Milwaukee Tool’s first pliers wrenches are expected to start shipping soon.

As we posted about a few months ago (see Milwaukee Pipeline 2025 – New Tools!!), 5 different Milwaukee pliers wrenches have been announced thus far.

Milwaukee shared their tentative launch timeline, along with official pricing.

Milwaukee Pliers Wrench Pricing and Availability

• 5″ (48-22-6905)
  • $33, Feb 2026
  • Preorder at Acme Tools | Ohio Power Tool
• 5″ with pocket clip (48-22-6906)
  • $35, Feb 2026
  • Preorder at Acme Tools | Ohio Power Tool
• 7″ (48-22-6907)
  • $37, August 2026
  • Preorder at Ohio Power Tool
• 10″ (48-22-6910)
  • $43, Feb 2026
  • Preorder at Acme Tools | Ohio Power Tool
• 12″ (48-22-6912)
  • $60, July 2026
  • Preorder at Ohio Power Tool
• 7″ and 10″ 2pc set (48-22-6930)
  • $70, Sept 2026
  • Preorder at Ohio Power Tool

The pliers will be backed by Milwaukee’s limited lifetime warranty.

Should You Buy One?

I tested these out briefly at Milwaukee’s Pipeline media event, first on the fasteners and pipe fixtures they had set up at the demo station, and then I grabbed some non-metallic wire to rip apart.

In no uncertain terms, these were designed to beat the best of the best, and that’s Knipex. Do they accomplish that? I’m not sure, although that could partly be due to my strong affinity for Knipex’s Pliers Wrenches.

I couldn’t find anything to complain about during my brief on-site testing. The jaws opened wide, and were easy to adjust. Each step had a wide range of jaw opening widths.

They were fairly comfortable. The jaws were as perfectly parallel as I would expect.

I was able to grab two pliers and stretch out the outer jacket of non-metallic wire, and then gently pull out the fine paper wrap from a cut section.

The design seemed well thought out.

Everything felt “right” about them, which I can’t say for some of the competing options I’ve tested over the years. For example, some pliers wrenches look good, but won’t ratchet around certain fastener sizes.

My on-site demo experience didn’t turn up any issues, but I’ll need to test a pair or two over time and a range of tasks to be sure.

I’m very excited to see these come out, and to get my hands on some of the sizes – definitely the 5″ with pocket clip and the 7″.

Would I trade in my Knipex pliers for these? That’s unlikely. Would I complement my existing kit with some of the new Milwaukee pliers wrenches? Yes, without hesitation.

Related Posts:

Bosch Launches Plumbing Tools and Knipex-Like Pliers Wrench Milwaukee USA Hand Tool Factory Tour – More Details New Milwaukee M12 Brushless Copper Tubing Cutter for Larger Pipes

There are an increasing number of fancy tool roll options, often pushing above the $100 price point.

Bucket Boss, which specializes in soft tool storage – such as pouches, tool rolls, bags – has a Super Tool Roll for ~$34.

This is one of the more basic designs I’ve seen. I’m thinking it could be a good choice for beginners looking to test out the concept before splurging on a much more premium-priced option, or maybe a one-stop solution for others.

The Bucket Boss Super Tool Roll features 6 zippered pockets, carrying handle, quick-release buckle closure, and metal grommets for hanging in vertically on hooks or screws.

It measures 14.5″ x 6″ when rolled up, and 26″ x 14.5″ when open.

The tool roll is made from “heavy-duty Duckwear canvas” which Bucket Boss says will absorb tool oil over time “like a well-oiled baseball glove,” rather than “turning into oil slicks” like polyester.

I can find cheap generic non-branded options for around $28-$30 in online marketplaces. This one is only a couple of dollars more, and backed by a reputable pro-quality brand.

Price: ~$34

In contrast, Veto Pro Pac has a modular tool roll with removable pouches for $175 – see it at Acme Tools.

There are other names in the market, such as Atlas46, and now Tekton is also making premium tool rolls in small batches.

It can be difficult to justify $100+ and even $150+ on a tool roll, or at least I feel that’s the case when trying out new-to-me tool storage products. Starting off with a more basic model like the Bucket Boss can help pave the road towards an upgrade, satisfy all of your tool portable tool storage needs, or prove that the concept is not for you, without risking a larger sum of money.

Related Posts:

New at Harbor Freight – “Extreme Duty” Hercules Tool Backpack New Veto Pro Pac Tech-LC & LCT Wheeler Tool Bag Is this Boxy Wide Mouth Tool Bag a Good Idea?

Chance Miller:

Alan Dye, Apple’s vice president of Human Interface Design since 2015, is departing the company. Bloomberg reports that Meta has poached Dye as part of its push “into AI-equipped consumer devices.”

Stephen Lemay, a 26-year Apple design veteran, will take over the role from Dye, who officially joins Meta [to become Chief Design Officer] on December 31.

Can he take Liquid Glass with him?

Juli Clover:

Dye has been at Apple since 2006, joining the marketing and communication team as a creative director. He transitioned to Jony Ive’s user interface team in 2012 to work on iOS 7, and he worked on subsequent iOS, iPadOS, macOS, watchOS, and visionOS design updates.

John Gruber:

I think this is the best personnel news at Apple in decades. Dye’s decade-long stint running Apple’s software design team has been, on the whole, terrible — and rather than getting better, the problems have been getting worse.

Chris Silverman:

I think the fact that Dye considered Meta a good fit gives some insight into why everything he’s influenced at Apple feels so profoundly un-Apple-like.

Warner Crocker:

Frankly, I think we’re all looking forward to some change ahead.

Nick Heer:

I am sure more will trickle out about this, but one thing notable to me is that Lemay has been a software designer for over 25 years at Apple. Dye, on the other hand, came from marketing and print design. I do not want to put too much weight on that — someone can be a sufficiently talented multidisciplinary designer — but I am curious to see what Lemay might do in a more senior role.

Louie Mantia:

I like [Lemay]! I have a lot of respect for him.

Mario Guzmán:

Can we please get designers that remember that computers are bicycles for the mind and not just something to sit there and look pretty?

Previously:

• Alan and Aaron
• John Giannandrea Leaving Apple
• Shipping Liquid Glass
• Design Is How It Works
• One Size Does Not Fit All
• Jeff Williams Retiring as Apple’s COO
• Assorted Notes on Liquid Glass
• Liquid Glass
• 25 Years of the Dock and Aqua

Juli Clover:

General Motors began phasing out support for CarPlay in its electric vehicles back in 2023, leading to complaints from iPhone users, but the company has no plans to back down.

In fact, GM is going further and plans to remove CarPlay from all future gas vehicles, too. In an interview with The Verge, GM CEO Mary Barra said that the company opted to prioritize its platform for EVs, but the change will eventually expand across the entire GM portfolio.

[…]

GM Chief Product Officer Sterling Anderson suggested that GM’s decision to embrace its own system is a “very Jobsian approach to things” that he likened to phasing out the disk drive.

I would just be laughing at this except I worry about getting stuck with a GM rental car.

John Gruber:

Someone should investigate whether Mary Barra is a mole planted at GM by Ford.

Joe Rosensteel:

Allow me to summarize this: Mary really wants to sell services, or have recurring revenue from partnerships and deals with companies in services to earn money over the lifespan of the vehicle. She cites how disorienting it is to jump in and out of CarPlay, but that’s hardly a hurdle that justifies the development work they’re putting into not supporting CarPlay and Android Auto projection systems.

[…]

The only salient point he raises is that there are features of the car that do not currently integrate with CarPlay, or CarPlay Ultra. It can’t do anything with Super Cruise. Apple, as far as I know, has no real plans for integrating Maps on a phone with any kind of assisted driving, or autonomous technology. I hope that they are working on something for that.

[…]

I do think Mary Barra would love to cut a deal with Apple to have Apple Music as an app on their own platform. Apple currently offers Apple Music apps for Tesla and Rivian and neither has ever supported CarPlay, because it is far more important to Apple to get the recurring services revenue than it is for them to use Apple Music as some kind of wedge issue for car shoppers.

[…]

I’m not going to sign up for a GM federated ID that stores my login credentials in their cloud. I’m not going to individually sign into apps in the car like Google Maps with my Google ID that I use for way more than just navigation.

Previously:

• Testing CarPlay Ultra
• CarPlay in iOS 26
• General Motors to Phase Out CarPlay
• The Enshittification of All Things

Update (2025-10-24): See also: Mac Power Users.

Dave Rahardja:

My interest in buying new cars is already at an all-time low. Now GM products are crossed off the list.

[…]

The main benefit for me is that I carry the state with me. Podcasts, for example, will pick up where I left off. Text messages read/unread state will update accordingly, and so on.

Raluca Budiu (Hacker News):

One of the oldest findings in usability is that anything placed on top of something else becomes harder to see. Yet here we are, in 2025, with Apple proudly obscuring text, icons, and controls by making them transparent and placing them on top of busy backgrounds.

[…]

And then comes Apple’s boldest (or dumbest) experiment: text on top of text.

[…]

In iOS 26, controls insist on animating themselves, whether or not the user benefits. Carousel dots quietly morph into the word Search after a few seconds. Camera buttons jerk slightly when tapped. Tab bars bubble and wiggle when switching views, and buttons briefly pulsate before being replaced with something else entirely. It’s like the interface is shouting “look at me” when it should quietly step aside and let the real star — the content — take the spotlight.

[…]

Apple has also decided it’s time to crowd and shrink touch targets. The long‑standing guideline of at least 0.4cm between targets (and 1cm × 1cm tap areas) seems to have been tossed out the window. Either Apple believes our fingers are getting smaller, or it assumes years of practice with smartphones have magically trained us to hit tiny targets with perfect precision.

[…]

This signals another transition (this time for the worse) to Android-style design, where page titles are left-aligned (instead of center-aligned), thus displacing the breadcrumb next to the back button.

Nick Heer:

However, I found the argument against the more prominent Search button in many apps unconvincing[…]

Me, too. I don’t like that it floats on top of content, but I think people did have trouble discovering it when you had to swipe down. Maybe the placement at the bottom also makes it easier to tap.

What is disappointing is that the hidden search field still exists in a handful of places. Most notably, Music on iOS 26 still has two different kinds of Search: the one you can get to by tapping on the button in the bottom-right, and the locally-scoped one you will find at the top of views like Playlists.

Previously:

• On Liquid Glass
• How to Turn Liquid Glass Into a Solid Interface
• Shipping Liquid Glass
• Assorted Notes on Liquid Glass

Whether you love it or hate it, there is no shortage of opinion on Liquid Glass. I have thoughts about what it is, but today I want to focus on why it exists.

Apple’s public rationale for the new design language is that it offers a universal solution across platforms that takes advantage of recent hardware advances. Its touted benefits are a more lively experience that puts a greater focus on content.

The transition from iOS 6 to 7 was used as an example of how Apple has been successful with visual refreshes. But I don’t think that applies in this case.

In late 2012 and early 2013, there was a movement outside of Apple to simplify user interfaces: the highly textured designs introduced with the first iPhone had run their course. You can see this in our own work with Twitterrific 5 and other apps like Vesper. The launch of iOS 7 in 2013 was startling to some designers and developers, but not everyone. There was clearly a need, and the app ecosystem has benefitted from this change for over a decade.

I’m unaware of anyone outside of Apple who’s thinking “we really need to have more fluid glass in our designs”. Of particular note during the introduction is how much time they spend showing off glass blocks and talking about the physical effect itself. While not addressing the most important question: “why do we need this?”

And I’m pretty sure the answer is “we don’t”. The answer is “Apple does.”

I’ve spent the last few months updating Tot for iOS 26 while watching Sean do the same thing with Tapestry. One thing that’s clear from this work is that you never want a control or container that touches the edge of the screen.

It’s like when safe area insets appeared in iOS 11: it wasn’t clear why you needed them until the iPhone X came along with a notch and a home indicator. And then it changed everything.

There has also been an emphasis on “concentricity”. It’s an impossible thing to achieve and an easy target for ridicule. But it’s another case where Apple wants to take control of the UI elements that intersect with the physical hardware.

All of this makes me think that Apple is close to introducing devices where the screen disappears seamlessly into the physical edge. Something where flexible OLED blurs the distinction between pixels and bezel. A new “wraparound” screen with safe area insets on the vertical edges of the device, just like we saw with the horizontal edges on iPhone X.

The user interface work of the past few months will all make a lot more sense, and developers who haven’t been paying attention will have their “holy shit” moment.

I can see this new physical design being very successful with touch-oriented devices: it will feel natural with a phone, tablet, or watch. Hardware and software becoming one in classic Apple fashion.

I’m having a much harder time seeing how Liquid Glass will benefit other platforms like the Mac or Apple TV (where Apple doesn’t even make the screen). Forcing tactility where it’s not needed or wanted feels like a misstep.

Other challenges, like infusing your own branding into an app with clear buttons will be easier to reason about once the reality of the hardware drops. Until then, stay away from the edges and wait for Apple to reveal the real reason for Liquid Glass.