I recently purchased a Grizzly scrollsaw (model G0969) and am very pleased with it. It looks identical to the Excalibur. I suspect they are made in the same factory in Tiawan. I’m sure Excalibur has patent protection. Do you supose Excalibur sold Grizzly the right to copy their saw? An any case I am happy and I paid Grizzly considerably less that I would have paid for the Excalibur.
Discussion Forum
Get It All!
UNLIMITED Membership is like taking a master class in woodworking for less than $10 a month.
Start Your Free TrialCategories
Discussion Forum
Digital Plans Library
Member exclusive! – Plans for everyone – from beginners to experts – right at your fingertips.
Highlights
-
Shape Your Skills
when you sign up for our emails
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. -
Shop Talk Live Podcast -
Our favorite articles and videos -
E-Learning Courses from Fine Woodworking
-
-
Replies
“[Deleted]”
It could be they stole it.
I have a Grizzly jointer planer combo. A critical part disintegrated and I discovered that there are no parts available from Grizzly. In searching for the part online I came upon a machine that looked exactly like it. The machine was made by a German company called Scheppach. Photos appear identical. The schematics I found from both machines appear identical.No one that I've been able to communicate with from Grizzly can or will tell me anything. They do not support ANY parts for that machine. I thought maybe if Grizzly sold a Scheppach machine under license then a Scheppach part might work. Scheppach response is that they have NEVER had a relationship with Grizzly! I found a Scheppach parts distributor in France that has what appears to be the part and will sell it to me but knows nothing about Grizzly and will not accept it back if it's incorrect. So,did Grizzly reverse engineer this German designed machine( in Grizzlys original advertising they claimed that it was German designed) and built it themselves or did they stumble across a warehouse full of them and stick their paint and logo on them? Maybe they were busted by Scheppach and just walked away from supporting this machine -who knows? No one is offering me any solution or explaination from Grizzly. The machine is not so old that the parts would be obsolete ,they just do not support my machine.
I still have my old jointer and planer having procrastinated in selling them and have pushed the Grizzy(?) Into a shed and will probably try importing the part from Europe and take my chances. So yah, maybe they did just steal the design from another manufacturer. I personally will never consider a Grizzly machine again!
Thank you for sharing that; I was planning on a road trip to Seattle this fall to pick up that jointer/planer, you may have canceled my plans. Hope the Scheppach part works for you (I'm betting it does).
I knew that, once a company moved its manufacturing to China, all bets were off and cheaper knockoffs start appearing, their trade laws are quite different. That happened to Katz-Moses' router plane. I didn't know that the same thing appears to be happening in Taiwan, too.
when you say it happened to katz moses router plane, do you mean someone copied it or you noticed that he lifted the core design from veritas? It's been practically a national sport over there to knock of LN and LV tools for at least 15 years. LN's tools are a play on stanley, but the things that are different on LN's tools got copied into the copy tools. There used to be a site "qstool" that obviously is familiar (quansheng)- you could look up and down the site and see LN *and* LV knock off stuff on it.
Some of this stuff on the bigger side of businesses has to do with size. I had an acquaintance at one point who was selling really inexpensive stuff to a retailer, but it was his business and his IP and designs. The retailer came to him and told him their shoppers were too high end for the products, and about a year later, the products reappeared but as copies from single items. Whatever scuffs or defects were on one sample that was used to copy the designs just showed up on all.
He employed about half a dozen or ten people at the time and relayed to me he wasn't going to fight it because the manufacturing was enough for him to pay employees and eke out a salary for himself, though reduced from the past when his dad founded the same company and had 30 employees. To fight legally and lose would've left him in a position he couldn't be in.
I guess everyone making phillips screwdrivers for the last century are rip off artists too eh?
Katz didn't rip off or "copied" anyone. He made improvements to an existing design.
There's nothing dishonest about it. LN didn't copy Stanley, etc.
This argument is so old and tired.
Katz router plane is by a good margin the best router plane I've seen or used regardless of who made one first or where he made it.
There are knockoff companies whose intentions aren't honest, and they don't innovate whatsoever.
They aren't all bad guys, either. Take Wen, for example. Absolute trash. But I've got a disk/belt sander that was like 45 bucks, and every time I've needed it, it's worked great. those things are crazy expensive for the top-end stuff. Not everyone can afford top-of-the-line tools, so a low-quality reproduction company that makes crap and doesn't stand by anything is just what a LOT of people are looking for out there. Customer service costs a lot of money and that has to be built into the price.
I have bought crap tools from crap companies for noncritical applications I'm only going to do once, and I'm glad I was able to not spend a fortune. I know what I bought and have no expectations.
My 500$ Rockler Mini Lathe is another great example. Rockler is a rip-off company, too, I guess.
Thanks for sharing the Grizzly story, Panta. I don't own any Grizzly stuff, but now I can make sure I never do. They sound dishonest and scummy to me.
The "German-designed" thing really irks me when they just reverse-engineered and stole it.
Also, props to you for calling the German company and digging into it. Thats good stuff.
He used the casting originally from the LV Plane - that pattern, as well as the handles. There's no great reason to do that and if you think that doesn't make any difference, you'll have to explain why woodcraft's V3 wood river plane removed recognizable but not functionally necessary aspects from their planes that looked like LN. If you look at the luban planes (other QS tool make), and look at the frog, they still look like LN. They're not sold in the US, and maybe not in Canada, so no changes were made to them.
When you copy something from someone else all the way down to the visuals, including aspects that aren't function, it's a potential trade dress issue, but at the very least, it's discourteous and extremely lazy. Copy the Stanley or record designs instead.
We're in la la land if we're going to make a claim that LN's plane isn't a copy of a bedrock type. It's fair to wonder if the differences between LN's planes and Stanley planes are just artifacts of manufacturing and available materials.
The difference is, Stanley wasn't manufacturing a bedrock plane and hadn't been for a very long time.
You have your opinion of the Katz plane and I do mine. It's enough to be a trade dress issue to me and that is definitive in terms of both patronizing someone and in having a personal opinion about the players. It's not the first time someone lifted the functional and visual elements, both, from LV's tools.
About the same time Grizzly offered my model Scheppach moved its operation from Germany to China. Consequently my machine was manufactured in China. Are all other Grizzly machines made in Taiwan? Mine came from China. My jointer/planer model might be an anomaly, I don't know, but I feel they ( Grizzly) owes me and anyone else that purchased that model something! This wasn't supposed to be a "knockoff," It didn't come from Temu or Alibaba. Grizzly, the company, marketed and sold the machine. They advertised it, had videos of it. There are places on the internet right now that list it but when you inquire they do say " out of stock". My only other experience with Grizzly machinery was maybe late 80 s early 90s when I did some work out of a shop and they had outfitted their shop with Grizzly machines. They were a bit crude but worked o.k. and were much cheaper than Powermatic or Delta equivalents that I quess one could claim they were knock offs of and we thought of them as that. Grizzly since then has gone to a great deal of trouble and to present themselves as a legitimate manufacturer of professional grade macninery.
Grizzly says some of their machines are made in the USA, but many are made in China, Taiwan and India. I don't think they tell you on the website where a particular machine is sourced from.
Pantalones868, thanks for your eye opening post RE Grizzly. At first I was surprised, but maybe I shouldn't have been. I had already noted that the Grizzly G0969 appeared to be identical with the Excalibur. The thing that sold me on the Grizzly scrollsaw was that Bob Vila had given it a glowing review. He had said something like "professionals would not be able to find a better tool". In any case I now have the Grizzly saw in my shop and at this point I would agree with Bob Vila. If Excalibur feels that their rights have been have been violated it's up to them to sort things out. Not my problem. I intend to use and have fun with it (unless sometning breaks). Before now I had gotten by with a classic 1935 Delta "jig saw" with the cast iron arm, a 24" throat and a spring loaded blade return mechanism that I inherited from my dad. joeblade
Really? You knowingly buy a fake, and declare "Not my problem?" That's because you are the problem.
I did'nt knowingly by a fake. I purchased the Grizzly based upon Bob Vila's recommendation. Don't put a guilt trip on me.
I know nothing about the Grizzly saw, but if you search: Excalibur Scroll Saw What Happened, it will take you to a page listing out a lot of changes in ownership and right to distribute. Apparently in the USA, if you want the original Excalibur, you need to purchase the King Industrial Scroll saw which shows as in stock for the 16" version at a couple of places.
It does note that the original saw was introduced in 1982. I know only a little about patent law, but design patents in the USA only provided protection for 14 years back then I believe. After more than 40 years, Grizzly is quite probably free to copy the original saw and distribute it the USA.
Let's cool this one down folks.
Trust me, having seen 12 tools from different manufacturers all in the same room, this is not isolated to any one tool or manufacturer.
And no, it's not the consumer's responsibility to know the entire array of available tools and ensure that they are truly original.
I found an article that claims to explain the issue:
https://www.scrollsawvillage.com/articles/resources/excalibur-scroll-saw-what-happened-r101/
I was actually looking for the date of the original saw being produced - patents have a limited lifespan of 20 years - in return for sharing your secret sauce you get the right to use it exclusively for that period of time.
Any patents on the original would have expired in 2002 so it is hardly surprising that there are copies of an excellent tool being made today - that too is the point of a patent - others get to riff off what you invent or simply copy it at the end of the period so you have to make your hay whilst the sun doth shine.
Sawstop's patents are due to end, as are Festool's for the Domino - we will soon be seeing Domino-esque machines on the market, though doubtless without Festool's amazing quality control...
I have a couple of Grizzly tools - a shaper and a lathe, and can say that you get what you pay for. All in all they're decent, serviceable tools. I rarely use either, and when I do, they do the job pretty well. If I were to buy a tool I was going to use every day, I would pay the premium and get something better. For instance, on my lathe, the spindles line up perfectly, the motor is smooth and there is no vibration. But it has crappy, cheep plastic knobs - one of which stripped out the first time I used it. (They did provide good service and sent me a new knob quickly).
Some tools are so well made and elegant that I smile every time I use them. In my case, Grizzly tools don't fall into that category, but they are good workers and have provided excellent value.
actually, the discussion below provides a discussion point for what people are referring to as "copy" machines.
There have always been clones after patent expiration.
The world of electric guitars (but also other things) provides some insight into what is a copy that's misleading vs. a clone that's allowable. Except the mess of trade dress lawsuits and how much they go back and forth from settled, to appealed, and then a different decision is "out there" so to speak. For example, Gibson and Guitar center long ago were negotiating and PRS came in and offered a single cutaway guitar and was hoping to fill a void that could be created. Gibson sued, won the original case that much of the PRS offering body style was not functional. PRS appealed and the court recognized that gibson said that some of the aspects they were referring to had been advertised in the past as improving the sound of the guitar (that becomes functional and not decorative). In general, the protected part of most guitars is the peghead design and especially at the top of the peghead.
This case went away for a while because PRS won the appeal but made some changes to "pre-lawsuit" guitars. Now there's one going with Dean guitars. These brands are like tool brands. Dean guitars is not owned by Dean Zelinsky. Gibson guitars is not owned by the original company - someone owns the brands, and none or little are manufactured at original sites.
The basis for what's "Trade dress" violation is supposed to be a view from a reasonable distance or something of that sort by an *educated customer* who may be considering purchasing a guitar. If copied aspects are designed to mislead a consumer into thinking they're buying the original product that's protecting the trade aspect, then that's a trade dress violation *if* the person or company defending the design wishes to do so.
I see just this year, the Dean guitar suit went the opposite direction from the PRS v gibson suit, but now that suit has been reopened, too. It must cost double or triple digit millions to do this stuff over decades.
What's the relevant question for people here? Does anyone who bought a different brand machine believe they bought the original. E.g., if sheppach makes something and you buy grizzly, do you believe the machine is sheppach. Not do you suspect that maybe sheppach is making it and it's the same machine, but do you believe a manufacturer has copied a machine including distinguishing aspects and could trick you into buying a grizzly product in this case while honestly believing you bought sheppach or whatever else.
I doubt the answer to that is yes.
I'm not an attorney, but I wouldn't expect an attorney who doesn't actually practice in this area to be of too much use other than have sense reading summaries and case results.
In the world of guitar stuff (important if you self-build some guitars from scratch and may want to dump them later on a guitar selling site when your room gets too full - you don't want to dump them with a gibson open book peghead - guaranteed), it seemed other than literally fraudulently branded guitars, that peghead shape was established as the identifying feature.
And then two years ago Gibson won a suit that said otherwise, despite prior law, and now that case has been reopened.
Back to the machines - if you bought a machine that was sold by Grizzly because you assumed it was the same as one from a german manufacturer that moved overseas, then you made a bad assumption.
if a machine looked identical for non-functional identifying marks and all aspects and you believed you were buying the other machine's brand and could make the case, that's trade dress. I've never seen anyone make a machine so similar (e.g., giant brand names on the machines and different color schemes) that someone would buy a grizzly at some point thinking it was a Martin.
Scheppach does not export to the United States as far as I know. They manufacture products under their name and a brand called Kity. They also manufacture machines to be branded by others or so it seems. That could have been the case with Grizzly and I think that would be o.k. After all when you buy a machine, any machine, who made the bearings,who made switches and motors or countless other parts. Many companies did this, someone mentioned Wen... I dont know what Wen is today but once upon a time they were a major manufacturer of Craftsman tools, as was Walker Turner and Parks. It seems though ,according to my communication with Scheppach that that wasn't the case. Scheppach and Grizzly had no deal. The machine came to Grizzly some other way. I never heard of Scheppach until my Grizzly machine broke down and then made the connection searching for a part. Simply put -a photo that when I saw it it looked just like the one I have. More digging revealed to me that internally they also appear identical. I didn't think I was buying anything other than a Grizzly.
I purchased the Grizzly because I was trying to create space by combining two machines and largely THAT particular machine based on price...I already knew a Hamer or Felder or Martin machine were better. My machine would be out of warranty I get that but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a company to offer support and parts to purchase for a machine that they manufactured or branded for a long time. Someone mentioned on here their 1935 Delta scroll saw. Delta was purchased by Campbell Stuckman in 1939 ,the same year he married into the Rockwell family. Within a couple of years Delta was integrated into Rockwell and from there until Rockwell started making Spaceshuttles and beyond - even after Pentair took over their machine division you could get any part for any machine they ever made. That is also true for Walker Turner that Rockwell took over and discontinued the brand but they still supplied parts. This was also true for their Port Cable line of tools which Stanley Black and Decker killed off. So, original new parts and from the manufacturer for that scroll saw would have been available for at least 50 years! I think of machinery that I've had for 20 years as my new stuff! Here in California there is likely to be a disclaimer on it that says that the product might cause cancer. You might find that notice on something like a hammer! Maybe tools and machinery should have a notice on them .." This is not a lifetime tool!"