A nearby thread, Blade Guard Survey, has pretty well established that the Euro style riving knife and crown guard are far superior to the splitter and blade guard supplied with North American saws.
Now, what about sliding tables, a standard or easily obtainable extra on European table saws. My opinion is that they offer protection to the operator that is comparable to that from the riving knife and crown guard. But, as with the latter, effective sliding tables aren’t even available as an add-on to North American saws.
The standard our-style table saw is a rip saw. With the addition of a miter gauge, it can crosscut narrow (up to about 9 or 10 inches) stock. To do wider crosscuts and miters, the owner is forced to do the engineering and manufacturing of a cutoff sled or some comparable rig. These shop-built fixtures have their own safety drawbacks. Or, even worse, people crosscut by freehanding the workpiece against the rip fence. That’s a very dangerous practice, in my opinion, but one that has been practiced at some time by most of us and one that is even endorsed by our esteemed sponsor (see http://www.taunton.com/finewoodworking/pages/w00066.asp). We’re forced to these unsafe practices by the lack of a viable alternative, and who wants to use an expensive saw only for ripping?
But consider the Euro-style sliding fence. The work is fully supported through the full crosscut travel. The operator’s fingers need never get near the blade, because the table is the object being moved. Very wide pieces (e.g., a full sheet of plywood) can be as easily and accurately cross cut or mitered as ones a couple of inches wide. There’s no danger of the workpiece rotating into the blade and being thrown back as there is if the rip fence is the only guide.
As you can tell, I am sold on sliding tables for both safety and utility. But I’d like to hear from other table saw users.
Replies
Don,
The superiority of the european equipment is evident in every way that one can judge the piece of equipment. It is a difference of philosophy. And one in which "American" equipment is distustingly deficient.
The philosophy of European design is, "Let's stand back and analize as carefully as we can the real needs and requirements of the tool, then let's, design it as carefully and as intelligently as we can, paying careful attention to concepts like technical expertise, craftsmanship, pride of workmanship and ownership."
American equipment falls into the, "Ok, mickey mouse it until it pretty much works if you muscle it around, and if it sorta gets the job done, well then it's ok and fer crissake, if it ain't broke, leave it the hell as it is, cause real men don't need good engineering to cut a friggin' piece o' wood."
Yes, euro design costs more. But not as much more as the increased value of the tool.
Oh, did I mention that the sliding table is just a wee superior to a wooden cross cut sled? My best attempt at a crosscut sled is stone-age technology compared to a eurosaw's sliding table. But I have listened to defense of wooden jigs, attachments and accessories as "Damn well good enough, and the mark of a craftsman" for years. I have actually heard people put down the engineering in eurosaws as technology "gone berserk."
Rich
Edited 9/28/2002 4:01:54 PM ET by Rich Rose
the sliding table is just a wee superior to a wooden cross cut sled
And what is the maximum safe crosscut width with a sled? As much as 18 inches? Anyway, nowhere near the capacity of a Euro sliding table.
I agree with your assessment of North American equipment, but, because I've never been able to read people's minds, I have no idea of the motivation to continue avoiding improvements that have been staring them in the face for decades.
What's more mysterious to me is why the great American entrepreneurial spirit hasn't coughed up someone to manufacture after-market attachments for a riving knife and crown guard. There's some minor effort in after-market sliding tables, but they look pathetic compared to the European original equipment.
Many saw buyers think nothing of doubling the basic cost of their table saw with after-market rip fences, miter gauges, and various jigs and fixtures and tune-up measuring gizmos. But in the end, the saws are not a whit safer, so I think a cost comparison to Euro saws must include the after-market stuff to make the North American saw work.
Don,
How does the Euro-style cross cut differ from those which Delta, Grizzly, or Excalibur sell?
Jeff
Jeff--
Generally, they are designed as an integral part of the machine, not an add-on. The Grizzly, which I've seen only in pictures, is closest to the Euro design in that it is attached to the saw rather that relying on a separate set of legs (which can chew up a lot of otherwise useable floor space).
Some European sliders have a stroke long enough to crosscut a full width (48") of sheet goods.
Most European manufacturers offer two types of sliders: a separate table that is offset from the blade; or one that replaces the left wing and slides the workpiece right up against the blade. The three after-market sliding tables you mention have (at least the models I've seen described) a table that is outboard of the regular saw and has a short stroke.
I have not used any of the three sliders you mention, so they may be perfectly adequate for many uses. Considering the saw manufacturer's record of innovation, though, I doubt it.
Actually Don, many of the European saws like Altendorf have up to 10 feet of crosscutting capacity which is really nice if you work with a lot of sheet goods. the only downside to the european sliding table is that you can't use a dado blade. now there are other ways, but a dado blade is one of the easiest ways to cut deep, narrow or angled dados. in. I've used both types of sliders and while the built in sliding tables are very nice I would still want my general 350 (with no sliding table) in the shop as well as a nice altendorf, if I had the space and money for one :)
My Rojek with a sliding table has a 5/8" arbor with the capacity for a 13/16" dado stack. The no-dado blade restriction is for sales in Europe. So far, only Rojek among the Euro saw manufacturers, so far as I know, has paid any attention to the needs of their export market (they also send to us motors designed for 60HZ power).
So Rojek, at least, is paying attention to the needs of the North American woodworker. I wish the North American manufacturers would do the same.
What is your opinion of the added safety of a sliding table?
Edited 9/30/2002 8:05:24 PM ET by Donald C. Brown
Edited 9/30/2002 8:23:51 PM ET by Donald C. Brown
So if you own a european saw, why are you complaining? I just don't get it. If you guys like the euro saws so much then buy them. Are you trying to save the rest of us? No thank you! Maybe you think that we who buy american saws don't know whats good for us so you have to lobby in our favor? Again, No Thanks!
Its disgusting to have you guys beating this drum every time there is a table saw thread. We know how you feel already. We can go to the archives and find how you feel about this. Please stop!
TDF
Tom,
I have a Grizzly contractor's saw in my cramped 2 car garage. I'll sing the praises of European design compared to "typical" saws aimed at the North American market any ol' time. Come to think of it, I already did, many posts ago in this thread.
Rich
chill man, the thread is about sliding tables. Don't be mean.
I totally agree; I wouldn't be without both in a perfect world (a slider and a 350 class saw). Trying to get a new Altendorf ELMO 4 into my school shop ASAP.cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
"Actually Don, many of the European saws like Altendorf have up to 10 feet of crosscutting capacity which is really nice if you work with a lot of sheet goods"
What is the price of the saw with this 10' of crosscut capability--and when on earth would it be useful?
Funny. I always thought Excalibur was near the top for ingenuity when it came to table saw accessories. I don't have the material on hand for the others, but the Excalibur SLT 60 crosscuts up to 69", while it's little brother, the SLT 40 works to 49". Around here, either one will get you through a 4' x 8' panel. A 45 deg. crosscut on the larger table can be made 35" deep. The SLT 60 adds 32" to the width of the saw, after the removal of the left side wing (net maybe 22").
Their over-arm blade cover works very nicely, as do a number of other, similar, guards from Delta and HTC (Brett Guard). None are perfect, but, then, I'd be willing to bet it's possible for an observer to pick up imperfections in European models without too much of a search.
European equipment is surely nice, but how many hobby or small pro shop woodworkers can afford to kick off with a $5000 (or higher) saw? Choices in the lower cost market look to me much like what are sold here for under $150...except they cost the equivalent of $700 to maybe $1000.
Curiosity also makes me wonder if the European saws have American market arbors, or do they export their stub arbor "safety" feature, too?
I believe the Rojek with a sliding table sells for something like $2,500.
Not a bad price if the other features are in line--but what I was asking about was the one that allowed a 10' crosscut.
All the major sliders will do that (10')....some have a smaller 8' version, but 10' is pretty common. It's useful when ripping down the edge of a sheet (say the 4' part of a 4 x 8 is against the front fence, then you push the panel past the blade, taking an 8' rip)...lots of people use 5 x 10 sheets too. These saws are designed for cutting up sheet goods. They can crosscut solid lumber too, but I'll never be convinced they are the machine for ripping solid wood.
Someone asked about what an Altendorf costs. $45,000 Cdn for a base version; up in the 50's and 60's by the time you add in CNC controls like the ELMO versions. Other brands, you can be talking 12K and up, again, into the 60's.cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
You're right Adrian. I don't think the big sliding table saws are really meant for ripping solid timber. Usually the slide support mechanism sits too far back for the operator to achieve a comfortable stance for ripping. Often you have to stand a long way back, which could be dangerous. Sliders with a smaller stroke, such as mine, with a 1600 mm stroke, seem to be about the limit for general purpose machine. But this means that I have to use a router/buzz saw and straight to gurantee that a first long edge of a board is straight. Fortunately, processing board materials 8 hours a day, five days a week all year is not a feature of my working life. Slainte.Website
45K Canadian. What's that, roughly 30K-35K U.S.? Good grief. I've got small cabinet shop friends who do not have that much in the entire power machine set-up in the shop, but who still do great work and make a good living.
I don't know what you call a 10' "crosscut" whether in plywood or anything else, but the word "rip" comes to my mind. Rather than manhandle a 10' x 5' chunk onto a horizontal saw, I think I'd research the idea of a large panel saw, slide the work along the floor until 1 end is there, then lift and slide again.
The horizontal slider IS a panel saw....it's designed to cut up panels. If all people need is to cut up big panels into smaller panels....all 90 degree cuts with the blade at 90 degrees, then the vertical panels are a good choice. But if you have to cut bevels and mitres down the edges, and have a lot of angled and compound angled cuts, then the horizontal slider is more versatile. BTW, when I described how it's used, you'll notice I did use the term 'ripping'.
Dados keep coming up in this discussion; more and more Euro sliders now have dado capability, but I don't really know why someone would want it (not least because a set for a big saw has to be pretty expensive)....I'm not anti-dado, but if I was doing a lot of them, I would buy a Unisaw class saw and dedicate it to that, or a panel router. Again, that's more money than a hobbyist could think about, but the cost of the full size sliders makes them pretty much a pro-only tool anyway.
On Euro saws in general (a discussion going on over several threads)....there are a whole lot of apples being compared to a bunch of oranges.....a Felder or an Altendorf or an SCMI slider wasn't in any way designed to be comparable to a Unisaw, and there is a huge price differential. The small Euro saws, that do have a similar capacity to a Unisaw with a sliding table, don't impress me....pressed steel tabletops and aluminum extrusions.....I'd never buy a Kity or anything in that family, or even a small Minimax like an SC-3 or 5 or whatever the current version is. I would much prefer a General 350 with a Robland sliding table (a combo I have) in every way. Or you could move up to a 14" General 550 with a beefed up slider....out of the hobbyist price range, I bet though. From there, it's a big jump to a medium or full scale slider (Rojek excepted, which seems to be a good saw for low/medium production use....Czeckoslovakia or Lagunas Bulgarian saws definitely have a price advantage).
Anyway, there is an orthodoxy developing here about the innate superiority of European saws that I think is based on some false assumptions, and some unfair comparisons (and for the record, I am a full fledged admirer of Euro tools....have a shopping list for tools right now with a whole bunch of zeros on the end, and most of it is Euro). A Unisaw/350/66 is a kit; it's a base model, sold set up for ripping, with some very limited crosscutting capability. That's because the manufacturers don't know how the end user wants to use the tool, and the main user, industry, wants to use it as a ripping tool....the saws are so cheap (they really are amazing value.....and some of the Europeans lust after the cast iron in the same way some folks here are lusting after some of the Euro gizmos), that many shops have 2,3,4 or a dozen around, dedicated to different ripping type jobs (ripping fixed widths, grooving for cabinet backs, drawer bottoms, etc., or dadoing. I think the manufacturers know exactly what they are doing, and they are meeting my needs by selling the base model. IF you want to crosscut with it, the enduser is responsible for adding on what is required....add a sliding table, a better quality blade guard (not needed by many folks, because as soon as the saw comes in a power feeder will be mounted to it....THE number one safety accessory, in my opinion, by the way)...whatever you want. I think, as has been stated, cost wise you'll still end up lower than the light weight Euro sliders, and have a heavier, more powerful saw.....not comparable to the big machines, but there's that apples/oranges thing again.
My two cents.
cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
As you say, there's an orthodoxy developing...and the comparisons are ludicrous, apples to goslings or something similar. Comparing a saw such as an Altendorf to a Unisaw or Powermatic 66 or General 350 is silly, but is done with great frequency. I'm never sure what the purpose is, because, in truth, such comparisons serve no useful purpose, except, possibly, to make some people feel superior.
I saw at least one Euro company introducing their lower end line of "contractor's saws" at IWF. The day I buy a table saw with a galvanized sheet steel table is the day they haul me into the old folk's ward. Especially when the price is pushing that of a top of the line contractor's saw that is ALL solid cast iron on top.
Someone posits the Rojek (is that the spelling) at $2500 as a great saw, and if it has most of the features listed, then it is truly a bargain, but I've never used one--in fact, I have never seen one. I am inclined to doubt it is superior to, as a quick example, a Unisaw with an Excalibur sliding table and a Biese fence, plus a power feeder. Add in a Delta Uniguard or a Brett guard or an Excalibur guard, and the price has probably just tapped the $2500 mark. That might be a comparison worth making. I no longer have the shop capacity (size or power or weight-handling capability) to run such tests, but someone should do such a check, and soon. It won't settle many arguments, but it may well provide some buyers with useful ammunition in their hunt for the tool they need.
To be fair,
Many of the people (including me) who extolled the virtues of "Euro" did not say that Rojek, or Hammer, or Felder were better in their whole and specifically than any particular "American" saw. No Apples to Oranges comparisons were made (I think).
It WAS said that features, fit and finish, philosophy of design, attention to the needs of the job to be done, technology, ESPECIALLY the riving knife and crown blade guard, were to be found on 'Euro" saws at much higher quality, if at all, compared to the typical "American" saw.
To be sure, there are Euro manufacturers that supply inferior design and equipment. But many superior features that are common on better Euro equipment are not available on American equipment at any price.
Rich
North American-style table saws represent my single biggest complaint in the woodworking industry. I have owned two different models (contractor saws), and sold both. I now have a non-table-saw shop, and I'm very happy about it.
Let's face it, the guard system and splitter on most North American table saws exist only because of existing safety laws. The manufacturers are just covering their asses legally. These "safety" devices are literally throw-away items. As a matter of fact, I read a review last year of North American table saws, and in the article table saw guards were actually rated by how easy they are to remove!
This is not me feeling superior. I say all this simply because I am ashamed that North American manufacturers care so little about incorporating safety into the most dangerous tool in the wood shop. That's right: North American-style table saws, by far, cause more accidents than band saws, drill presses, routers, and miter saws COMBINED!!! Go ahead and check the stats if you want and you'll see what I mean.
As for doing dadoes -- there is a reason it's outlawed on Euro-style saws. The dado operation is extremely dangerous. And this contradicts the argument that North American-style table saws are designed as "ripping" saws.
I also lay some of the blame on those who are supposed to know better. How often have I seen in woodworking books and videos the statement "guard removed for clarity"? This is absurd!! Back when I used to watch New Yankee Workshop, I remember seeing Norm cut a dado with his hands held right over the blade! Is he nuts?
For me, this all comes down to responsibility and obligation. Of course, every company, whether they are in the US, Canada, or anywhere in Europe, is interested in making a profit. But for me to support that company with my hard-earned dollars, I'd like to see that they are being innovative in all areas -- design, reliability, and safety. North American manufacturers don't feel the need to innovate in the last area because everyone keeps buying up their equipment regardless of the inadequacies.
With all this said, I believe that customers should be free to buy whatever they want, and manufacturers should be free to sell whatever they want. What I would like to see is a North American manufacturer that designed something to make everyone proud. We know they have the resources. They just need the will power.
Guards of any kind exist only because of existing laws, no matter where you are. Better guards, and splitters, are available.
Why would you want a guard that is difficult to remove? There are a number of operations on a table saw that do not require guards, or for which standard guards are a hindrance.
You can check stats until your numbers collide, but the fact is, in power woodworking the greatest majority of work is done on a table saw, which has a tendency to inflate figures. In other words, if there are 300,000 bandsaws out there, and 500 accidents, that's one number. But there are more than 15,000,000 table saws out there, so the odds are excellent there will be, as an example, 5000 accidents, which makes it 10 times as dangerous as a bandsaw. NOT! If we get more accidents from table saws than from numerous other tools combined, there are a number of things that might affect the numbers, including the relative numbers of each tool. Reporting language is another...hospitals generally neither know nor care what kind of "saw" cut a guy's finger off, which leaves the data collector also not knowing, but often interpolating.
Any power tool is dangerous. Stupid or ignorant owners are the biggest danger in any shop. I don't know for sure which power tool is the most dangerous, though IMO it is the shaper...which may or may not be accurate, but is an opinion I've held since I first worked with a shaper back in the middle '50s. Some users claim jointers. others the RAS. I've been woodworking for well over 40 years, and I've learned one thing, in my own and others' shops: dumb stunts produce the most accidents (and I've had my share, though fortunately nothing really serious), but that doctrinaire statements with unreliable stats never, ever prevent any accidents.
Hands over a dado? Bad idea. That what push blocks and sticks are for. As for photos shot without guards to give clarity to the shot, how do you suggest that be done? I've shot hundreds, probably thousands, of photos that way with and without different kinds of guards. With the guards, you get a great shot of the guards in use, but you get squat about the procedure in 90% of the cases. Superman has x-ray vision. The rest of us don't.
I'd agree that American manufacturers should put out the gear that will make table saws safer. The saw makers don't always do that, but at least some of them do--Delta's Uniguard and splitter are a couple cases in point. The fact that they are options has more to do with the market than the maker. Raise the price to cover those items, and buyers will flock in droves to brands without them because the start-up costs are lower.
Photos with the guards off, "shot for clarity:
If the photo is of the equipment set up, but not performing, that's one thing. Clarity is needed, and the caption should state that the guard has been left off for that reason, but that it should be put back to perform the operation.
If the shot is one of the work being done, the guard should be in place. Because clarity in the photo is important doesn't magically remove the danger in leaving the guards off. Such a photo shoot should be made with the guard on, the saw stopped and the guard then removed to show the cutter's relation to the wood, at which point the actual photo be made. The caption should clearly state that the operation was stopped and the guard was removed, part way through the operation.
Rich
I will agree that the table saw is the most common tool in woodworking shops. However, do you think by any stretch of the imagination that the number of table saws is greater than the combined number of band saw, drill presses, routers, and miter saws? I don't think so. Therefore, the fact that table saws outnumber the accidents of all these other tools indicates that...well, table saws cause more accidents. The stats I've seen are not only from hospital staff reporting injuries, but rather from officially reported workmens compensation incidents. Those are not fudged, as far as I know. My father used to own a business installing garage door openers and electric gates, and if one of his employees got injured, the report was VERY specific about exactly what was happening at the time of the accident.
I didn't mention the TYPE of accident either. With the other machines mentioned, injuries are more often "minor," whereas with the table saw it is more often a "major" injury.
I understand that the guard needs to be removed from the table saw for some operations. But the problem is that once it's off, a lot of people leave it off, henceforward, for ALL operations.
It's my strong belief that if Jet/Powermatic, Delta, General, or Grizzly developed a saw with an integrated sliding table, even if it cost another $500, people would snatch it up fast. But I admit, this is a big IF. I think North American manufacturers are afraid to put the money into development for fear that maybe people would not buy these machines.
How happy I would be if someone would take the chance.
Edited 10/1/2002 4:06:57 PM ET by Matthew Schenker
I agree that it would be nice to have an integrated U.S. table saw other than the DW746 (number?), though I have no need for such a saw and wouldn't buy one. But the power tool business is so competitive right now that it's quite possible if a company produced such a saw, and it didn't do well, the company would go toes up.
Companies like Delta may seem huge and monolithic, but in the scale of businesses, they're actually fairly small. That means R&D money, and risk taking money, is limited.
The market for such saws is also limited. I don't know what table saw sales figures are but I'd be willing to bet that a rise in prices for safety equipment, equivalent to adding an overarm guard and a splitter (@ $450), would blow sales of that particular saw right out of the water.
Delta's Uniguard overarm guard and splitter sells for about half your $450 target.
Since safety appears to be the issue and main function of the guard, then the new tablesaw from the manufacturer of the SawStop should be a huge hit. Assuming as well as the tests I have seen, you would never need a guard.
One thing about the statistic of the euro style to north american style is numbers. More people are using NA type saws then euro style. Many a house has a tablesaw or some kind. Not all tablesaw users are trained but any accident will put you in a statistic. From a homeowner black and decker table top to a cabinet saw to a contractor saw, lots of people trained and untrained use this style. Id go so far to say that most users of euro style saws are trained and more of a serious hobbyist to a professional. Whereas NA style saws have all kinds of users from people who shouldnt be allowed near them to professionals.
Im avoiding the actual use and safety features and just looking at the statistics side.
More importantly its the saw's user that can be traced to problems and not so much as the type. There are just some people that shouldnt be around machinery of any kind.
Of all the conspiracies and orthodoxies in the world, those you imagine to be arising on this message board seem to me among the least dangerous.
Can't we all agree that we'd all like to see the best components of European and North American machinery available at an affordable price? Thus the dragon of conspiracy is slain.
No doubt it's all about economics. But that doesn't excuse the absence of a quality splitter and blade guard on the Unisaw and its imitators. Accepting the premise that most saws are used in industry rather than in homes, what's going on here is that the cost of NOT having safety equipment is being borne by employees, while the cost of HAVING safety equipment would be borne by employers. And because employers make the buying decisions, you have what you have. In Europe, where the interests of employees and employers are balanced somewhat differently, you get a different result. Your may prefer the American balance politically, but there is certainly no reason to believe that machines without safety features somehow represent the ideal of woodworking technology.
The idea that the Unisaw should really be viewed as a "base machine" that must be tailored to the individual user and souped up with $1,000 of add-ons may be absolutely correct. It is absolutely not how the machines are marketed to the public. It would also surprise me if the conglomeration of pieces from different manufacturers were of equal quality with a single machine whose parts were integrated. But who knows, maybe it is.
It seems very relevant to this discussion that first DeWalt and now Jet are selling machines for the home shop market that have integrated splitters and sliding tables. They must think there's a market for saws of this design, but at a substantially lower price point. What does that mean? They seem to be adopting the orthodoxy of which you complain in a very unorthodox way.
"Accepting the premise that most saws are used in industry rather than in homes, what's going on here is that the cost of NOT having safety equipment is being borne by employees, while the cost of HAVING safety equipment would be borne by employers. And because employers make the buying decisions, you have what you have. "
You obviously have no experience with OSHA, fines and associated lawsuits if you truly believe that statemant. All of these (OSHA suits and fines) make outfitting shop equipment with the lastest and best safety equipment far cheaper than the cost of that equipment. I believe that todays manufacturer of industrial the equipment will not deliver the equipment without the lastest and best safety devices. They (the manufacturer) have also been found liable in many lawsuits for not anticipating unsafe conditions.
Most industrial accidents are due to employees not following acceptable safety practices or removing in place safety devices, not the lack of the few dollars required to make an industrial operation a safe operation.
No, I have no experience whatsoever with lawsuits. I'm just a lawyer.
For one thing, as I'm sure you know, workplace safety rules, like workplace anti-discrimination rules and just just about all other workplace rules, tend to be far better enforced in large companies than in small shops. Historically there is no doubt that my point is true for all industry. As governments have shifted the balance between workers and employers ("internalized" the cost of accidents, in economic jargon), the workplace has become safer, at least where the rules are enforced. But the rules certainly are not enforced uniformly. For example, there are lots of houses being built around where I live, all by small crews of Mexican laborers. It is routine to see the guy just about hanging by his fingertips off the roof, installing shingles, no harness or other safety device in sight.
But all that is really beside the point. You have to read my post in the context of the thread. Someone suggested that the Unisaw-type saw, without the hifallutin European safety equipment, was just the perfect way to go, as evidenced by its widespread use. I responded that the widespread use of unsafe equipment was not evidence of its superiority, but only of the imbalance between the interests of employers and employees. Your post just proves my point. Once you get a third party - government - pushing down on the employee side of the balance, voila, you get safer equipment.
Adrian--
([A blade guard is] not needed by many folks, because as soon as the saw comes in a power feeder will be mounted to it....THE number one safety accessory, in my opinion, by the way)...
That's a very interesting point, and one that has escaped serious discussion on this forum. Could you expand on the safety aspects of power feeders (a tool of which I'm totally ignorant)? I gather a riving knife would still be useful even if a blade guard wouldn't. What about wide crosscuts? So long as outboard support was provided, could a power feeder eliminate the need for a sliding table? What are the cons to using a feeder (other than added cost)?
Don;
There's not that much written anywhere about the use of power feeders....some, but not a whole lot. The big advantages are safety (the board is completely controlled during the cut.....no overhead guard required, hands never go anywhere near the blade), and a much improved quality of cut. It's also a lot faster than ripping by hand, and the machine helps you rip at the speed the blade works better at. A PROPERLY SIZED AND SET UP riving knife or splitter I suppose would be an asset (the emphasis is because an IMPROPERLY sized or set up riving knife is useless or dangerous....that's a point that I don't see getting mentioned here....not any old riving knife is going to save the bacon).....I don't have one on the saw I have set up with a feeder, and it doesn't seem to be an issue. I just checked out the specs on a number of straight line rip saws too, the industrial sized version....saw no evidence or mention of riving knives on those machines, definitely none in any picture I saw, no mention in specs, or codes. Anti kickback fingers, yes; riving knives, no. Maybe someone else knows more about that.
Most of the applications on a saw are ripping or similar....on a smaller saw (as against a straight line rip, which has a chain drive), the material has to be fed against a fence...the feeder toes in slightly towards the fence. So grovving, stuff like that, works great. Some crosscuts like dadoes would work fine....depends on the capacity of the saw and feeder. The feeder would have to be on your left, behind the fence, in that situation.
Cons: material has to be planed before it goes into the feeder, or it is difficult to control....I sometimes rip rough or S1S lumber, but you can't with a feeder. Takes a few minutes to set up. Reduces capacity of saw a little, if mounted permanently.
Theres a start, anyway.cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
Adrian-
A few follow-ups, if I may.
You mention that you don't use a riving knife with your power feeder. What about improperly dried lumber that wants to move after being cut? Suppose it moves to close the kerf and bind on the blade; does the feeder just power on through it? Suppose it moves to open the kerf, which would apply pressure against the fence and (in the absence of a feeder) tend to push the stock away from the fence. Does the feeder keep everything going straight?
About anti-kickback fingers with feeder-equipped saws: are they necessary? I thought the feeder itself would resist kickback.
Can the feeder be moved out of the way easily and without interfering with other uses (e.g., crosscutting) of the saw?
Using a stock feeder on the tablesaw:
I use a 4-wheel, 3-phase, 1-hp feeder for ripping just a few pieces, as well as when ripping hundreds of feet of material. It’s not only safer than hand ripping with all the guards in place, it also yields a better edge, because of the consistent speed. I use it with the riving knife in place by removing one of the feeder’s wheels, placing two wheels before the blade and one after.
The feeder doesn’t care whether the matereial is planed smooth or sawmill rough – if the pressure is set correctly. It is necessary, of course, to begin with one straight edge against the fence. It isn’t like a straight line rip saw, which doesn’t use a fence to saw a straight line.
I don’t have or use anti-kickback fingers, and they aren’t necessary with the feeder, which prevents kickback. So long as it’s set up properly, with the feed wheels stradling the cut, both the workpiece and offcut piece move only in the intended direction. As on the shaper, I’ve even experimented (successfully), back-feeding on the tablesaw. I don’t use that method, because I don’t see any advantage.
Used on my Felder, I can quickly swing the stock feeder out of the way for other operations. Although it's never in the way, it's placement does limit rip widths to 9.5-inches. That's the only downfall on my particular setup, and I wish I could mount it such that it'd be useful when ripping 4x8 sheets in half.
Frankly, I don’t know how I worked without the stock feeder for so many years.
Gary
Gary-
Thanks for the great info. You and Adrian have already contributed a lot of much-needed information on a neglected subject. I hope others will offer their own observations.
Gary;
You can put a rough surface through, but you won't get a great edge....definitely not a glue joint. I've had boards go screwy, so I don't do it anymore. Look at any industrial line, and you will always see the rip situated after a jointer and planer, or a facer and planer, or a double surfacer, if they are looking for quality edges.
One place people climb cut on a saw, with a power feeder, is when grooving in delicate materials...gives a better quality of cut.One guy on one of the pro forums , as one example, uses diamond tooling in a dedicated saw with a power feeder, climb cuts all the grooves for cabinet backs.cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
That's true about ripping rough stock, but I can't think of a reason to try to rip a gluejoint edge from rough stock. If that were the case, as when building a garden gate, I'd rough rip and then joint the edge - either by hand on on a jointer.
We've got a miscommunication somewhere.....what I'm saying is people DON'T try and get a good edge from rough stock....they surface both faces (and usually cut to rough length), before it ever gets ripped....then, the resulting edge can be 'glue joint' quality (and I'm not argiung whether or not it is as good as an edge off a jointer or whatever), no further processing required. The best you will get from rough lumber and a power feeder is a rough blank....and in my experience, you will lose quite a number of pieces because they will go screwy under the feeder and result in tapered or undersize pieces. So I don't use a feeder and rough surfaces anymore, or rarely. If I have to rip a few blanks, oversize, from rough lumber, I do it manually (not p.c, I know, but done all the time.)cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
Adrian and Gary-
Could you rip rough lumber (never mind why) by putting it on a sled with holddowns? That would put a smooth side against the table, but a rough side against the feeder.
Adrian,
You're correct, of course, about the glue joint, but I was challenging your statement from an earlier thread that "material has to be planed before it goes into the feeder, or it is difficult to control....I sometimes rip rough or S1S lumber, but you can't with a feeder." That's not true, because you can rip rough lumber with a feeder. I do when I get material too wide for my 12" Parks planer, like the wide poplar I request for its clarity. I first straight line, or joint, one edge and then rip it to just under 12" with the feeder.
You CAN...I said that in my last post......but you're taking a chance, unless you're cutting plenty oversize....and if you are cutting a lot of boards, a thin one mixed in there can result in a crooked saw cut, or potentially kickback. I've also found that if you have rough lumber, or lumber with one face surfaced (down on the table), and the top surface is bevelled, to all intents and purposes....if the slope goes one way, the feeder will pull the board in to the fence (not a problem). If it goes the other way, it will pull the board away from the fence, resulting in an undersized rip.That is a problem. Like I said, the most common practice in industry is to surface both faces before moving on to either crosscutting or ripping, depending on what you're producing. One source for that is a text from the Furniture Manufacturing Centre, in the Industrial Engineering program at North Carolina State, called Furniture Manufacturing Processes, by Prak and Myers. They give lots of examples of different arrangements of machines....all of them have surfacing machines before ripsaws. And if you are trying to get a glue line rip, then having double surfaced material is their #2 rule, after having well dried material. "Furniture Manufacturing Equipment" from the same program, says the same thing, and notes that for gang-rips, the material is "usually" double surfaced. Most of my other references all say the same thing, and that's mostly what I see in practice.
Are there exceptions? No doubt, plenty probably....in fact, I can think off the top of my head of two plants I go into pretty regularly here, both making the same product......one double surfaces first, one gang-rips rough lumber first. I expect the second to change in the future, but we'll see.
Anyway, all I'm saying is that the literature says you get a better result if material is surfaced before ripping, whether you are going for a glue-line rjoint or not, and that jibes exactly with my experience. I break my own rules sometimes, but generally I get better reults and less rejects if I surface then rip. If what you're doing works for you, great.
(ps....came back to say, that very last remark wasn't intended to be snarky. And I don't mean to imply I've got it all figured out....just stating an opinion).
cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
Edited 10/2/2002 3:17:34 PM ET by Adrian
Adrian,
We really are on the same page, here. I can think of only a few occasions where I've powerfed rough lumber. Besides the aforementioned poplar, another was making a mortise and tenoned garden gate in rough saw, 4x10 redwood timbers. My point is that it can be safely done.
When I'm working on cabinets and furniture, surely I too surface plane before ripping.
Sorry, I've never read a text on the subject, and can only speak from my own experience. I'm not a foolhardy woodworker, I run a safe shop, and I do have all the digits on my ten fingers to prove it.
okey dokey...hey, are you going to tell Don, or should I , that you can also use a feeder on a jointer?
back to sliding tables.....not a lot of mention here of the Robland, sold by Laguna, optional on a General, made in Belgium.....good quality, cast iron tool....not a huge stroke or a huge table, but well suited to furnituremakers. In combination with a North American saw, I think it makes for a better machine than any of the small Euro saws I've seen, if we can get away from the safety issue for just one minute.cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
You sure can use it on the jointer, in fact you could use it on most any stationary machine that doesn't already have a feed system of it's own. Can you tell that I'm sold on them?
Gary
Gary-
O.k., what about a router table? I'm reduced to small scale stuff now, so I don't have the same requirements as you. But I can't see mounting a feeder directly on a laminate-covered MDF router table top. Is it feasible to build a separate roll-around table for the feeder that latches to whatever machine you want to snuggle it up to?
I'm interested mainly in the safety aspects rather than productivity, or did I mention that before?
The cabinet shop next to mine use feeders on their heavy duty router table, as well as their shapers. I think the trick will be to make the mount especially immovable. In order to adequately force the workpiece down against the table, or sideways against the fence (assuming you'll be using a fence), requires a stiff enough mount so the vertical post doesn't pivot even slightly. I'd probably drill a piece of 1/4" steel plate to match the post flange holes, mount the plate under a stout tabletop, and then through-bolt the post flange.
Because the feeder has to be anchored in relation to the cutting operation, I'm pretty sure a roll-around table won't work. It needs to be bolted to the same table as the machine it's mated to. My stock feeder is too big, but a smaller, lighter one could be bolted to one machine and then moved to another without much hassle.
You know, I've never tried my feeder without a fence, such as when pattern shaping. I don't think it'd work. I do use a pivoting wheel hold down to insure the workpiece is snug against the table when pattern shaping with a bearing.
I think the feeder produces better results and is far safer than hand feeding. As I mentioned in a previous thread, you can backfeed safely, which yields chip free, satin smooth cuts.
Gary
You can use a feeder for pattern shaping....haven't done it, and can't really remember how it's done, but it's doable....maybe tomorrow the braincells will kick in.
Another option for different machines I've seen mentioned is to mount the feeder on a post, which is bolted to the floor....this is one way to use it on a jointer, but it could also be applied to a router. Again, no direct experience. I asked about feeders once on a forum; one guy mentioned mouning it to the ceiling....not sure if he was kdding. never seen that done.cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
I suppose the stock feeder could be mounted anywhere so long as the machine was somehow affixed in relation to the feeder. Perhaps one could make a strong clamping device on a machine such that it could be rolled up against the floor mounted feeder and clamped in place.
As to pattern shaping with a feeder: I think that'd depend on the shape. If someone here has tried it successfully, may.bewe'll hear from them.
Gary
I haven't actually tried to pattern shape per se, But I have made up fixtures to run arched and eliptical moldings using a power feed. I believe that using power feeds for just about every woodworking operation is possible and it does wonders for productivity, safety and uniformity. I know that it has increased my own standards as far as tolerances go. For example, when I built my workbench I had a bunch of 6/4 maple cutoffs ranging from 8" to about 20" from a job requiring parts about 8'2" long. Being long on scrap and short on funds, I decided to put these pieces into a bricklaid top. I flattened all the stock using a power feeder, just stuck one piece after the other through. I believe that I had around a hundred pieces, ranging from 3 1/2" to 6" wide and I bet it took maybe 1 hour from start to finish to flatten them by myself. I then jointed one edge, by hand, and that took me longer than the previous step. I then planed to a uniform thickness. Then I setup the power feed on the table saw to feed for a width of 3 1/4 ". I figured I would need the extra width so that I could flatten the top after I glued every thing up for a net thickness of 2 1/2". I ran all the pieces through to get as many as I could out of the pile without gluing cutoffs back together. I actually got enough pieces in the run to build the top with leftovers. To keep the pieces on a fairly straight plane( think 7 1/2' long) I dadoed a 1/2" groove into every piece on both sides to create continous splines. Those two operations including set up and the fact that I ran the dadoes on both edges to center the groove took another two hours. I actually spent nearly two days gluing the entire thing up even though I was gluing the top in two slabs at the same time. I wouldn't suggest this to the faint of heart, it does take some effort to glue face to face and end to end and keep every thing tight and reasonablly straight. I only had one void in an end to end joint, I don't think I squared the end properly on a piece because the other side is tight. Anyway, before I glued the two halves together I jointed them flat on a 16" jointer I had access to and planed them flat again. Then I glued up the two halves to create a single slab 20" wide and 7 1/2' long. The point of all this is that after all the machining, gluing and flattening was done I had to hand plane out about 3/32" of crown in the top. The top is a full 2 3/4"" thick and I doubt that someone edge gluing longer pieces together in either direction could have done any better than that. Right Sgian? :-)
Yes I am a firm believer in power feed and it's potential. I currently have a 1HP three wheel feeder in my own shop that I move from machine to machine. I have 2 mounting bases so that moves between two machines don't waste time other than to move the feeder from one machine to another. Another poster wanted to know about use on a router table and I use it on mine without any problems at all. My top is 1 1/4 " particle board and have not ever seen it flex. I believe that a steel plate is in order if the top is 3/4" just for strength issues. I even have in a pinch moved my router table over to the shaper and clamped the two together so I could swing the power feed between the two machines to make simultaneous operations possible with one base. As to safety, it is pretty hard to get into spinning knives or saw blades when you have to run your fingers under the drive wheels just to get there. I also use four wheel PF's with full varible speed at work as well as a single wheel feeder that is designed for running curves and so on. I have not operated the continous belt feeders but would like to sometime. They are designed for very short work (around 2"). We even have an older feeder that mounts directly to a fence and it has proven to be invaluable for portablilty. I agree with the poster who recommended 1/2 hp as a minimum size and the bigger the better although they tend to get pretty heavy.
Now, we also have a Felder K700F with the 8' sliding table. We purchased this saw a 20" Felder Jointer/Planer and a Spindle shaper with a sliding table from a shop that went under about 2 years ago. After using the saw this long I cannot say enough good things about it. The riving knife is fully adjustable for perfect alignment. The crown guard is quite safe to use and protects the operater effectively. We even straight line lumber 6-8' long on the sliding fence prior to jointing and that job is no longer the tedious process that it used to be. The rip fence is even nice to use even though some have said that the new version is better.
BTW,this is probably the first post I have seen in many months that made me even want to respond Thanks, Joe
Edited 10/11/2002 11:05:26 PM ET by JOEGROUT
"Right Sgian? :-)"
Huh? Don't ask me. I'm just a woodwhacker like everyone else. Your description of your technique and results looked pretty darned good to me. Slainte. Website
I was refering to another post you made stating that your worktop still isn't flat. Sorry, I mixed up the threads. Oh well :-) Joe
Ah. Okay Joe. You may not have been around when I started a rather well known and deliberately contentious 'flat workbench' thread just to get the juices flowing. I had greater success than I expected. It got pretty contentious,---- and, er, my workbench still isn't flat. It's not bad right now, being just a little out of whack, but it still moves as the seasons change in my open to the elements workshop. I can live with it though, ha, ha. Slainte.Website
I'd like to see your "fixtures to run arched and elliptical moldings using a power feed." I know the feeder makes for better, safer cuts, I just haven't spent the effort to figure out how to use it to shape curved pieces.
Your workbench sounds great, although a lot of work, but now worth the effort, I'm sure. When I was boatbuilding, I needed a 24-ft-long bench for making planks. It had to be flat, but only 18-inches deep. Since most planking was of softwood, Honduras mahogany being the hardest, I decided to build the benchtop of softwood. I rationalized that a softwood bench wouldn't be harmful to softwood workpieces. I used clear, t&g pine and ran a drum-type floor sander on the glued up top before I installed it (I didn't have a Timesaver sander). I too had to hand plane the top after installation, because it wasn't perfect enough -- oh well, we live and learn. At least planing the softwood benchtop was easier than if it'd been maple. Fact is, I still really like softwood benches and have one in my cabinet shop. Since it's so much less expensive than maple, I consider it consumable. I know some will cringe, but I don't hesitate to drill into it or fasten down a sanding stop, and that can be a real advantage.
I assemble cabinets and furniture on my dead flat, Formica top, corebox table. It doesn't seasonally change shape. The top is 24-inches off the floor on a roll around base with room for assembly tools and parts. When an assembly is too big for that table, I've another 2-ft x 3-ft table, same height, that I can roll in place to hold up an end or corner. For glue ups, I like the plastic laminate tops because cleanup is easy. If the glue dries, I use a sharpened putty knife to scrape it off.
I'm sure you'll be satisfied with your Felder purchases -- I am. The company is great at customer satisfaction, and I think that's the best part about those tools. Do you know of their forum? It's at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/felder-woodworking/ I'm envious of your big planer/jointer. I'm still using my old 12-inch Parks planer. My 7.5-hp, KF700Pro is a fine machine, with more than enough power for any operation I've asked of it.
Gary
Gary I suppose the easiest ones I have done for curved work amount to nothing more than screwing complementary radiused pieces straight to the shaper fence to guide the arch. Just make them a bit thinner than the thickness of the arch so that the P.F. can drive the piece. We are also in the process of building an entry unit for a home that will have a half circle rail in each door. The inside radii will have stained glass installed after we construct the door. The outside radii will have a straight stub rail to join it to the stile. The outside will have raised panels in it so we are going to make a jig so that we can cope the ends of the circular rail and then cut sticking on the inside and outside of the rail. I have all the details figured out but am still trying to decide whether to just screw to jig to the rail or to try using a vacuum to hold the piece in place. I have had good success with the 2" disks placed flush with the jig on segmented radii in the past and really like the idea that you do not have any screw holes to fill. Most of the fixtures we use carry the work on top but with a vacuum I found that running the jig on top works better. I do this so that the power feed helps hold the two together as a vacuum resists shear forces better. I have found some fairly good information in The Shaper Book by Lonnie Bird but the vacuum jigs are something I have not found much information on except for routers and am going at it pretty carefully.
Ellipses are a bit tougher and involves spring loaded bearing carriers I fabricated. I didn't really like it, it was cumbersome to set up and I haven't had to use it in the last couple of years. That is mainly because we have a William and Hussey molder now and setup is easier for cutting casing profiles. Joe
Joe,
It's coincidental that I too am about to begin an entry door with a radiused top rail. I'll probably shape that piece, as well as the center stiles, with patterns. This door will be of solid hickory/pecan, laminated of two layers of 8/4 stock to make up a 3 1/4-in-thick door that measures 42-inches wide by 7-feet tall. It'll be divided into 14 lights between two center stiles, along with a solid panel in the center for the door's knocker. Fortunately it'll be a contemporary, Shaker style door with square inside and outside edges, so I'll have little molding to do. I'll cope and stick the center rails and stiles, and use long, integral mortise and tenons at the corners.
I'm with you when it comes to complicated shaker setups: unless I've got quite a few linear feet to run, I usually run it by hand. Since my power feeder is so easy to set up, I almost always use it for runs of straight stock - often backfeeding. I made up some spring loaded wheels (from gate hardware!) that worked well when hand feeding, but I never tried them with the feeder. The Williams-Hussey is fine machine. I worked in a shop once that has one, though I never got around to using it (I didn't stay there long enough).
Gary
3 1/4" thick out of hickory/pecan? That ought to be a really fun one to prehang let alone install. How thick are the glass units going to be? I am curious mainly because of how you intend to make the sticking for glazing purposes. I have built 3 1/4" doors without any glass. We set up the cope/stick cuts so that we had a 2" groove and then built back to back raised panels out of 4/4 and used 1 1/2" rigid foam for filler and to keep the weight of the door down. I was really glad that it was made out of knotty alder because it still weighed in at about 160 lbs. and was a bear to deal with. We used 5-6x6 heavy duty ball bearing hinges to hang the door. The mortised handled set caused a problem.The box went in ok but the ecustion levers wouldn't reach into the box. It was solved pretty easily but had a contractor ready to go postal. I think we have highjacked the thread but heck it was about table saws. I think their is plenty of info elsewhere right Ha Ha Joe
Gary and/or Adrian-
How does one size an appropriate feeder? It would have to have something to do with the resistance to feeding, but I don't know where to go from there.
For example, a table saw used for ripping hardwoods up to 8/4 or so and sheetgoods a few at a time; no continuous operation. For a 3 HP saw? For a 5HP saw?
Donald,
My sense is to get the biggest you can afford, although you may want a smaller one for a router table. They're rated at about 1/4-hp and up. I don't think horsepower is all that critical, because of the low gear ratio and slow speeds, but, based on previous experience, I'd not have a feeder rated at less than 1/2-hp.
Heavy is good, at least when forcing wood down against the table. I like my four wheel feeder, especially for the tablesaw, because I can put two wheels before and two after the blade, or I can remove one wheel for use with the riving knife and put two in front of the blade and one behind the knife. You may not be able to do that with some of the smaller, three wheel feeders. I wouldn't want one of those belt, or track type feeders, because I don't think it'd work on the tablesaw, where the blade needs to be up between two of the rubber wheels.
Gary
The machine just powers through it, I guess...never seen any issues. If I had a properly sized riving knife, I would use it....but ask yourself this....how many blades of different kerfs does a shop, even a one person shop....have? How many riving knives do they have?....there should be one matched to every different kerf.
Anti-kickback fingers: I was referring to the big ripsaws (15-30 HP or more)....they have fingers. Smaller machines rigged with a power feeder don't.
The feeder can be mounted permanently on the left or right side of the blade, depending how you want to use it....I have mine on the left extension table, as you stand looking at the blade....so my rip capacity is unchanged, but crosscutting on that saw is limited. Some people just C-clamp it on when they need it, but mine are pretty big (have one on a shaper also), so they're bolted on.cabinetmaker/college instructor. Cape Breton, N.S
Fine Woodworking did an article on power feeders: Issue #96, October 1992. If you don't have the issue, email me and I'll send a copy of the article to you (I hope the publisher won't mind, it's for safety after all).
Jeff-
Thanks for the tip. I do have that issue, so I'll read what they have to say. I thought I dimly remembered such an article, but I'm at an age where I have to flush my memory every few months to free up space for new experiences.
Curiosity also makes me wonder if the European saws have American market arbors, or do they export their stub arbor "safety" feature, too?
The Rojek table saw uses a long 5/8" arbor which can take standard American 10" blades and stacked dado sets. I don't know about other brands. As Mark Roderick has pointed out, the Rojek saw costs about half the $5,000 price you mentioned for a European saw. Certainly there are European and American saws that cost considerably more.
Edited 10/1/2002 2:24:00 PM ET by Donald C. Brown
Don I just trimmed the ends on a small bench 17 1/2" wide by 48" long by 3" thick last night using my sled with no problems. But my sled is a very big sled with 2 miter runners.
<<The superiority of the european equipment is evident in every way that one can judge the piece of equipment. It is a difference of philosophy. And one in which "American" equipment is distustingly deficient.>>
I disagree with the above comment. While on the whole I believe the Euro machine is better, NOT everything about it is better.
For instance, NONE of the Euro rip fence systems can hold a candle to the rip fences commonly found on American (or clone) saws. The Hammer rip fence is even downright dangerous. The Felder is the only Euro fence I've seen that even approaches the American designs, even it is measurably deficient in some respects.
Another example, almost no Euro saw can accept a dado or molding head. There's a loss of capability even though the machine itself costs more. The Euro machines I've seen that do accept dado blades make it far less convenient to install them compared to American style saw.
In addition to these common examples, some brands have quirks of their own that make some of their features less desirable than those found on American saws.
As for the riving knife versus splitter, as a concept it is better than the splitter. However, due to the way many are implemented, they are effectively rendered almost as bad. This is due to their being no adjustments on them to ensure the remain in-plane with the blade.
Don't get me wrong, the Euro machines have lots of nice features, the sliding table is hands-down the best feature. Truth be told though, if it weren't for this single feature, the Euro machine would hold little attraction. I'm kind of hoping someday that some domestic or clone maker will "wake-up" to the basic Euro design and "improve" it for the American market.
PMB
http://benchmark.20m.com
What I've noticed is that people who use the fine Euro Saws produce better work for cheaper prices because their table saw is so much better! I was just in a gallery of fine furniture the other day and they had the furniture sorted, one side Euro Saw and the other American made! My life would change if only I could get a Euro Saw and not have to cut sheet goods with my contractor saw. :) You guys have figured it out, the saw makes the woodworker! :0 :)
A sliding table is nice, but I try not to be a snob about equipment. It is really too bad you can't buy being an expert, you can only earn it. Keeps slowing me down. :)
Peter-
Good parody. But what is it you are parodying? Nobody on this or related threads has claimed Euro saws magically produce better work. The discussion has been about better safety with riving kiives, crown guards, and sliding tables.
I'll admit that sometimes it's fun to erect straw men and then knock them down just for the sheer hell of it.
Edited 10/1/2002 9:38:43 AM ET by Donald C. Brown
Why don't you'all just skip the whole problem for cross cutting & ripping & get a panel saw like I did it makes handling large sheets easier. I only need to raise 1 end of a 3/4" thick sheet about 6" off the floor the pick up the other end & slide it in the saw. No balancing act at all. The saw doesn't take up much floor space about 1 ft. out from the wall & 9 ft 7 in long. I was real lucky I purchased this DeWalt panel for $100 without the saw & installed a circular saw that I already had. Some how I managed to get everything square. Sure works nice. Oh I almost forgot I do have a table saw & it is much easier to cut sheet goods on it once they are broken down. The panel saw doesn't have a kick back problem it doesn't need a splitter or riving knife. It is completely guarded. It doesn't throw sawdust in your face like the table saw with no guard & you don't have the struggle to lift heavy sheet goods to waist height to get the onto the saw. Once the sheets are broken down into smaller sizes they are much easier to lift onto the table saw & the table saw footprint doesn't need to have 50" to the right of the blade or a slider to the left of the blade. A good 30" fence system works just great. I have found that on some cuts I don't even need a table saw because the panel saw cuts square. So other than dados & rabbits & other special cuts & cutting pieces that have already been cut down on the panel saw. The sliding table & 50" fence system has been eliminated. My shop is 13'5" x 24'5" so a 50" fence system or sliding table is out of the question.
Bart-
I think you've found a great solution for your work and one that is applicable to the needs of many shops. You apparently use sheet goods a lot.
What do you do for crosscutting hardwoods? Is the panel saw applicable for cutting, say, 4"wide pieces.
I view the table saw as basically a rip saw. Add-ons such as miter gauges, sleds, and even sliding tables are adaptations that all have their compromises.
What about splintering of the face veneer on crosscuts with your setup? Do you process Melamine with the panel saw?
Yes I use the saw especially for melamine with a blade made just for melamine & laminates. I also use this blade for other sheet goods it seems to give a good clean cuts, I always cut with the face of the material against the panel saw bed.
For hard wood & narrow strips & cut them on my CMS or on the table saw with a sled or miter guage.
Bart-
Thanks for the info. Having a panel saw that takes up little floor space cerrainly sounds much more attractive than a giant-footprint horizontal panel saw/table saw. Not to mention the ease of loading sheet goods onto the saw.
MARTIN T73 Far and away the finest woodworking machinery available and I dare anyone to debate that (did I say dare?).
But it's not American, so by Benjamin's definition, it must be junk. Too bad. It certainly is a fine saw.
You could buy an American flag sticker like Powermatic uses and stick it over the "Made in Germany" placard
cp,
I don't think that you'll get many arguments. Maybe some niggling about certain controls or features.
What does the basic machine cost in the US?
Rich
Starting around $17,000 up to $33,000 for the cnc automatic
cp
Gulp!
If I abused wood for a living, I could prolly easily justify the expense for the increased productivity. Sadly, as someone who now only makes furniture for family and friends, the TS budget stops at $16,995. *sigh*
Rich
Dang, Rich. I can send you a dollar. Will four or five one for insurance) join me in this love offering?
Don,
No, no, no. I can not accept your offer, generous as it is. A man must know his limits. I've always made it a point to make a budget and stick to it, by gosh. $16,995, and not a penny more. That's what I always say.
Of course, I could always dispose of a Mercedes or two to free up some cash.
Rich
Rich, I'm sure Martin will let a basic machine go for 16,995 given the current economic condition the industry is in. Ante up buddie.
Yeah,
But then there's shipping all the way to Hawaii. And I probably could swing that. But first the ship goes to Honolulu and the pallet has to be off loaded and put on a barge to Maui. Those extra charges are just too, too much.
Besides, I showed my wife the saw on the web site. She didn't like the color, so the deal's off.
Sorry, guys.
I've always made it a point to make a budget and stick to it,
You are a man of high principle, Rich. Thre's something disturbing about that.
Edited 10/14/2002 2:39:35 AM ET by Donald C. Brown
It is not even fair to compare a full Euro slider to an American tablesaw. They are two different animals. I have each and they both have their place. A real slider has the sliding table right up to the blade. This is a tremendous advantage over a miter gauge or even a sliding( in the miter gauge slot) table. But try ripping on a slider with a 10' long table and you will see the disadvantage.
Sorry to Don, I'll explain -
You see, many on the board "can't understand" why the American consumer puts up with the current American Table Saw offerings. This must mean that the results of using the American Saws are inferior to the results of using the Euro Saws. You see, the results matter when you use the saw and the result of the cut is truly the same.
You are going to get into the Zen of using the saw like the guys who don't use power tools do, right? OK, for some people the Euro Saws give a better experience.
On the safety issue, table saws cause lots of injuries in the US. Does someone have the corresponding numbers from Europe? Without comparison numbers we are drawing conclusions without enough information. You know, "Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics."
Summary - American consumers continue to buy American style TS because the Euro saws are not truly better when the full ROI is calculated. Your argument that we are not talking about Euro Saws is silly, once this was about sliding tables but not anymore.
This is standard "Cross the Chasm" marketing stuff. The Euro Saw owners on this board are typical early adapters and trying to convince us to buy the product using a superior feature list. Everyone who isn't in the early adapter group doesn't care about features, just results.
Peter--
the Zen of using the saw like the guys who don't use power tools
"Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics."
the full ROI
standard "Cross the Chasm" marketing stuff
typical early adapters
O.K., you've convinced me. Anyone who can pack so many chiches into a short message just has to be right. Whatever your point is, you must have made it.
Have we reached closure?
Wait a minute. Wait just one darned-tootin' minute.
It's early adopters, not adapters.
See, his whole argument is falacious!
Rich
Rich-
That's what I like about cliches. They are endlessly adaptable and frequently become unrecognizable compared to their original formulation. Their singular merit is that they save the heavy lifting of having to think about a problem. I have found them to be the greatest thing since sliced bread.
I always enjoy poking someone hard enough they have to run away.
Poor Don, maybe next time you can pick an argument you can win.
"
That's what I like about cliches. They are endlessly adaptable and frequently become unrecognizable compared to their original formulation. Their singular merit is that they save the heavy lifting of having to think about a problem. I have found them to be the greatest thing since sliced bread."
You sure that isn't night baseball?
Phil,
The fence you reviewed on the KF700E certainly had problems, and there were many other far superior fences on both American and European machines. In defence of Felder, however, they listened to their customers and in less than a year produced a fence that, in my opinion, is superior to anything else on the market - anywhere. The new fence will appear on their industrial, Format 4 machine, but is offered as a retrofit on KF700 models. Felder gets my vote for superiority simply because the pay attention to those of us who use them and they act swiftly to correct problems. I've owned two top of the line American machines, and it was impossible to get even simple problems resolved - I had to fix them myself
Gary.
Phil, you make interesting points. Fences for one. Some are a bit flimsy I hear, Hammer being one alleged to be poor. Flimsiness is not something I've come across with the fences I've used, but I'm a long user of mostly Robinson and Wadkin machinery. Robinson are now defunct, and Wadkin have not had their financial troubles to seek of late, ha, ha, and they no longer produce the general purpose woodworking machinery for small to medium workshops, such as saws, planers, thicknessers, bandsaws, spindle moulders, hollow chisel morticers, etc..
I do own a Wadkin saw about 8- 9 years old, one the last models they produced, and it is rigged up for the US market so that it will accept a dado blade, but I've never actually bought a dado blade for it, so in a sense, the full length long rigid rip fence is a moot point for the way I work anyway--- see last paragraph.
I don't think I've ever come across a riving knife that wasn't adjustable for height and for left and right, but I admit I've also never used saws from Felder, Hammer, SCMI, Laguna, Rojek, and Robland, these being the models I think mostly seen and available in the US. I defer to your experience and knowldege on that point.
I think much of what people are comfortable with regarding table saw usage (for example) comes down to their cultural background. Dado blades and long fixed rip fences were never part of my training and working life as a cabinetmaker until I moved to the US. Now they are all around me and people use them all the time. I used both a bit when I first worked in the US, but I gave up on them pretty quickly. It just didn't feel 'right' so I reverted to my particular background, training, methodologies, and work habits. Slainte.Website
Hi Don,
I only use the European setup - mandated as the only acceptable way in this country - all equipment sold with Euro-style guards.
Here's a previous thread on sliding tables that was pretty thorough. Might give some background to other interested users.
http://forums.taunton.com/tp-knots/messages/?msg=7392.1
Cheers, eddie
I read through this yesterday.
Still don't know much about sliding tables. Other then Europeans like them.
My question, is there any advantage to us 'frugal' woodworkers of spending $400+ on one of these things? They sure look like they burn up a great deal of floor space for something I think I'd rarely use. Despite the initial post, these things are easily availble if you want one.
As far as the european saws go, I've never heard of these brands. Certainly never seen them. Frankly, my eyes glaze over when people speak of spending over $1500 for a saw. Much less the price of a Dodge Viper; which I'd much rather have by the way.
Personally, I've scabbed a good Rockler table saw out of 3 saws over the years.
- An old craftsman that I bought for $30 w/ no fence or miter gauge.
- An old craftsman w/o a motor that I bought for $50 for the fence, miter gauge, & two cast iron extensions. ($10 got me a motor)
- And a Rockler, abused w/ a bum motor $10. Motor repair $50.
All in all, I've spent $150 on 3 saws. My dad has one, one's going to become a disk sander, and I just spent $260 on an exaktor fence for the Rockler. Still need a really good blade.
It would seem to me that I could build a simple table that folds up. Make it the same height as the table saw, and if I need a long crosscut make it w/ an infeed and outfeed table & a short fence. I could build something like that for $20-50 and still have the floor space when I don't need it. But frankly, long crosscuts work real well w/ a circular saw, a good blade, and a guide fence. Especially, if they're angled.
What's the advantage of the sliding table? Seems like buying a milling machine when all you need is a drill press to me.
Sorry, guess I just don't get it.
Bill
P.S. My approach to getting a table saw takes a long time, and a good bit of luck. But I think its wise to look at used equipment whenever possible.
What's the advantage of the sliding table?
I stated my view of the advantages in my opening post. If none of those are benefits for what you do, then by all means do not invest in a sliding table.
Sorry, after re-reading my post I was a bit snippity.
I really am curious about these things, so I posted a similar ? on another WW Forum.
I was directed to what looks like a fabulous site I'd never seen before: http://www.benchmark.20m.com/
While I've only skimmed it so far, it has what looks like an excellent article comparing various sliding tables. It also has an excellent article comparing American cabinet saws to european saws.
When I have more time I'm going to have to read these in depth and see what else is on this site.
Anyway, always interested in better safer ways of doing things. Some of these look practical for a small shop.
Best reguards
Bill
While I've only skimmed it so far, it has what looks like an excellent article comparing various sliding tables. It also has an excellent article comparing American cabinet saws to european saws
Phil Bumbalough has some excellent and very informative reviews at his site. As with any research, I'd recommend that you look at other sources as well.
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled