If Ryobi is so “bad,” why do so many DIYers keep buying them?


It’s no secret that Ryobi gets a lot of hate online. You’ve probably seen videos on social media poking fun at the bright lime-green tools, and asking for advice in a Reddit tool forum will quickly get responses about just how “bad” they are. If that’s the case, why are they so popular, and why do DIYers keep buying them?

Fun fact: the same company (TTI) that owns Ryobi also owns Milwaukee, which is why they’re both so prominent in Home Depot. I’m not saying they’re the same, but it’s something to think about.

Especially if you’re the right customer

Close-up of a Ryobi ONE Plus 18V impact driver with a spade bit attached. Credit: Patrick Campanale / How-To Geek

People love to trash on a product or brand to help justify their own purchase, and tool enthusiasts are a passionate bunch, all claiming their team color is the best. I’m talking about those yellow DeWALT tools to the mighty red Milwaukee line.

Turns out, Ryobi tools are actually pretty great, especially for the target audience. Ryobi makes excellent tools that are often marketed to new homeowners, DIYers, and occasional users. And for that market, they’re an excellent option, delivering good performance at a great price.

Ryobi isn’t trying to directly compete with some heavy-duty tool you’ll find on a construction site, although it’s not uncommon to see Ryobi in those locations, either. I know multiple mechanics and an electrician who all use Ryobi, and use them daily. If there’s a problem, they offer a pretty great warranty, and buying a replacement is fast and affordable.

These are highly capable tools with a solid track record of more than 20 years, and they’re not slowing down. The company constantly adds to its selection, and more are coming in 2026.

I’m not a mechanic, and I don’t use my Ryobi tools every single day. However, I can tell you that I own 20+ Ryobi tools, and I’ve used them to rebuild a patio deck, replace all the suspension in my truck, rebuild an engine, change spark plugs, build furniture and swing sets, remodel a laundry room, and perform several other various tasks. I’ve never had a Ryobi tool fail, and the 18V battery packs hold up well, too.

Readily available at any Home Depot

You always know where to find more tools that are compatible with your batteries

Another reason Ryobi tools are so popular is their ease of access. Home Depot is the most popular hardware store in the United States, and every one of its locations is filled with lime-green Ryobi tools on the shelves. The big-box retailer is also wildly popular in Canada and Mexico, and is full of Ryobi and Milwaukee tools.

Whenever you need a new tool, even an obscure tool, there’s a good chance Ryobi makes one and sells it at Home Depot. For example, as a new homeowner, I constantly do little projects around the house. Whether I need a Brad Nailer, an impact wrench, or something else, I know Home Depot will have what I’m looking for, and more importantly, it’ll be affordable.

The only tool you can’t use is the one you don’t have. So, the next time you’re in need of a tool and don’t want to spend a fortune, head to Home Depot and grab something by Ryobi.

A huge selection that’s relatively affordable

Good tools at a reasonable price

Ryobi tool assortment on a wall Credit: Ryobi

Every major power tool brand has a growing collection of tools that all run off the same battery. It’s what makes them so popular and what locks you into their ecosystem.

The Ryobi 18V One+ system lets you use the same battery with nearly 400 different cordless power tools and accessories, so you don’t need to own multiple battery packs or chargers. The 18V line is what you’ll see most of, which powers drills, impact wrenches, Bluetooth speakers, leaf blowers, Brad nailers, vacuums, table saws, sawzalls, fans, lights, and more.

Ryobi also has an even bigger 40V system for those who need more power, but many of those are for lawn care. Then, there’s even a Ryobi 80V platform designed to replace gas-equivalent tools. As I said earlier, Ryobi offers a little of everything.

At this point, I own well over 20-25 Ryobi tools, and I don’t plan to slow down. I have everything from drills and drivers to impact drivers, angled ratchets, my lawn mower (which uses a bigger 40v battery), weed eater, garage fan, electric grease gun, saws, orbital sanders, and much more.

The reason Ryobi is so popular, and why DIYers keep buying them, is due to the massive 350+ tools that run on the same battery. Ryobi has a huge collection, more arrive all the time, and they’re often more affordable than the competition. Ease of access, performance, and affordability are all key factors.

You wanna tell them they’re wrong?

Ryobi impact wrench on a truck tire Credit: Cory Gunther / How-To Geek

I can tell you that without a doubt, I’m extremely happy with all of my Ryobi tools. My brushless impact wrench is way better than a comparable Craftsman model the neighbor has, and users on Reddit agree. The next time I happen to need a new tool for around the house or in my yard, I’ll be buying another Ryobi.

For example, one Reddit user who’s an Electrician by trade recently started ditching their expensive Milwaukee tools, and is “starting to love Ryobi.” Another user mentioned that the price premium for Milwaukee or DeWALT simply wasn’t worth it, especially for around-the-house use, and they could easily replace them with Ryobi at a lower price point and still be happy with the results.

Most owners agree that Ryobi is still one of the best bangs for your buck, especially for homeowners.


You can have your preferences, but Ryobi isn’t “bad”

I’m not saying Ryobi is the best, or that your beefy DeWALT or Makita tool isn’t great. Each brand has its own wins, but in casual daily use, Ryobi is hard to beat. If you need a tool for around the house, light repairs, or DIY projects, consider Ryobi the next time you’re wandering the hardware store looking at price tags.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


TL;DR

India debates sovereign AI after the US forced Anthropic to kill Fable 5, with proposals for a $5B fund and calls to embrace open-source models.

When the US government ordered Anthropic to shut down Fable 5 and Mythos 5 on 12 June, the export control directive was aimed at restricting foreign nationals from accessing America’s most capable AI. In India, Anthropic’s second-largest market, it landed as a warning shot about what happens when your AI infrastructure runs on someone else’s politics.

The suspension cut off Indian developers and enterprises from Claude’s most advanced models overnight. India’s Claude run-rate revenue had doubled since October 2025, and Tata Consultancy Services had announced a partnership just one day earlier, on 11 June, to train 50,000 employees on Claude and build a dedicated Anthropic business unit. That deal is now in limbo.

The timing has turned what was already a simmering debate about AI sovereignty into a full strategic reckoning. Proposals that sounded ambitious a week ago now sound urgent.

The 💜 of EU tech

The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol’ founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It’s free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!

Mohandas Pai, former Infosys CFO and one of India’s most prominent tech investors, has called for a ₹50,000 crore (roughly $5 billion) annual sovereign AI fund. He has also proposed a ₹2 lakh crore (approximately $21 billion) credit guarantee to finance cloud infrastructure, hardware procurement, and semiconductor development. The figures dwarf the government’s existing commitment.

India approved its IndiaAI Mission in March 2024 with a budget of ₹10,372 crore, approximately $1.25 billion. The programme has deployed around 38,000 GPUs so far. Pai’s proposal would quadruple annual spending and add a credit backstop an order of magnitude larger.

Sridhar Vembu, the founder of Zoho, has gone further. He argued that India should embrace smaller and open-source models, including Chinese ones, rather than depend on American frontier systems that can be switched off by executive order. “Technology is the ultimate weapon,” Vembu said. “Globalization is dead and Bharat must find her own way ahead.

The argument has teeth because the suspension demonstrated exactly the vulnerability Vembu is describing. Amazon’s CEO reportedly triggered the government crackdown by telling Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent that researchers had used Fable 5 to obtain information that could be used in cyberattacks. Anthropic called the action disproportionate, but compliance was immediate and global.

Policy expert Prasanto Roy put it bluntly: “American AI models are bound to American geopolitics.” For Indian enterprises that had built workflows around Claude, the lesson was that access to frontier AI is a privilege that can be revoked without notice, without consultation, and without regard for the commercial relationships it disrupts.

The Indian startup ecosystem is already adapting. Sarvam, a Bengaluru-based AI company, released 30-billion and 105-billion parameter open-source models at the India AI Impact Summit in 2026. Krutrim, founded by Ola’s Bhavish Aggarwal, has pivoted from building foundational models to providing cloud and AI infrastructure services, reporting ₹3 billion in revenue for fiscal year 2026.

Neither company is close to matching the capabilities of Fable 5 or Mythos 5. But the argument for sovereign AI was never about matching frontier performance immediately. It is about ensuring that the floor does not fall out when Washington makes a unilateral decision about who gets to use which models.

Aakrit Vaish, founder of the AI startup Activate, said the suspension “completely changes things” for the sovereign AI debate. Vijay Rayapati, CEO of Atomicwork, raised concerns about what the precedent means for Indian companies with multi-country teams that depend on American AI providers. If the US can shut off model access to enforce export controls, any country that relies on American AI is one policy decision away from disruption.

Not everyone agrees that India needs to build its own frontier models. Hemant Mohapatra, a partner at Lightspeed Venture Partners, argued that talent and compute access matter more than capital for building competitive AI. India has the engineering workforce, but the compute gap is significant, and closing it requires either massive domestic investment or continued access to foreign cloud infrastructure.

Anthropic opened a Bengaluru office as part of its India expansion, and the TCS partnership was designed to be a cornerstone of its enterprise strategy in the country. Whether those plans survive the suspension intact depends on how quickly Anthropic can restore access and whether Indian enterprises still trust a provider whose most capable models can vanish overnight.

The broader pattern is unmistakable. The US has spent four years tightening controls on AI technology, from chip export restrictions to model-level interventions. Each escalation pushes more countries toward the conclusion that dependence on American AI infrastructure carries political risk. India, with its 1.4 billion people and rapidly growing technology sector, is now asking whether it can afford that risk, and what it would cost to eliminate it.

The Opendoor layoffs in June 2026, which shut the company’s India office and affected roughly 250 employees, added another dimension. CEO Kaz Nejatian cited AI-native teams as the reason, suggesting that some US companies are using AI to reduce their reliance on Indian engineering talent at the same time that India is debating its reliance on American AI. The relationship is becoming less complementary and more competitive.

For now, the sovereign AI proposals remain proposals. Pai’s fund has no legislative vehicle, Vembu’s call for open-source adoption has no coordinated policy framework, and the IndiaAI Mission’s GPU deployment is still in early stages.

But the Anthropic suspension has done something that years of policy papers and conference speeches could not: it has given the sovereign AI movement a concrete, recent, and viscerally felt example of why dependence on foreign AI is a strategic liability. The debate is no longer theoretical.



Source link