Which Scissors Brand Wins?
We compared 15 scissors options head to head. KAI came out on top. See the measured results, the runner-up, the budget pick, and a link to the full test video.
KAI
Price shown in test: $73
Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
Gingher
Price shown in test: $31
Affiliate link. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
KitchenAid
Price shown in test: $9
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 | Weight | Initial sharpness | Sharpness after 1000 paper cuts | Sharpness and time after 20 cardboard passes | Sharpness after 10 aluminum passes | Sharpness after 10 sandpaper passes (final) | Resharpened on a flat sharpening stone |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1KAI$73 | 254 g, heaviest of the lineup | 220, sharpest of the lineup from the start | 290, first place | 330 after 43 seconds, fastest and sharpest | 335, sharpest | 460, first place overall | not tested |
| 2Gingher$31 | 171 g | 245, took the lead from Klein Tools | 310, first place before KAI overtook it | 375 after 85 seconds, second place | 350, moved into the lead, cutting aluminum did not hurt sharpness at all | 550, second place overall | not tested |
| 3Klein Tools$24 | 167 g | 270, moved into the lead, described as very impressive | 320 | 420 after 90 seconds, second sharpest | 435, tied for third with Fiskars | 645, moved into first position at that stage among the mid pack, third overall | not tested |
| 4Fiskars$21 | 126 g | 355, sharpest yet at that point in the countdown | 400 | 410 after 70 seconds, very fast | 435, tied for third with Klein Tools | 725, fourth overall, described as finishing extremely strong | not tested |
| 5Heritage$28 | 215 g, heaviest at time of introduction | 345, quite a bit sharper than average | 410 | 450 after 85 seconds | 490, fifth place at that stage | 730, fifth overall | not tested |
| 6Henckels$22 | 91 g | 395, quite a bit sharper than average | 460, sharper than average | 525 after 80 seconds, tied with Bianco for fastest at that stage | 635 | 770, sixth overall, nearly as good as Fiskars | not tested |
| 7Westcott$14 | 161 g, by far the heaviest at time of introduction | 475, nearly as sharp as the KitchenAid | 525 | 585 after about three and a half minutes (210 seconds), one of the slower brands | 610 | 780, seventh overall, held an edge very well and briefly led abrasion resistance before Fiskars and others passed it | not tested |
| 8Ultima Classic$19 | 195 g | 410, same as Scotch | 440, two way tie for first place with Livingo | 485 after 125 seconds, sharpest at that stage but not designed for thick material | 510 | 945, eighth overall, moved into second position among mid pack for that stage, performed better than average | not tested |
| 9Livingo$13 | 109 g | 390, took the lead over Scotch | 440, two way tie for first place with Ultima Classic | 520 after 115 seconds, took more effort to cut than KitchenAid despite being sharp | 555 | 1000, ninth overall | not tested |
| 10Scotch$4 | 77 g | 410, 200 points sharper than Stanley | 545 | 585 after over two and a half minutes (about 150 seconds) | 630, lost about 5 percent sharpness | 1175, tenth overall, described as extremely dull and too dull to push cut through paper at this stage | 575, from 1175, after about a minute of sharpening |
| 11Acme$18 | 185 g | 575, nearly the same as Singer | 595, did not start sharp and did not dull much either | 675 after 95 seconds, second fastest at that stage | 705, minimal sharpness loss | 1190, eleventh overall, dulled quite a bit | not tested |
| 12Bianco$20 | 130 g | 395, nearly as sharp as Livingo, second position at that stage | 485, sharper than average | 570 after 80 seconds, moved into the lead for speed at that stage, offers great leverage | 590, very small sharpness loss | 1235, twelfth overall | not tested |
| 13Singer$6 | 67 g, lightest of the lineup | 560, sharper than Stanley but not as sharp as Scotch | 570, second position at that stage, performed nearly as well as Scotch | 700 after about 90 seconds (just over a minute and a half), fastest at that stage | 685, stayed nearly the same as before, took less effort than Stanley and Scotch | 1240, thirteenth overall, pretty big sharpness loss | not tested |
| 14KitchenAid$9 | 122 g, heaviest at time of introduction | 470, second position behind Scotch | 515, held up best yet, moved into the lead | 585 after 85 seconds, quite a bit easier and faster than the first three brands, same sharpness as Scotch | 635, lost about the same amount as Scotch, very easy work of the aluminum | 1270, fourteenth overall, performed very well overall but lost quite a bit of sharpness here | not tested |
| 15Stanley$3.50 each or $7 for the pair | 92 g | 610, not very sharp | 1015, cost quite a bit of sharpness loss | 1075 after about three minutes, very dull | 1230, definitely dulled | 1650, fifteenth and last overall, an additional 13 percent sharpness loss | not tested |
How it was tested
- initial sharpness using a Best Certified Sharpness Tester, measured in grams of downward force to cut test media
- sharpness after 1,000 cuts through standard paper, a total cut length of three football fields
- sharpness and cut time after 20 passes through cardboard
- sharpness after 10 passes through thin aluminum flashing, testing whether cutting metal hones or dulls the blade
- sharpness (abrasion resistance) after 10 passes through folded 400 grit sandpaper
- resharpening via a flat sharpening stone, demonstrated only on the Scotch brand
“So, which scissors are best? The KAI's are definitely the best, but they're also twice as expensive as all the other brands.”
Data notes and caveats
Very clean, internally consistent numeric progression across all 15 brands and all 5 test stages, with only one recurring caption drift: the brand KAI is spelled correctly at its price introduction and briefly afterward but drifts to the homophone KEI through most of the middle and late sections of the video; resolved to KAI throughout per the description's product list, since every other detail (most expensive at 73 dollars, made in Japan, sharpest scissors throughout) matches the same brand consistently. The closing recommendation section names three separate picks beyond the outright winner: KitchenAid as the cheap budget pick (around 10 dollars), Fiskars as the pick if spending a bit more, and Klein Tools praised for durability; only KitchenAid was recorded in the budgetPick field, the Fiskars and Klein Tools mentions are preserved in their own product notes since the schema has no field for a second and third recommendation. runnerUp is set to Gingher based on the transcript's own explicit final ranking after all four physical tests (KAI 460, Gingher 550, Klein Tools 645, Fiskars 725, Heritage 730), which is distinct from the host's separate value based recommendations in the closing section. The video description's top Brands line lists Heritage, but the affiliate link Products Tested list beneath it omits Heritage entirely, a partial description inconsistency; Heritage is nonetheless extensively and consistently tested in the transcript with its own chapter, so it is included as a full product. Chapters named after individual brands (Fiskars, Kitchenaid Scissors, Westcott, Heritage Scissors) mark rough transition points in the video rather than segments exclusively about that one brand, so they are only loosely precise; the Sharpness, Abrasion Resistance, and What Scissors Are Best chapters align cleanly with their corresponding test sections.