This article I came across convincingly disputes the idea that JIS is meaningfully different from other cross head standards. I do not have access to the standards myself to corroborate.
The design is often criticized for its tendency to cam out at lower torque levels than other “cross head” designs. There has long been a popular belief that this was a deliberate feature of the design, to assemble aluminium aircraft without overtightening the fasteners.[15]: 85 [16] There is no good evidence for this suggestion, and the property is not mentioned in the original patents.[17]
Philips apparently got adopted because it strips so easily. Back in the day, torque limiters didn’t work well and camming out was considered preferable to applying too much torque
Treat yourself to some good drivers from Vessel and you are living the high life. Or don’t and strip every screw you look at on old Japanese motorcycles.
JIS > Philips and this is a hill I will die on. Philips #2 strips so quickly its quickly garbage.
This article I came across convincingly disputes the idea that JIS is meaningfully different from other cross head standards. I do not have access to the standards myself to corroborate.
That’s the point of Philips. They’re for assembly line manufacturing designed to torque out when they’re tight.They’re awful.The problem with JIS is that most people don’t have a JIS driver.
Wikipedia disputes the claim of cam out being deliberate
Fair enough.
That makes them trash to me, if that’s not a feature.
What’s jis look like
Allegedly images like this one pull drawings from different sized screwdrivers and do not show an actual difference between standards
Oh interesting
Philips apparently got adopted because it strips so easily. Back in the day, torque limiters didn’t work well and camming out was considered preferable to applying too much torque
Treat yourself to some good drivers from Vessel and you are living the high life. Or don’t and strip every screw you look at on old Japanese motorcycles.