a blade using the ruler on the same tool. You can't turn a screw on a multiplier using the screwdriver on it. Except for the LM Surge, most tools can't file a dull blade with the diamond file on the same tool.).

Problem #2: A multitool can't do a job that requires using two functions of the tool at the same time (e.g. You can't turn a screw with the screwdriver and hold the nut with the plier at the same time.).

Problem #3: If one part of a tool is broken, you have to send the whole thing in for repair (Tools are bound to break at some point in the future. Hence, the need for a backup tool when the other tools is sent in for warranty repair).

Problem #4: There's always one feature that is missing on a multitool (no multitool has it all-even the Victorinox XAVT doesn't have hard wire cutters, full size pliers, nor the lightness of other tools for that matter).

Can you think of other reasons why we should (or shouldn't) at least have two multitools or other examples of the problems above?

I believe that a tool maker who can eliminate some of those problems would have come closer to making the holy grail of multitools. Until then we just have to have at least two multitools :D
Click to expand...

Excellent analysis. I feel a lot better about having several dozen now, thanks.

:p

(with apologies to FelineVet ;) )
 
Well you can carry this...
toolbox.jpg





Or carry this!
tim.jpg




Now you're ready!
 
You mean the guy? I think I'd rather carry the toolbox than a fully grown man. Well I guess he could at least open the door for me or eat the food at the dinner table I don't like.

But seriously I think I've been persuaded to buy another multitool :)
 
RubberJohnny said:
Well I guess he could at least open the door for me or eat the food at the dinner table I don't like.
Click to expand...

Hahaha. Well I guess, being Australian, I'm generally unawares of the intricacies of (and detached from) American politics. But this I'll say: we can all blame Tim for that bloody eyeglass screwdriver on the new line of Leathermans.

(Tim wears glasses+Tim owns leatherman) X (Tim has say on the design process) = eyeglass screwdriver on my wave and surge :grumpy:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top