I was at my local Rockler toy store a couple days ago. As usual I went in for something specific and ended up talking with one of the guys that work there. The conversation drifted to the Sawstop and the fact that they are selling lots of them. He told me insurance companies are requiring shops and schools to upgrade for safety reasons. The Rockler store sold a dozen to a local school district who in turn wanted to trade in a dozen 66’s. The store turned down the trade ins. Point is there may be a lot of perfectly good used saws coming on the market that are being sold in order to upgrade. That is if someone is still interested in using a lesser saw like a 66 or a Unisaw. May be worth wile to find out who is buying the Sawstop and see what they are doing with the old iron.
Bot T.
Replies
Alternatively, Powermatic and Delta could try and make their TS safer and compete with SawStop.
Just a thought...
Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
If I remember the story some time ago, the guy that invented this shopped it around and no body would take it, so he designed a saw to go around the safety device. Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
From what I heard that is mostly true. Of course I doubt you could reconfig a delta (say) to use this saw stop system so I expect that would require a new design. Also thier are liscense issues. I will bet you good money the guy was not giving his design away. (note I never said he should)
I also heard (do not know if it is true) that the designer wanted to get the gov. to require a blade stoping ability on all new table saws. So thier are a lot of things going on with this tech that we (the general users) are not aware of.
Please note that I am not saying the design is not good, or the idea it a bad one, i am just saying that like everything in the world there is more then one side to the issue.
Doug
Oh, I remember those issues you mentioned, but for some reason, the others decided the market demand for that safety feature did not justify the investment. Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
Alas they are in business to make money (even SawStop is) and not knowing how expensive a redesign would be, and with out knowing how much the designer wanted for a "fee" to use the design we really have no idea if the big companies were being reasonable or not. I think that to assume that they all are being greedy so and so's is a bit much, but I would not doubt that cost was the major issue. It is just not clear how the cost worked out. And in truth being as non of us were involved we will not really be able to ever know the truth. And once again their are two sides to all issues. (at least) But being as non of the companies took up the option I have to think it was not completely the "fault" of the companies that turned him down.
And lets be honest the guy wants (and deserves) to get paid for his design. There was a company (I think it was Lear back when it was small) that had in their contracts that any patent that its people came up with that was safety related would be allowed to be used by everyone with out any fees or agreements. They could afford to do this I imagine because they were a profitable business not a little guy designing something on his own. But I have to ask, if the guy that designed saw stop did not expect to get paid for his design would he have designed it? If so then why did he want a fee for others to use his design? So to assume that he is the fountain of all that is good and nice because he designed something that is safer is a bit much. He saw a need and filled it. I praise him for his design and seeing a need that he could fill, but I cant fault companies for not using it. We do not have all the facts and thus we can not really know who is in the right and who is not. Until that time I will not point fingers at companies that did not take him up on it. It was not a proven design, it was not known how it would stand up in use (and still is not that old so we are not sure how it will hold up over the years yet) and it was not free, and it would have required a new saw design, so their we/is down sides to it.
Still if you can afford it I would say it would be a good idea. I tend to put on gloves when rough cutting plywood to avoid splinters, this is a good idea, but like the saw stop it is possible to do with out this. You just have to be careful.
Doug
"...we really have no idea if the big companies were being reasonable or not."
The word on the street is that the "big companies" didn't want to sign on because of the liability issues. The only plausible justification for adding the Saw Stop mechanism to one or more of your table saw models is to improve safety, of course. And when you do that, people will infer that the other table saws that you manufacture (past, present and future) that don't have the Saw Stop mechanism aren't as safe as those that do. And so you've set yourself up for lawsuits when people injure themselves on one of those other models.
The same thing happened with airbags. The "you should have put airbags in my car" lawsuits would likely continue to be filed if it were not for Federal safety regulations that mandate the inclusion of airbags or an equivalent safety feature. Now, the automakers can say, "We didn't put in the airbags to improve safety--our cars have always been safe--we put them in because the government said that we had to."
The logic is all very twisted, but that's the way the real world works. Unless we can collectively accept that society "learns" over time, there will always be people who file (and win) "the manufacturer should have known better" lawsuits, even when there is no rational basis for that position.
-Steve
This happened in the General Aviation industry awhile back.General Aviation being your smaller aircraft(Pipers, Cessnas) A study costing about 12 mil was conducted in making seats more crashworthy, and they came up with a different design that absorbed impact better than the old current design. But here came a quandry, if the new seats were manufactured and installed then that would be implying that the old seats were flawed, therefor opening up a rash of lawsuits based on old designs. The study was eventually shredded, what a shame. Trial Lawers have always said that there class action lawsuits make the world safer, I can only wonder what it would be like if they were not around
mark
But royalties of as much as 15% of the wholesale price on top of purchasing the SawStop parts and cartridges--which is what one manufacturer was told the cost of licensing would be, is hardly just a reflection of "greed", it's a matter of staying in business.
If SawStop were required on all table saws, I suspect that just about the entire low-end of the new table saw market would disappear. There are a lot of forces required to stop a blade and drop it below the table top. This may require a level of beefiness that just isn't feasible in low cost machines. We note that SawStop itself has not yet brought it's long promised contractor grade saw to market. Not nearly so many newbie's to turn into avid hobbyists if the initial price to play is over $1,000 or some such price. A table saw can be purchased for $100, (no I don't recommend it) and I'd bet the majority of saws sold are at prices less than $400.
Perhaps someone more well versed in industry royalties can comment here... I spoke w/ someone pretty well situated in one of the 'big companies' about it when the fur was really flying about Sawstop making their own saws vs. other companies licensing the technology from them. What I was given to understand was that usually royalties ran in the 5-7% range... and Sawstop started out wanting 15%+. They were pretty much laughed at and told to come back when they wanted to be reasonable... so they came back at 12%... still almost 2x the industry average for royalties... plus no discounts to the manufacturers at all for things like the replaceable brake cartridges, etc.I applaud the idea of Sawstop, and would love to see the technology grow, but if the above is even remotely true, it smacks of flat-out greediness to me. I realize none of the companies really have my 'best interests' at heart, they are there to make money, but for Sawstop to ask 2x the average in royalties and then whine that nobody else cares about the customer because they don't want to meet their demands... makes it real tough for me to contemplate buying their products, features or no. That they *did* put their money where their mouth is and started production on their own helps some, but it still leaves kind of a sour taste in my mouth about the whole thing.
Don't forget trying to force the issue by getting the government to mandate them.
Doug
Doug,If I recall correctly, the wording in that push thru the CDC allowed for 'equivalent technology' i.e. something that afforded a similar level of protection. Of course, at this point in time, nothing else specifically offers that... but I'd bet you'd see one in less than a year if something like that every passed.In my case... a couple years before Sawstop hit the market, I put my money in a saw with a riving knive, easily removable blade guard, sliding miter table, and good dust collection - I bought a BT3100 @ the Home Depot ;)The saw works well, but it is a little light duty for my tastes so I'm eyeballing some of the newer options out there... the Sawstop isn't exactly out of my price range, but it may be more than I want to spend. As such, I'm looking at some of the newer hybrid saws and such w/ riving knives, easily removable blade guards, good solid fences, etc. By the time I actually get around to buying one, the Sawstop Contractor saw might actually be on the market ;) Or I might talk myself into a full Sawstop cabinet saw. Hard to say this far in advance.Monte
Any reports of 'misfires' on Saw Stops? This would be a MAJOR risk in my opinion, due to the cost of a new blade and mechanism. I mean, what if I WANT to cut a hot dog with my tablesaw? Or wet lumber?
"Any reports of 'misfires' on Saw Stops?"
Yes. "False positives" are covered by the warranty, but I don't know the specifics of what you'd have to do to demonstrate that it was the saw's fault and not yours. The internal computer actually stores the history of what caused the mechanism to fire. If it does fire unexpectedly, you send it back to the company for post mortem analysis (sort of like the "black box" on an airplane).
"I mean, what if I WANT to cut a hot dog with my tablesaw? Or wet lumber?"
There is a "bypass mode" where the sensor is still active, but it's disconnected from the brake. This lets you see if the brake would have been activated, had it been enabled.
-Steve
Edited 11/14/2007 11:11 pm ET by saschafer
We had an incident at the Community college in Oakland with a sawstop. The fixture that holds the riving knife was loose and when a student turned on the saw the knife touched the blade and the saw brake tripped. Since the blade was not at full speed the saw shut off and the brake just barely stuck in the blade. Anyway not exactly a false trip but something to look for when using this saw.
"but if the above is even remotely true, it smacks of flat-out greediness to me"
This seems illogical. He offered a price. They passed. He went out on his own to produce the product. What's wrong with this? It's not greedy. He had a price he was willing to sell it for and didn't get it. So what? The idea that he needs to sell at a specific price due to industry standard is what's greedy.
He ran the risk of making little to no money off of it. It was a risk he was willing to take. Let the man make his money for goodness sake. He did nothing wrong. We should applaud the fact that he didn't fold under an industry standard and went at it on his own...Good for sawstop.
Matt ,
Well said , I agree , it's called Yankee ingenuity , capitalism , free enterprise , Entrepreneurialisim and a few others as well .
Some countries don't give you the choice to even try .
regards dusty
.
I agree, if you build a better mouse trap you deserve to make the money for it. On the other hand I should not have to give up my current traps, nor should you be able to force someone to build only your type of traps. Something he did try to do.
My point is that while the guy is welcome to make money on what seams like a good saw and a nice safety feature, lets not put him up on that pedestal next to Mother Teresa. He is in it for personal gain, nothing wrong with that, but that is his motive.
As for getting the gov. to mandate safety, well their are a couple issues with that. First off. he has a patent on this, so if you want to require them, but not use his patent then you would need to try and figure a way of doing the same thing and getting around said patent. Also their is the issue that was reported buy some, that indicated that the wording he was trying for almost required his approach, and then their is the issue that the government normally does not require a company to put in a safety feature that is protected by a valid patent. It would be like handing the guy a monopoly on saws. The lawyers would be lined up around the court house fighting the idea.
Doug
Hi Doug ,
I was not actually referring to any gov mandate and missed that aspect of this .
Trying to get everyone to use your product is also fair game , being able to force everyone is another issue and imo not ok .
Can't blame Ford or whoever it is who has a piece of windshield wiper intermittent controls , regardless of who sells it they don't force them to use it .
If the SS was that overwhelming of an advantage we would both have them.
You can become injured on a sewing machine , hey maybe the same technology can be used for various products .
You can't blame a person for trying but in this country we do have freedom of choice , still .
regards dusty
I'm up in the air about whether I disagree with this seemingly aggressive move to have safeth mandated by the government. I could still be convinced by either side. 'What's wrong with trying' on the one hand. 'who are you to tell me what to do' on the other. I guess I can't fault the guy for trying to have his product on every new saw. If he were making 15% that would be pretty sweet I'm sure. If you find it repulsive, I guess you can smile at the fact that he probably spent a significant amount of money on what appears to be an extreme long shot.
15%? Here is a quote from the Inc article at the link above:"Under the terms of the deal, there would be no up-front fee; Ryobi would pay a 3% royalty based on the wholesale price of all saws sold with SawStop's technology. The number would increase to 8% if the majority of the industry also licensed the technology."
15% wasn't my number. I was responding to others that suggested that. I hadn't seen that link. Vic posted while I was typing. We're probably the only two people that were on this forum at 2am last night.
Edited 11/16/2007 11:27 am ET by MattInPA
Hi ALL,
Government mandated Sawstop technology. What the heck. They do it everywhere else. Because, you know, we need to be protected from ourselves.
Just wondering. How many people are injured or killed annually in automobiles and how many people are injured or killed using table saws?
Yes. Sawstops are safer. But please, give use the choice!
Paul
ps There. I feel a little better now :)
"How many people are injured or killed annually in automobiles and how many people are injured or killed using table saws?"
Autos: 2.6 million injuries, 43,000 deaths (NHTSA)
Tablesaws: 60,000 deaths and injuries (CPSC--I couldn't find separate figures)
"Because, you know, we need to be protected from ourselves."
The irony is yes, that's true. If everyone would wear their seatbelts all the time, auto death and injury rates would go down so much that the cost/benefit rationale for airbags would go away. But they don't, and the additional cost of installing airbags in all cars is more than made up for by the reduction in consequent health care costs. Auto death rates are about 50% of what they were 30 years ago, the direct result of all of those evil government regulations, inspired by the general lack of common sense in the population.
-Steve
Hi Steve,
That question was somewhat rhetorical. Although the number of table saw injuries was higher than I would have guessed.
I do, though, understand the need. I was just venting about the constant government interference in our lives.
Maybe what I'll do this afternoon is turn my soap box into a nice candle stand for my wife.
Paul
Edited 11/16/2007 1:10 pm ET by colebearanimals
Steve's on the right track here ... cost benefit. But let's look at the real balance manfacturers are faced with.
Saws are low margin items for retail - sellers make their $$ on accessories (blades, etc.) Even slight shifts in wholesale cost ripple through to consumer choice (look at how many of us will buy online from the lowest price outlet as opposed to our local hardware or lumber store, bigbox not included). We're cheap, period. If we make a living with our tools WE are operating on tight margins and are SUPER cheap. We buy higher quality equipment because it meets our financial needs of lasting longer / reliability (lost time on a job is $$$$$$). Look at how many of our tools we hold out replacing to get the last bit of cost savings from using before being required to replace it (my 30 yo milwaukee drill has ONE more hole in it, I'm sure!)
The balance that the tool industry is striking is how long can they hold out until a plausible case can be made that they should be installed. They realize that this will happen, and the cost that they will incur will not be retooling, etc (they do that on a regular, planned basis anyway) but in lawsuits won between the time that they start losing cases and can get a working safe saw on the market. How long can THEY hold out until they have to replace the way their tools are made? (the PM66 has ONE more lost litigation for unsafe design it, I'm sure!)
I predict that once enough SS's are out there to make lawyer's job easier (thus rebutting the industry case that it is untested technology) we'll see a lightning strike application of the SS mechanism across the industry. The key is that ALL manufactures selling in the US will have to adopt at the same time to equally bear the cost, thus keeping the field level for all participants.
[aside: I just barfed in my mouth a little thinking about making a lawyer's life easier]
The tool companies are staffed by people, people who are as crazy about tools as us. I'm sure the Delta guys really would like to implement the technology in their tools (what tool nut would actually say that they wouldn't prefer a deep cut over a bag full of bloody digits) but until it is financially persuasive to do so we won't see wide adoption.
BTW, I'm buyin' one in January.
Edited 11/16/2007 1:16 pm ET by BradG
"BTW, I'm buyin' one in January."
are you selling either a unisaw or 66?
No, I am choosing to buy one over a PM66 or UNI (just got my replacement shop built). Limping along on a Bosch contractor's saw now.
There is no doubt that the SawStop is a wonderful invention. There is no doubt that other manufacturers could make better guards and add riving knives to their saws. The guard that came with my Delta Unisaw sucks, to put it mildly, and their saws has no riving knife. At one time I had a small INCA table saw. It had a good guard and a riving knife that I always used but, the saw was small and, to cut miters, you had to tilt the table, so I chose to move up to a cabinet saw. Needless to say, the guard on the Delta was so crappy that I threw it away. I now work without a guard on my table saw; I do use a Micro Jig splitter. I cannot afford the $800 + for one of those Biesmier(?) overarm guards, they look good to me. So, I have chose to work carefully, using common sense to avoid an accident. I have been a woodworker for thirty years and my worst injuries were from slivers. So what is my point? None really, except to agree with some of the other posters, in all things its about money. When I am wealthy enough to own a saw that will not let me get hurt maybe I will or maybe not. In the mean time I will use knowledge and common sense as a tool to prevent injury (kind of like staying awake on the freeway, or not pointing a gun to my head!). Will I ever be injured? Who the hell knows? One thing I do know, I am tired of the do gooders in the world trying to dictate what I should and should not do!
So, my final thought, if you like the SawStop and can afford it, then buy it! I would! But stop lecturing and trying to convince the world that it is the only way to get things done safely. It's not and, I have all of my fingers to prove it!
Bob, Tupper Lake, NY
Edited 11/17/2007 8:45 am ET by salamfam
Edited 11/17/2007 8:46 am ET by salamfam
Right on Salamfam. I am not a professional. I have had accidents on the tablesaw, nothing serious, but I learned from them and about the machines I was working on. The accidents were my fault because I assumed I knew how to handle them and took it for granted that I knew how to handle them properly. Both machines I was working on were less than finely tuned and were not solid well built machines.
After the last accident in 1993, I bought a Unisaw which at that time was about as good as you could go. I keep it well tuned, clean, polished and use only top notch blades and a Beis...fence. I always use a pushstick and wear a good heavy apron. I have a spotlight shining on the blade area that comes on when the machine is turned on that highlights the danger zone. I like this saw and I like what I can do with it.
The sawstop machine is rated pretty good, but because it's so much higher priced(according to Finewoodworking info) I don't think too many who already have good expensive machines will be in a rush to switch. I wonder how many pro shops have them and if the sawstop feature still works or has been disabled or worked around in some way. I know I'd be tempted to try a hot dog test if I had one. That would be about a 50 buck test I think.
Do Gooders? Do you mean the general public who's tired of paying for things like head trauma because an idiot thinks it's cool to ride a motorcycle, bicycle, or skateboard without a helmet? The Do Gooders who worked to get the lead out of our lives and got you to buckle up and countless other causes? How's that Tupper Lake, a little cleaner than it was twenty years ago?Vic D
Surfrider Foundation
California native
"Do Gooders? Do you mean the general public who's tired of paying for things like head trauma because an idiot thinks it's cool to ride a motorcycle, bicycle, or skateboard without a helmet? The Do Gooders who worked to get the lead out of our lives and got you to buckle up and countless other causes? How's that Tupper Lake, a little cleaner than it was twenty years ago?"
Yea, the same do gooders who next will ban your transfat because the public don't want to pay for your bad health choices. The same one's who can't have you drink alcohol, nope thats bad for you too! Oh, and if you are over weight, well we cant have that either! Dont worry the government will come to the rescue! No need for you to make those decisions for your self any more!
Be careful for what you wish, you might just get it!
.Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
Nice retort. Your examples definatly make you sound younger than I'm guessing you are, they're simply ridiculous. If things are going in the direction you suggest I think cigarets and hand guns would have gone long ago. ( Sarcastic tone of voice ) Fortunately, the tobacco and gun lobbies are strong enough to allow these businesses to continue to prosper and side step any form of product safety that every other American manufacturer must comply.The wild west is alive and well, south of the boarder. Just follow the extension cord, and when you can smell the heavy metals in the water you'll know your there.Vic
Do-gooders as opposed to... evil doers?Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
as opposed to ...it takes a village.. ?Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
Yo, lite'n up surfer dude!
No, I think that if some one is dumb enough to ride a motorcycle, bike, or skate board without a helmet, and cracks their skull, well, then it sucks to be them; but, they had a choice! I chose to buckle-up, never needed someone to force me to do that. I can control my car but, it's the other idiot I worry about. On the other hand I am not driving my 600 lb. table saw on a public highway where I might hurt someone else. Oh, and do'nt kid yourself about the lead thing, just look at all the toy recalls in the news lately. Surfing! have you Googled surfing accidents and seen the number of surfer dudes getting injured and injuring others by running into them, or drowning, or needing to be rescued by emergency service personnel who are risking their own lives to save the dudes who get themselves caught in a rip tide or on some rocks!!!!! Now theres something we need to put a stop to!!! That's costing the tax payers way too much; Surfing! Google it, I did!
You are not comparing apples to apples!!
Bob, Tupper Lake, NY where I'll bet the water is cleaner than yours!
"No, I think that if some one is dumb enough to ride a motorcycle, bike, or skate board without a helmet, and cracks their skull, well, then it sucks to be them; but, they had a choice!"
Yes they did have a choice. But whether they hurt themselves voluntarily or involuntarily it affects a lot more people than just the injured individual. Insurance costs that eventually get spread around to everyone. Productivity losses due to time lost from work. Or other property liabilities caused by the accident.
Bob,Are you for real?When someone has an accident while riding a motorcycle without a helmet who do you think pays for it? Those uninsured or underinsured cyclists with closed head injuries who end up trached and on a blower in an ICU or a long term care facility?Do you think they get unplugged just because they are brain dead and broke? Well they don't. Just like Terry Schiavo, they end up on SSI/Medicaid and their custodial care ($50k-100k/year) is paid for by the U.S. taxpayer. So one compelling reason for government "intrusion" is that all those libertarian donor-cyclists who end up under a truck have less than libertarian family members who went them kept on life support at all costs, and with someone else paying the bill.You may not like it. You may not think that it "should be this way". But that is reality, and I haven't seen it change much in 25 years. So deal with it, not a parallel universe.Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
Glaucon,
You bet I'm for real! I do'nt like paying those outrageous insurance premiums any more than anyone else, But, I'll say it again, you are not comparing apples to apples in your examples while trying to make an argument for requiring all woodworkers to use a table saw like the SawStop! It is ridiculous to think that if I want to enjoy my woodworking hobby by using a saw that is not a SawStop that I am costing you or any other bloke money. Put your stinking fork down, if you stick that thing in your eye and litigation results, it hurts us all!! There, now I sound like you!
EVERYTHING HAS IT'S RISKS. EVERYTHING! Do we legislate EVERYTHING? Now do you get my point?
These SawStop discussions are pointless. I'll say it again, the SawStop is a cool product. If you like it, can afford it, want it, then buy it. That's what this free thinking bloke would do, but do'nt tell me I have to give up my present saw and get one.
Bob, Tupper Lake, NY
Edited 11/21/2007 6:44 pm ET by salamfam
Lighten up, Tupper dude.I have already said (several times) that no one should be forced to buy a SawStop. I have also said someone in the market for a new TS should consider it, and place safety at the top of their list of values. I also said that if you can't afford a saw with at least a riving knife (many are now entering the market), you should ask yourself if you really need a TS, or whether a BS, which is a safer machine, might be a better idea.I don't think that my opinion will necessarily sway the minds of experienced woodworkers, who know what they want, and have experience and/or training to handle a TS safely. Nor will it change the minds of those unencumbered by the thought process.But there are more than a few newbies, who are getting into WWing, and who might not have had any formal training since a long ago school shop class. Many think that a TS should be their first purchase, and are less safety aware. My comments were directed particularly at these folks and I think they are applicable.I have also said that the government has a role in dealing with safety, whether it is automobile air bags, sanitary food standards (not so fond of E. coli myself), lead in paint or toys, commercial aircraft maintenance standards, or power tools. As for your statement:"No, I think that if some one is dumb enough to ride a motorcycle, bike, or skate board without a helmet, and cracks their skull, well, then it sucks to be them; but, they had a choice!"My point was that their choice is paid for by others. So if you want to cite that example in defense of your argument for "free choice" and "bearing the consequences for one's actions" you should recognize that it doesn't work that way. The fact that you do cite it makes you look like you don't understand what you are talking about, but that you would rather espouse an ideology than to think about the practical implications of your position. Having stitched up more than a few hands, I think about it quite a bit.Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
OK, you are right, I am right.
I could probably get about $800 for my Uni-saw, if I sell it before the government makes it illegal. If you will kindly send me the additional $2000 I would need to get the SawStop, I will order immediately and you will never have to worry about my family litigating (litigation and litigators, that's the real issue) and costing you money.
Oh, but if I were you, I would get rid of that really dangerous 8" Grizzly spiral cutter jointer! Why? Because the American style "pork chop" guard on the thing swings out, off of the cutter when you pass a board over it. (the Euro style on mine stays put) Also, it dose'nt have a SawStop style device on it to stop the cutter when the board kicks out and your hand plunges into the meat grinder! Now, before you get all huffy Doc, and tell me that you are very careful and use push blocks, remember, I do the same with the table saw of my choice.
Yes, there are a lot of inexperienced people who are looking at getting into woodworking. What do you say we give them good advice, like find an experienced mentor, read all you can in FWW and other credible mags and, get some training by taking a class or two from a reputable school and finally, use common sense and listen to that voice inside that says maybe I should think this through a bit more. I do'nt think we should tell them that if they can't afford the SawStop they should not get a table saw at all. By doing that, we all would lose by never getting to see some really creative and talented woodworkers and the contributions they could make to the craft.
By the way, I really respect your opinion, and think if we were ever to meet eye to eye, we would find we have a lot more in common than not.
Bob, Tupper lake, NY
Edited 11/21/2007 10:34 pm ET by salamfam
Bob,Here is what I said:"...someone in the market for a new TS should consider it [a SawStop]... I also said that if you can't afford a saw with at least a riving knife (many are now entering the market), you should ask yourself if you really need a TS..."Here is what you claim that I said:"I do'nt think we should tell them that if they can't afford the SawStop they should not get a table saw at all..."Do you notice any contradictions here? I'm just curious how you reconcile the two statements.Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
Glaucon,
Years ago when I bought my first TS, the first time I ripped a board I was terrified! The board was only 4½" wide by about 6' long, and I was ripping it in half, narry a push stick in sight. I got about 3' from the blade and shut the saw off, I was trembling so much I couldn't keep the board against the fence.
Gramps, I can't cut this board!
You meathead! Are you crazy or stupid.
I said both I guess.
Then he proceeded to give a lasson or three about how to use a TS safely, and made several push boards along the way with a lasson on their use too. Also made a splitter outa piece of wood and adjusted the blade guard so it worked right. That was nearly 40 years ago.
I guess my point is through all the drivvel is that there is no substitute for training in the use of ANY woodworking tool. And, the SawStop is not the end all or perfect solution in the hands of the untrained. Is it safer than a 66 or Unisaw? Can't answer that, and noone else can either. Is it safer in the hands of an experienced woodworker - YES!
I now have a very healthy respect for all my tools, especially my tablesaw.
Regards,
Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
This thread has taken on a life of its own.
<!----><!----> <!---->
My original post was just a tip that as schools and some production shops move to Sawstops, either reduce insurance costs or protect kids in shop class, there will be some perfectly good used saws coming on the market. It may provide an opportunity to acquire a good saw at a reasonable price. Didn’t mean to start a flame war on Sawstops, government regulations or helmetless motor cycle riding. On and by the way I do sometimes leave the lid at home on a warm summer evening and I will probably keep my General TS and my push sticks. I guess I am just a rebel…
I've called several schools but I haven't found any of them upgrading to SawStop saws. I'll keep looking as I'm a cheap old rebel that just might like to upgrade my contractors saw to a Pm-66 or Unisaw.
Thanks for the heads up.
Regards,
Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
Edited 11/23/2007 12:22 pm ET by KiddervilleAcres
Check with your local dealer and see who is buying the Sawstops. It was a local tool dealer that told me about the schools wanting to sell there 66's.
Bob T.
Hiya Bob ,
I know some folks think that most industry will eventually mandate the SS technology on most of the cutting equipment as has been suggested .
Well I know of one industry that the new SS technology will not be accepted or work for .
,,,,,,,,,,,,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,The meat cutting industry
dusty, thinking about safely cutting the leftover turkey
Good point LOL...
It happens everytime anyone brings up the name Sawstop.
I don't think any proposed legislation mandates that you'd have to give up your saw. I think what is proposed is that any new saws from the day such legislation ever does get passed would be required to have said safety mechanisms. For example I'm not required to give up my house because it doesn't have grounded outlets (which is now electrical code). Or is the hobbyist hot rodder next door required to give up his 40's coupe because it doesn't have seat belts or a catalytic convertor, etc. This discussion is timely because the man himself Steve Gass is on Woodnet.com engaging in the same type of discussion and it really helps clarify some positions that he has taken that have been greatly misconstrued in the rumour mill.
How many times are you going to prove that you don't understand (or read) what Glaucon writes?
The issue here is two parts. The first part is that if the new saw is not safe and should not be bought with out either SS or a Knife then the reality is neither is the current saw in most of our shops, so if one should NOT purchase one with out these safety features then logically one should not use one that does not have them, and this goes for those of us that have them and those that are thinking of buying them. You can try and twist this anyway you want but you can not say that it is to dangerous and that if you can buy a safe one you should buy a BS and then try and say that those of us using them should keep doing so. Either the danger is too great or it is not.
I say that the middle ground is If you can afford to buy one with the safety features buy all means do, but if you can not, then buy the best you can afford and have someone show you (if you do not know how) to use it safely. TS are dangerous, but so is a lot of things in live, and people have used them for years, and most of us have not hurt ourselves. So the danger while real is sometimes a bit do much of the focus. IF they were as dangerous as some people try to make them out to be would would all be missing limbs or dead. Lets not lose sight of the danger but lets not go over board.
The other issue here is that (at least in the US) we have moved to a point that a lot of people seam to think that anything that is for "Safety" is a good thing and that if that means running right over an individuals rights so be it. It is a sad thing in the land that was the great defender of individuals and the peoples rights, but today if you can point to something and say it is a danger to someone and that the government should do something about it you will get a lot of attention and a lot of people following you.
As for the building codes, please keep in mind that they were not meant to protect YOU from YOU they were meant to protect YOU from a cheap shoddy workman. The idea being that a lot of people were building dangerous stuff and selling it to people that do/did not know that what they were getting was not good. Now they are so over board in most areas that it is not even funny. Locally we have to pressure test our plumbing (waste lines) to the point that the only way that much pressure would ever get on the line is if every single line plugged up and the line filled up to 10 feet higher then the highest inlet (so in short, plug up all the traps, go on your roof and fill in the system from above and that would get you to about the same level of pressure) This is a rule that sounds good but is just nuts. I could go one for a long time on the list of stupid laws that "protect" people but..... the point is we in the US no longer want to take any chances and we want to stop you from taking any also.
Doug
Matt,I appreciate the vote of confidence, but I doubt it will change a closed mind.Those who choose to ignore the content of a post in order to spout an ideology, or pick a useless fight are unlikely to be swayed by data, or clarity. It's possible to reach a differerent (and reasonable) conclusion after looking at the same set of problems, but the honest broker does not seek to twist or misstate the other fellow's position in order to supply the deficiencies of one's own argument.The irony- an irony likely to be lost on those who engage in fallacy and bluster- is that they are making the argument for the "nanny" state that they deplore. By not putting forward an honest debate, there is a tendency to dismiss them and their nonsequiturs as adolescent and light weight. What better argument for having the government mandate protection than to behave as children in need of it? Glaucon
If you don't think too good, then don't think too much...
Hi Steve ,
It seems we have several sets of numbers floating around here , lets see if we can gain some clarification .
You said 60,000 deaths and injuries per year from the TS , in the link from post #26 on the very first page the number given is 32,000 injuries and no mention of deaths .I wonder if these numbers are from the same source ?
dusty
I believe they are, but represent different assumptions made while analyzing the data, which is certainly a bit fuzzy at times--when someone comes into the emergency room after severing their hand, they're not always all that careful about reporting exactly what kind of saw they used to do the deed.
A 2003 CPSC report specifically dealing with stationary power saws states that the total number of all (not just stationary) saw-related injuries (and possibly including non-powered saws, but it's not clear from the report) reported by emergency rooms in 2001 was about 93,880.
-Steve
"I'm up in the air about whether I disagree with this seemingly aggressive move to have safeth mandated by the government."
It's always a trade-off, but many people who most vocally oppose such things fail to understand the utterly pragmatic reasoning behind these kinds of social decisions, and that the "I should be able to decide what I'm willing to pay for safety" rationale is an extreme oversimplification.
Take airbags, for example. While putting airbags in a car obviously makes the car itself cost more, how does it affect the overall social picture of buying and operating cars? With airbags, it turns out that driver-side airbags clearly do offer more social benefit (i.e., cost savings to everyone, whether or not you drive a car, and, if you do, whether or not your car has airbags) than they cost, but that the situation with passenger-side airbags is not as clear-cut. (The problem with passenger-side airbags is that there is an increased likelihood that they will cause an injury, because the passenger is more likely to be "out of position" when they deploy.)
Anyway, getting back to tablesaws.... Any decision to mandate any given safety feature is going to involve lots of cost/benefit analyses, not just battles between paternalists and libertarians.
-Steve
If I were working by the hour for a shop, I would probably appreciate OSHA telling my boss that these safety mechanisms are necessary. No doubt that I believe that. I can't imagine any realistic circumstance that would force a $100 table top saw used in the basement of a hobby woodworker to use this technology.
I agree with what you're saying.
As for the mandate: If it is legally mandated, then the manufacturers can install the newly mandated equipment with a lowered potential for law suits. "There was nothing unsafe about our old design. We had to install this safety device. Not because we felt is was needed, but because the government mandated it." This is far different than, "We added a safety feature, for no reason other than marketing research indicated it will sell." The second example implies some level of lack in the current configuration.
As for his patent, there are other ways to approach this problem, that would probably not violate his rights.
http://www.inc.com/magazine/20050701/disruptor-gass.html
Vic and All ,
Thanks for the link , very informative indeed .
I'm sort of surprised one of the big companies hasn't bought SS out just to shelve it , like the car that runs on water sort of thing which is quickly scooped up by the oil and auto companies .
dusty
You know I never understood the logic of the idea that the auto co. would be againest a car that ran on water or one that got 100MPG. They sell cars not gas.
Doug
Doug ,
I think it is the core of the point here ,
It's the cost to re tool and re design , their car to run on water no different than the cost for table saw makers .
But the Oil companies are the ones to loose the most , so depending on which president is in office even it we had the water car it may not ever be a reality.
dusty
"even if we had the water car it may not be a reality."
If we are considering chemical bonds and chemical reactions to release the energy from water to power a car, forget it. It is a complete impossibility. If I recall my chemistry right, the only elements higher on the electromotive series than oxygen are chlorine and fluorine, both very expensive and both very caustic.
As for atomic power, Governments and corporations have been working intensively for over sixty years without success on that one. I don't think one auto company is holding out on that.
Hiya tinker ,
I was using an example , not actually suggesting , Like if some major tool company bought SS and put it on the shelf , took it off of the market place .It would no longer be a reality if it were not available .
BTW as far as water goes you said "it is a complete impossibility"
Do you remember the Stanley Steamer ?
I guess Stanley didn't know it wouldn't work
dusty
"Do you remember the Stanley Steamer ?"
Uh, steam engines run on gasoline, diesel oil, kerosene, coal, uranium, etc. Water is just the working fluid that converts heat into mechanical power.
-Steve
"example"
Yes, things like that happen all the time. Sometimes good selling lines are bought up and for some reason are put on the shelf and never heard of again. And don't forget that Sawstop could, down the line buy up some of the old lines and put them on the shelf.
"Stanley Steamer" I have never seen the beast, but I have heard of them. Quite a performer! I have often wondered why the line didn't last longer or why other companies didn't try steam more. As our friend mentioned, steam did not supply the power, it only converted heat energy to mechanical energy. Not very efficient at that - only about eight percent, as I remember. Well, gas engines aren't much better - about eleven or twelve percent. I would imagine that even in Stanley's day it was well known that a chemical conversion to extract power from water just wasn't going to happen.
Edit: Well it seems Knots wasn't going to let me in without me changing my title, so now I'm officially Tinkerer3. Most people just call me "Tink"
Paul
Edited 11/20/2007 9:57 pm ET by Tinkerer3
Edited 11/20/2007 11:23 pm ET by Tinkerer3
tink ,
So you were forced to change your name just like that , is it possible that since you were already using the name that sysop could have possibly made a mistake ?
dusty
"Stanley Steamer" I have never seen the beast, but I have heard of them. Quite a performer! I have often wondered why the line didn't last longer or why other companies didn't try steam more. "
The reasons usually given for the demise of the Stanley are that it needed more regular maintenance than most owners were prepared for, and that it used too much water and fuel. It came at the end of a line of development longer than that of the gasoline powered automobile. I suppose steam got off to a head start because of Watts and the rapid spread of railways.
Somewhere in a French museum you can still see the steam tractor made by Cugnot in 1769, followed by a steam tricycle the next year. All manner of steam machines were tried out in Europe and the USA in the 19th c., including my favourite, which had walking feet. Steam coaches operated regular routes for a time in Britain, until the Red Flag Act put an end to them. For them as don't know, the RFA required that a man waving a red flag walk in front of motorized vehicles to warn the public of approaching danger. Shades of Mr Toad. At that point development moved mainly to Europe and America. In the first ever motor race in 1894, a French steamer actually placed second, and the Stanley later held a speed record for a while.
Jim
Dusty. That's a good point. According to the documentary, "What Ever Happened To The Electric Car" ( tittle may not be correct ). The success of GM's all leased EV fleet brought on by a battery developed by an outside inventor increased its range and solving any electric cars one shortcoming the range between charging. GM bought out the inventor's work and scrapped the fleet and the program. It seems the EV worked so good that the only aftermarket service and parts GM could sell for the EV's was wiper blades and break pads.We may be fortunate that Mr. Gass decided to produce his own product.Vic
"a lesser saw like a 66 or a Unisaw"
hum...
55' ,
That remains to be seen .
We'll see how many of the SS are around and still stealth in years to come .
dusty
Ok, I guess I should have put a smiley face or LOL after <!----><!----><!---->
"a lesser saw like a 66 or a Unisaw"<!----><!---->
I thought the sarcasm would be apparent. Just thought I may be a good time to pick up great tool in an inexpensive way. <!----><!---->
Edited 11/13/2007 5:36 pm ET by Y1RET
Good thought! I have heard that cabinet shops are going to the Sawstop for insurance purposes and osha. They think the extra cost for the saw is worth the safty features.
You are right, it may be a good opportunity to pick up a nice used saw...
Skip
http://www.ShopFileR.com
I spoke to the man himself at AWFS in Las Vegas. He says that they wanted a certain percentage royalty and nobody wanted to pay that much. They also pointed out the required retooling costs because their castings would have had to be redone for most of their saws.
I spoke to a Steel City rep who was with Delta at the time and he said they came to them with a deal that outlined a royalty that Delta felt was too high and turned them down.
I got this information from people who were highly involved in the deal so I'm sticking with that story.
__________________
Jason Beam
Sacramento, CA
This from a post on Saw Mill Creek.
Vic
There are school districts that teach shop and have a budget to buy new tablesaws?
There can't be very many.
I hope a lot of 66's and Unisaws get replaced. Then I will get in line to get one cheap.
Paul
I've pored over a Saw Stop saw and can unreservedly say that it's a tank of a saw! The safety mechanism works exceptionally well. If I were just getting into serious woodworking, or replacing an old saw that didn't make sense to repair, I would certainly consider it as one of the cornerstone tools in my shop. There's no argument that the Saw Stop eliminates some of the Darwinism potential and it is just the ticket for those prone to frequent bouts of stupidity.
That said, I'll stick with my 5HP Unisaw, Bies fence, Bies splitter, zero-clearance inserts, leather apron, horizontal and vertical hold-downs, sturdy pushsticks and good work habits. I also suspect my grandchildren will be able to find any spare parts needed to keep it in running order. Besides all that, living in the same town as Lee Valley headquarters and flagship store takes all my extra money!
" That said, I'll stick with my 5HP Unisaw, Bies fence, Bies splitter, zero-clearance inserts, leather apron, horizontal and vertical hold-downs, sturdy pushsticks and good work habits. I also suspect my grandchildren will be able to find any spare parts needed to keep it in running order. Besides all that, living in the same town as Lee Valley headquarters and flagship store takes all my extra money! "
Absolutely.
I wonder when sawstop technology becomes more widely used if it's users will get used to it's safety and become careless. Then new safety measures will have to be invented. Eventually we will be using table saws from the comfort of our easy chairs and using a laptop. Now that will be safe, unless you happen to fall down on the way to the frig.
Paul
"I wonder when sawstop technology becomes more widely used if it's users will get used to it's safety and become careless"Exactly! Know it will happen, just like it did for cars. Years ago, I drove carefully. Now with my huge-azz SUV that has GPS, ABS, seat/shoulder belts, front/side air bags, puncture-proof tires, shock mounted bumpers, radar detector I just go blasting through red lights, stop signs, etc. If I ever get into an accident, I'll sue the car maker. After all, they made the car so safe, I don't have to think anymore!-Toby
Edited 11/21/2007 1:48 pm ET by tkb
Toby,
Just get the optional rocket launcher, then you can jump over the intersections too!
:-)
Regards,Bob @ Kidderville Acres
A Woodworkers mind should be the sharpest tool in the shop!
>Besides all that, living in the same town as Lee Valley headquarters and flagship store takes all my extra money!This has been bugging me for a while. I keep meaning to talk to them about it since they complain to me every month that my order is exceeding their order sheet. That express desk should just be illegal.
;) Andy
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled