And I chose Makita batteries...
- Thread starter pe2dave
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
Bosch copying what Metabo pioneered long before them with their cordless alliance (CAS).
The great benefit of collaboration like this, in my eyes, is that it helps specialist tool manufacturers stay afloat as the world goes more and more cordless.
Fein, as just one example, make good tools but aren't a big enough player to offer a full range.
Now that they share the Bosch battery platform which is amongst the best, people can opt for a mixed set of tools. Say Bosch for the SDS, drill and woodworking tools and Fein for the oscillator and metalworking tools. On balance, both companies benefit. Fein won't have to spend on keeping their own battery platform up to date with the latest tech and can develop more tools instead. Bosch will sell more batteries and may win customers over from the other big names.
The great benefit of collaboration like this, in my eyes, is that it helps specialist tool manufacturers stay afloat as the world goes more and more cordless.
Fein, as just one example, make good tools but aren't a big enough player to offer a full range.
Now that they share the Bosch battery platform which is amongst the best, people can opt for a mixed set of tools. Say Bosch for the SDS, drill and woodworking tools and Fein for the oscillator and metalworking tools. On balance, both companies benefit. Fein won't have to spend on keeping their own battery platform up to date with the latest tech and can develop more tools instead. Bosch will sell more batteries and may win customers over from the other big names.
pe2dave
Established Member
Surely standardisation wins in the long haul?
Yes, I agree. But it's good to keep some competition to force innovation too. Apple v google v microsoft v linux ...
Any one with a monopoly would be insufferable.
Choice between a manageable range of standards works for me.
Who gets to decide ? Some "expert" who can never get it right for everyone or an industry standard which means all the big companies gang up to protect their market position. They keep the innovators and cheap copy outfits down and agree on a compromise standard so they all share some pain and no one gets an advantage over the others because of the standard chosen. (This is what actually happens in the standards world).
Any one with a monopoly would be insufferable.
Choice between a manageable range of standards works for me.
Who gets to decide ? Some "expert" who can never get it right for everyone or an industry standard which means all the big companies gang up to protect their market position. They keep the innovators and cheap copy outfits down and agree on a compromise standard so they all share some pain and no one gets an advantage over the others because of the standard chosen. (This is what actually happens in the standards world).
Last edited:
pe2dave
Established Member
I disagree? Cooperation (W3C?) is much better for 'customers' than competition?
You may have done the right thing.
Look at all the clone (far East) cordless tools, commonly called Fakita. Which battery do they use?
Do you think there may be a reason for that choice?
For a cordless tool that you will only use once in a while, the clones make a lot of sense. For a tool you use every day, to earn a living, the big brands also make sense. There is no one right answer.
Note that Festool and Mafell are not part of the collective.
pe2dave
Established Member
IMHO more fools them? No company is better than a wide standardisation?
Without competition the innovation and continual development process will just stagnate, if your product is market leading and all the others are way behind then you will cut back on R&D which is extremely expensive until someone starts to get closer but you must never take your eyes of the ball otherwise you can end up overtaken. Festool is guilty of this with the domino, has there been any changes since it's introduction ? As for big monopolies then Microsoft is up there. With something like a cordless drill then what more can really be done, now using brushless motors so at some point all the brands will be much the same, defined only by the battery life and for the older amongst us weight is important.
Some of Mafell's tools are Metabo designs (very possibly with improvements and more rigorous quality control) such as their 10.8V drill driver. The companies have cooperated for many years.
So Mafell belong to the other, longer established collective. Their cordless tools use the Metabo (CAS) battery platform as do over 38 other brands.
https://cordless-alliance-system.com/en/brand-world.php
Notice the LiHD branding that Metabo created when it was the first company to make packs with the bigger 20700 cells.
Mafell also cooperate with Bosch. The Mafell tracksaw guide rail is a Bosch design and manufactured for them by Bosch. Bosch have a corded tracksaw that is heavily based on the corded Mafell MT55.
Thanks. So that means there are two 'universal' battery systems being promoted.
I wonder if this will develop like Betamax vs VHS did.
Doug B
Shy Tot
Most interestingly Fischer & Rothenburger appear on both the cas list & the ampshare list from the links in this thread 
PerryGunn
Established Member
pe2dave
Established Member
After 40 yrs working with (software) standards, I'd disagree based on my experience.
That's a myth! I'd even go so far as to suggest that the tool battery situation is a very good demonstration of how competition can stiffle innovation and continual development - specifically in blocking new entrants to the market (see below)
The one outcome of competition is that you end up with winners and losers. And with the battery situation I am sure one of the losers is the customer - who finds themselves blocked from picking and choosing best tools by the battery platform. It is also a barrier for new entrants to the market, as it will be difficult to persuade someone to buy a new tool if it also means the customer having to invest in a new battery platform.
I agree with @pe2dave, co-operation is much more productive than competition.
The one caveat I would add is that I think a having common battery platform would reduce the cost of batteries, and the response to that would be an increase in the cost of tools. But then I'd suggest that would result in a more honest (to the customer) price model. That is, the poor situation now where the customer realises after purchase that they are going to have to pay through the nose for a key consumable component (the battery) over the life of the tool, would be replace with one where the cost breakdown is more obvious.
pe2dave
Established Member
I look for battery tool X. My comparison is Makita (bare tool) vs brand X, tool + battery + charger?
@RobNichols would you explain your logic please "... and the response to that would be an increase in the cost of tools."
I can guess (with no knowledge) but...
@RobNichols would you explain your logic please "... and the response to that would be an increase in the cost of tools."
I can guess (with no knowledge) but...
If I think about the brands I routinely have access to in the UK: Makita, Dewalt, Hilti, Stanley, Milwaukee, Bosch, Erbauer, Ryobi. No two of these are part of either of these alliances. They seem more like a big brand with other tag alongs, or perhaps brands separated by country of sale as most of the brands I've never heard of. Whilst they make a song and dance about themselves I don't see them achieving much so far. Would love a common standard so I can branch into other brands and use existing batteries.
Could you provide some logic for that please.
If you look at the existing situation, a 5Ah battery with Bosch written on it costs roughly the same as a 5Ah battery with Makita, Milwaukee or DeWalt written on it (and less than for the same capacity from a more niche manufacturer like Hilti or Festool or Stihl).
A good quality battery with all the appropriate protection circuitry costs a certain amount to make, no matter who makes it. You'd have to think hard about trying to push any economies of scale argument.
If one of the existing providers could make it to the same quality for cheaper, would they not do so, to induce people to buy their tools?
We could go into conspiracy theories about cartels and artificially propping up prices but those lack plausibility in an international market. With a universal battery, there is possibly _more_ opportunity for price fixing (Mr Bosch talks to Mr Metabo and asks him "how much shall we both sell this universal battery for?").
Let's not ignore ergonomic's, the battery is designed to fit into that manufacturers tool and forms part of it's handling. If all batteries were common then the tools themselves must also become more common to adopt that battery so if you buy a bosch drill because it feels right for you then having the bosch battery style in a Makita could mean the Makita no longer feels right to people who liked the feel of a Makita over the bosch. I would say you cannot make the battery platform common without actually making the tools more common although many will see the benefit of now being able to buy the best drill and the best saw which are likely to be from different OEM's yet maintain the same battery so no longer tied in tool choice to battery.
Now why would any company want to spent large sums of money on producing a new product, there has to be something to be gained like market share or getting ahead of the competition, the only other reason is legislation where an OEM is forced to do something to comply with new rules such as in automotive powertrain where emision standards must be met. They do not just spend large sums on R&D for the sake of it, they are generally forced into it by another manufacturer who has moved up the ladder and threatens their market share or lead.
Now why would any company want to spent large sums of money on producing a new product, there has to be something to be gained like market share or getting ahead of the competition, the only other reason is legislation where an OEM is forced to do something to comply with new rules such as in automotive powertrain where emision standards must be met. They do not just spend large sums on R&D for the sake of it, they are generally forced into it by another manufacturer who has moved up the ladder and threatens their market share or lead.
pe2dave
Established Member
Having worked in that field for many years it is all about cost and competition, always looking ahead to improve a design whilst the bean counters are trying to shave money out of everything.
Think about car design, you will have to go back a few decades but there was a point where a cars appearance suddenly changed, it was to do with moving the lighting aspect from electrical engineering over to body engineering and now the days of nearly all cars having round headlamps was over, they became moulded into the body shape rather than just being something bolted on as it was previously. This was a process of moving from commonality to product specific, the opposite of what we are saying about the battery platform for cordless tools, but it would be like all cars suddenly going back to just round bolt on headlamps.
Think about car design, you will have to go back a few decades but there was a point where a cars appearance suddenly changed, it was to do with moving the lighting aspect from electrical engineering over to body engineering and now the days of nearly all cars having round headlamps was over, they became moulded into the body shape rather than just being something bolted on as it was previously. This was a process of moving from commonality to product specific, the opposite of what we are saying about the battery platform for cordless tools, but it would be like all cars suddenly going back to just round bolt on headlamps.
