You are reading a single comment by @gbj_tester and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • It isn't, that's an urban legend.

    Really? Well, fuck.

    Fwiw Wikipedia thinks increased cam out was a design intention.

  • Wikipedia thinks increased cam out was a design intention

    Where? In the main article on drive heads it says this about Phillips:

    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. Extensive evidence is lacking for this specific narrative, and the feature is not mentioned in the original patents. However, a 1949 refinement to the original design described in US Patent #2,474,994 describes this feature.

    Since cross head was original devised to avoid the cam-out which was plaguing slot heads, it seems improbable that the earliest designs deliberately included cam-out as a feature. The inclusion in an update would not be the last instance of a discovered bug being sold as a feature🙂

  • Bug or feature is a bit irrelevant now though. It’s a characteristic that commonly informs the choice/usage.

About

Avatar for gbj_tester @gbj_tester started