2022 test15 productsBlades, Bits & Abrasives
Which Circular Saw Blades Brand Wins?
We compared 15 circular saw blades options head to head. Makita (Max Efficiency Blade) came out on top. See the measured results, the runner-up, the budget pick, and a link to the full test video.
Winner
Makita (Max Efficiency Blade)
Price shown in test: 10 dollars
Check price on Amazon
Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
Budget pick
Spyder
Price shown in test: 5 dollars each (10 dollars for two)
Check price on Amazon
Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
The measured results
Every number below is read straight from the test. Scroll sideways to see all measurements. Products are listed in the order they finished.
| Product | Price/weight/origin | 2x4 rip (3 passes) | Oak rip (1 pass) | 8ft 4x4 rip | Smoothness rating | Nail test (10 embedded 16-penny nails) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1Makita Max Efficiency Blade10 dollars | 10 dollars, 185 grams, made in China | 1.41, 1.46, 1.41 seconds, recap average 1.43 seconds, dominated the competition by about a second | 2.17 seconds, dominated | 7.4 seconds ('made this look way too easy'), blade temp 82F | rating 1 (best tier, with Spyder, Bosch, Metabo HPT, DeWalt) | nail-embedded cut 4.3 seconds; transcript then states the blade took 319 percent longer for a follow-up clean-board cut, giving 5.98 seconds (the two raw numbers do not arithmetically match a 319 percent gap; kept verbatim); lost two teeth with quite a bit of dulling |
| 2Bosch Edge10 dollars | 10 dollars, 197 grams, made in China | 2.42, 2.42, 2.32 seconds, recap average 2.39 seconds (2nd place, took the lead from Ryobi) | 3.79 seconds (4th place in final recap) | 12.5 seconds ('nearly as fast as the spider'), blade temp 77F (6 degrees cooler than Metabo HPT's 83F); recap confirms Bosch stayed near-coolest at 77F | rating 1 (best tier) | fast blade but a lot of damage; nail-embedded cut 8.16 seconds; transcript states 271 percent longer for the follow-up clean cut, giving 8.87 seconds (raw numbers do not reconcile with a 271 percent gap; kept verbatim); teeth experienced a lot of small chips |
| 3Ryobi9 dollars | 9 dollars, 194 grams, country of manufacture not stated | 2.57, 2.57, 2.57 seconds, perfectly consistent, took the lead from Spyder at that point in the narration | 3.95 seconds | 11.2 seconds (fastest yet at that point in narration; final recap places it 3rd behind Makita 7.4 and Flex 10.9), blade temp close to 80F | not tested | nail-embedded cut 4.7 seconds (2nd place behind Spyder); clean-board baseline 3.49 seconds; recap-confirmed percentage increase of 35.8 percent; no missing teeth, only minor damage |
| 4Flex10 dollars | 10 dollars, 183 grams, made in China | 2.73, 2.83, 2.83 seconds, recap average 2.78 seconds (3rd/4th place) | 3.69 seconds (2nd place in final recap) | 10.9 seconds (2nd place), blade temp 78F | not tested | fastest cut through the nails at that point, 2.93 seconds; transcript states the blade took '58 longer' (percent implied) for the follow-up clean cut, giving 4.4 seconds; no missing teeth, only minor damage |
| 5Spyder Ultratuff Nickel Cobalt (polymer stabilization vents)5 dollars each (10 dollars for two) | 5 dollars each, 185 grams, made in China; the least expensive brand tested; claims to last 6x longer than regular blades | 2.83, 2.83, 2.78 seconds, average 2.81 seconds (fastest until Ryobi/Bosch/Makita later beat it) | 3.44 seconds (2nd place overall behind Makita in final recap) | 12 seconds, blade temp 76F, stayed the coolest blade of the whole video per the closing recap | rating 1 (best tier) | nail-embedded cut 3.39 seconds; clean-board baseline 3.13 seconds; recap-confirmed percentage increase of 11.26 percent (lowest of the brands given a recap figure); lost 2 teeth, rest of the teeth still in good shape; became the fastest blade in the nail-durability final ranking at 3.13 seconds post-damage |
| 6Milwaukee10 dollars | 10 dollars, 217 grams, made in Japan | 2.83, 2.93, 2.83 seconds (4th place behind Spyder) | 3.89 seconds (tied with DeWalt for 3rd/4th place in final recap) | 16.4 seconds (a little slower than DeWalt), blade temp close to 84F | not tested | made quick work of the nails at 3.39 seconds; transcript then says the blade is 'nearly as fast as the dewalt at 3.89 seconds' for what appears to be the follow-up clean-board comparison (ambiguous which number is nail-cut vs clean-cut; kept both verbatim); recap-confirmed percentage increase of 35.9 percent; very little damage to the blade |
| 7Diablo10 dollars | 10 dollars, 187 grams, made in Italy | 2.78, 2.98, 2.98 seconds, average 2.91 seconds | 4.15 seconds (a little faster than average at that point) | 13.4 seconds (quite a bit faster than most other brands), blade temp 83F | not tested | fastest cut through the nails at that point, 3.13 seconds; transcript states '25 percent longer after hitting the nails' for the follow-up clean cut, giving 3.64 seconds (raw ratio is closer to 16 percent, not an exact match); recap gives a separate percentage-increase figure of 24.9 percent for Diablo, which does not fully reconcile with the mid-narration 25 percent/3.13/3.64 figures either; all kept verbatim; teeth still in pretty good shape |
| 8Metabo HPT Premium VPR9 dollars (one dollar more than Craftsman) | 9 dollars, 224 grams, made in China; laser-cut Japanese steel, welded tungsten carbide tips | 2.93, 2.98, 3.03 seconds (3rd position behind Spyder) | 4.5 seconds (slowed about 1.5 seconds from its earlier pace) | 13 seconds, tied for 3rd place with Craftsman; blade temp 83F, the hottest yet at that point | rating 1 (best tier) | nail-embedded cut 5.67 seconds; transcript states '112 percent longer' for the follow-up clean cut, giving 6.33 seconds (raw numbers do not reconcile with a 112 percent gap; kept verbatim); teeth experienced a lot of small chips |
| 9DeWalt10 dollars | 10 dollars, 185 grams, made in Vietnam; patent-pending Tough Track Tooth, 18-degree hook angle | 3.03, 3.03, 3.03 seconds, perfectly consistent (5th place) | 3.89 seconds (tied with Milwaukee for 3rd/4th place) | 14.9 seconds (2 seconds slower than Bosch), blade temp 85F, the hottest yet at that point | rating 1 (best tier) | performed better than average, nail-embedded cut 5.06 seconds; clean-board baseline 3.59 seconds; very little damage to the blade; recap-confirmed percentage increase of 18.5 percent |
| 10Craftsman8 dollars | 8 dollars, 207 grams, made in Vietnam | 3.44, 3.49, 3.39 seconds (2nd place behind Spyder on the 3rd pass) | 4.45 seconds (2nd place behind Spyder at that point in the narration) | 13 seconds (2nd fastest at that point), blade temp 79F | not tested | nail-embedded cut 5.98 seconds; transcript states '41 percent longer' for the follow-up clean cut, giving 4.86 seconds (raw ratio is closer to 23 percent, not an exact match; kept verbatim); teeth in pretty good condition with minor chipping |
| 11Skil17 dollars | 17 dollars, 249 grams (a pretty heavy blade), made in China; claims up to 60x longer life than steel blades | 3.79, 3.79, 3.79 seconds, perfectly consistent, a little slower than average | 5.31 seconds (a little faster than Norske) | 20.8 seconds (2nd slowest), blade temp 77F | rating 2 (not in the named best tier) | nail-embedded cut 4.7 seconds; transcript states the clean-board follow-up cut took 80 [percent] longer, giving 6.84 seconds; some dulling but no missing teeth |
| 12Irwin Classic5 dollars | 5 dollars, 246 grams, made in Vietnam; no laser-cut vents, heat-expansion slots, or stabilizer vents, precision-ground teeth | 4.4, 4.3, 4.3 seconds, average 4.33 seconds (about a second and a half longer than Spyder) | 4.71 seconds (about a second and a half longer than Spyder) | described as 'took four seconds longer than the spider' at 21.4 seconds (the stated 4-second gap does not match the actual 9.4-second gap versus Spyder's 12 seconds; kept verbatim, flagged as an unresolved caption inconsistency), blade temp 80F | not tested | nail-embedded cut 38 seconds; clean-board baseline 33 seconds; catastrophic failure, all 24 carbide teeth came out |
| 13Norske14 dollars | 14 dollars, made in China; weight figure is missing from the transcript ('the norski is the lightest yet at only [gap] grams') so weight could not be captured; radical bi-directional tooth profile claimed to double cutting life, C3 microgreen carbide, Japanese tool steel | 5.16, 5.87, 5.35 seconds, average 5.35 seconds (slightly faster than Mastec) | 5.92 seconds (slowed 0.6 seconds, about 2 seconds longer than average) | 16.6 seconds, blade temp 81F | not tested | the only blade tested bi-directionally; forward direction: nail-embedded cut 4.6 seconds, clean-board follow-up '38 [percent] longer than new' at 7.4 seconds; reverse direction: took even longer at 11.35 seconds, with damage to both the leading and trailing teeth |
| 14Mastec7 dollars | 7 dollars, 274 grams (heaviest at that point in the sequence), made in China; expansion slots, claims tougher tungsten-carbide tips, anti-kickback shoulder | 4.92, 5.42, 5.98 seconds, progressively slower each pass (blade slowing down as it heats up) | 6.94 seconds (worst on record at that point in the narration; Falkenwald was later described as finishing behind Mastec, i.e. even slower) | 26 seconds (slowest yet at that point), blade temp 80F | not tested | nail-embedded cut 10.29 seconds; clean-board baseline 9.5 seconds (no percentage figure given); no teeth lost but quite a bit of dulling |
| 15Falkenwald28 dollars | 28 dollars (the most expensive blade tested), 335 grams (by far the heaviest), designed in Germany and made in China; only blade with 20 teeth (all others have 24); claims '100 percent fast cut', carbide cutting surface, marketed for wood with nails/aluminum/plastics | 4.05 seconds (pass 1, slower than average), 4.35 seconds (pass 2, +0.3s), 3rd-pass time not spoken in the transcript (only described as 'slowed down a little bit more') | 7.86 seconds (last place, behind Mastec) | 25.2 seconds (a little slower than Skil), blade temp 85F (warmest of that test) | not tested | nail-embedded cut 8.87 seconds; transcript states '233 [percent] longer' for the follow-up clean cut, giving 14.3 seconds; no missing teeth but quite a bit of dulling and chipping |
How it was tested
- 12 inch 2x4 rip cut, 3 passes per blade, weighted-pulley test rig for consistent pulling force
- single-pass rip cut through an oak (hardwood) 2x4
- 8 foot pressure-treated 4x4 rip cut with blade temperature reading after each cut
- subjective smoothness-of-cut rating (1 = best, 2 = lesser)
- cutting through 10 embedded 16-penny nails in a 12 inch 2x4, then a clean 2x4 with the same (now damaged) blade, measuring speed change and tooth damage
“for me that makes the makita the best choice especially for cordless saw”
Data notes and caveats
15-brand showdown (transcript brand count matches the description's own '15 Brands' prose list exactly once Ryobi and Metabo HPT, which are missing from the amzn.to Products Tested link list, are included). Products are ordered above by the primary 2x4-rip speed test (the video's main framing, 'let's see which brand is the best'), not by the separate durability or value picks. Narrator gives a multi-pick verdict rather than a single winner across all axes: Makita for raw cutting speed (used as the top-level winner here), Milwaukee/DeWalt/Diablo/Ryobi for nail durability (no single runner-up named among these four, so runnerUp is left null), and Spyder for budget value; Flex and Bosch are called out as fast but nail-fragile. Several nail-test 'X percent longer' statements do not arithmetically reconcile with their paired raw times (Craftsman, Metabo HPT, Bosch, Diablo, Makita); these are kept verbatim per brand rather than corrected, since no second independent figure confirms the true value for most of them. The closing recap section gives its own confirmed percentage-increase figures for only 5 brands (Spyder 11.26%, DeWalt/'dwell' 18.5%, Diablo 24.9%, Ryobi 35.8%, Milwaukee 35.9%); these recap figures are more likely correct than the mid-narration ones for the same brands, but even the Diablo recap figure does not cleanly match Diablo's own mid-narration 25%/3.13s/3.64s numbers, so both are preserved. Norske's weight figure is missing from the transcript entirely (dropped number). Irwin's stated 'four seconds longer than the spider' does not match the actual 9.4-second gap between 12s and 21.4s; kept as an unresolved caption inconsistency.