168mm vs. 160mm saw blades for CSC SYC 50

[ElectricFeet]

I am (soon to be “was”—selling to a friend) an owner of an HKC 55 and I now own a TSC 55 KEB, which I bought relatively recently. The 160mm diameter / 1.8mm kerf blades are compatible and I own quite a few — for various materials and cut-types.

I see that the TS60 uses a 168mm diameter / 1.8mm kerf blade and I get why Festool want to go that little bit further with depth.

I just splurged on a CSC SYS 50 and I have mixed feelings about the saw blades being 168mm. It’s great that the tablesaw will go that little bit further, but I have several 160mm blades I would like to use in it.

I see no reason why I shouldn’t use the 160mm blades in the CSC SYS 50 — with the caveat that I might want to add 4mm to measurements, rather than calibrating to the new blade size (because otherwise the machine might(?) try to raise itself too high (though I’m sure it’s cleverer than that)).

But the manual says:

Only use saw blades with the following dimensions:
– Saw blades according to EN 847-1
– Saw blade diameter 168 mm
– Cutting width 1.8 mm
– Locating bore 20 mm
– Standard blade thickness 1.2 mm
– Suitable for speeds of up to 9500  rpm

so I thought I’d bounce it around here first.

The main point is that I really want to be able to use the same blades in both the TSC55K and the CSC SYS 50 wherever possible, as it’s costly having 2 of everything.

Any advice?

 

[woodbutcherbower]

Advice? Not really - just empathising.

I do this for a living and I have 22 x 160mm TS55 blades in a constant cycle of being used or being resharpened. I bought a TS60 (which is great), but my issue is that unlike the 160's where there a bunch of crazy-cheap aftermarket alternatives, the 168mm blade is still OEM only - at £70 a pop. Extortionate - to the extent that the new saw which was intended to replace my old TS55, only gets brought out when it's desperately needed for cutting material whose thickness slightly defeats the TS55. I'm paying £12 a blade for the aftermarket 160's and they are 100% as good as the OEM's. Identical in every conceivable respect. It's almost not worth paying £8 to have them resharpened.

 

[woodferret]

I'll stop buying rip and universal blades for my TS55 when the CSC comes in.  I might keep a cheap 3rd party oshlun for the rare occasional rip.  Hence I'm not concerned about having 2 of each blades.  The only overlap would be the crosscut blades - but thats fine.  General advice is not to minmax consumables.  If you're in the situation of job-work that'll occasionally leave you with only one of the two tools onsite, then min-maxing blades will leave you at risk of having the required blade 'in the other tool'.

 

[ElectricFeet]

General advice is not to minmax consumables.  If you're in the situation of job-work that'll occasionally leave you with only one of the two tools onsite, then min-maxing blades will leave you at risk of having the required blade 'in the other tool'.

Fully agree and I don’t normally worry too much about the cost of consumables.

I'll stop buying rip and universal blades for my TS55 when the CSC comes in.

This gets to the heart of the issue: I have a couple of blades that I will probably never use again on the TSC 55K, as I will do all rips on the CSC.

My Question is more whether I can use the 160 blades in the CSC — given the electronics involved in raising /lowering the blade and the automatic calculations for angles etc. I guess I will have a choice of adding 4mm to all heights in my head or recalibrating to the height to the new blade. The former is dodgy, as I will make misktaes. I worry that if I do the latter, it might try to extend the blade further than it should and break something. Though I imagine that Festool has already thought of that scenario — and the re-calibration may even be there for precisely this purpose.

 

[mino]

Below is a universal advice/statement. Not Festool-specific.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The safety aspect is, that a blade which is heavier (thicker disc), wider or has a bigger diameter, or, in general, was not tested with the saw, may: *)
- damage the saw
- create a safety hazard

This means, as far as the pure mechanical load on the saw goes, anything which is same or lower diameter and has same or lower (disc) thickness and the disc thickness is supported by the blade securing mechanism and has same or lower kerf and has same arbor and is rated to same or higher speed is generally considered safe to use in a rotating tool like a saw.

This is why most professional tools do not limit the user to specific blade diameters but have "up to" stated in documentation. The trick there is those are professional tools which only qualified professionals (are allowed to) use. These professionals are required/expected to be trained/qualified to not use an incompatible/unsafe blade-tool combination. In those case the tool maker is *not* obliged to tell the user how to use the tool - the user is supposed to have formal qualifications for that already in place.

Aand here comes the "issue":
Festool (Makita, Bosch..) sells to BOTH the professional and the consumer markets. Thus *all* their documentation must meet the stricter "consumer market" standards where the tool is expected to be used by a non-trained or at most semi-qualified person. Thus the documentation cannot leave such safety-critical decisions to the user.
Of course, the user may override/ignore the documentation, BUT then Festool cannot be held liable for any consequences. Be they tool damage, or, critically, an injury.

To reiterate. Above is not Festool-specific. This is how *all* the tool makers which span both the consumer and the professional markets are forced to operate. And that is also why Festool cannot allow users on this semi-official forum to propagate non-approved/tested tool use. Such advice being tolerated here could be construed as "being encouraged by them" in common law .. with all the legal consequences.

For my own: I use all kinds of blades in my TSC 55 and other saws, following the physics limitations mentioned above. BUT, I am a physicist by degree ... so lets say I fall into the "qualified" group on this able to make my own decisions, on my sole responsibility.

Hope helps.

*)Even 0.0001% probability of such meets that "may" and is a no-go for the tool maker vis-a-vis the consumer-focused documentation.

EDIT: Added the that a thinner (disc) blade is not safe also when the blade securing mechanism does not support such thin blades.

 

[woodferret]

I worry that if I do the latter, it might try to extend the blade further than it should and break something. Though I imagine that Festool has already thought of that scenario — and the re-calibration may even be there for precisely this purpose.

All engieers are trained use limit stops with servos.  We either home one good limit and soft-code the opposite or put in another limit stop on the other end.  There should be no way one grinds past the hardware even if we set the zero position somewhere in the middle.  Absolute limits are kept separate from datums.

TLDR - you should be fine recalibrating zero to a smaller diameter blade even if it diffs a large amount.

 

[ElectricFeet]

Thank [member=61254]mino[/member] and [member=72072]woodferret[/member] for helping me come to the conclusion that the 160 blades are probably OK in the CSC SYS 50.

However, I've just seen the circular saw blade FAQ on this page, which says:

Can the 160 mm saw blades also be used on the TS 60 K?
No, the TS 60 K is designed exclusively for the 168 mm diameter saw blades.

This tells me that they will almost certainly say the same thing for the CSC.

So I've decided life is too short to mess around recalibrating etc. I'll just buy new -- not minmaxing my consumables, as [member=72072]woodferret[/member] suggests.

Thanks for all the replies.

 

[jeh]

This means, as far as the pure mechanical load on the saw goes, anything which is same or lower diameter and has same or lower (disc) thickness and the disc thickness is supported by the blade securing mechanism and has same or lower kerf and has same arbor and is rated to same or higher speed is generally considered safe to use in a rotating tool like a saw.

...

EDIT: Added the that a thinner (disc) blade is not safe also when the blade securing mechanism does not support such thin blades.

It is also dangerous (probably very) to use a blade with a smaller kerf than a riving knife if one is used.

 

[mino]

This means, as far as the pure mechanical load on the saw goes, anything which is same or lower diameter and has same or lower (disc) thickness and the disc thickness is supported by the blade securing mechanism and has same or lower kerf and has same arbor and is rated to same or higher speed is generally considered safe to use in a rotating tool like a saw.

...

EDIT: Added the that a thinner (disc) blade is not safe also when the blade securing mechanism does not support such thin blades.

It is also dangerous (probably very) to use a blade with a smaller kerf than a riving knife if one is used.

Umm, not really ... if the kerf is too small the saw gets -stuck- by the riving knife in the material. Exactly as it does when the cut closes on natural wood and the riving knife prevents a kickback. So that would be still the "normal operating mode" of a saw. The cut would be ruined, but the saw would not get damaged or act outside its design parameters.

However, the sentence quoted started with a qualifier:
".. as far as the pure mechanical load on the saw goes, .."

My point being, if above is met, one has a pretty good level of certainty the saw assembly will not come apart. Nothing more, nothing less is stated there.

Sawing techniques are whole other cans of worms ...
[smile]

 

[imdking]

Just stick to the manual.

You could have bought a cheap and cheerful saw like an Ebaur, or a Ryobi for  a hundred bucks, but you went with an $800 fancy prestigious kit. And you want to cheap out on the blades? And use blades from a different machine?

Come on!

At the least, you could sell those blades and put the money towards the correct blades (as recommended by the prestigious manufacturer)

 

[jeh]

Just stick to the manual.

You could have bought a cheap and cheerful saw like an Ebaur, or a Ryobi for  a hundred bucks, but you went with an $800 fancy prestigious kit. And you want to cheap out on the blades? And use blades from a different machine?

Come on!

At the least, you could sell those blades and put the money towards the correct blades (as recommended by the prestigious manufacturer)

Defies logic to pay premium prices for a tool only to use cheap blades to "save" some money. A better solution is to buy a second blade and have one always ready to go as soon as the other needs to be sharpened. Better blades that are cared for will be able to be resharpened multiple times.

 

[Svar]

Make do with what you have if it doesn't compromise productivity or quality. By all means use existing blades if depth of cut is not an issue. I do it on my table saw all the time.
The blades in question are not "cheap" as others called them. They are the same FT blades, just smaller diameter.

 

[slavi.yordanov]

Just stick to the manual.

You could have bought a cheap and cheerful saw like an Ebaur, or a Ryobi for  a hundred bucks, but you went with an $800 fancy prestigious kit. And you want to cheap out on the blades? And use blades from a different machine?

Come on!

At the least, you could sell those blades and put the money towards the correct blades (as recommended by the prestigious manufacturer)

Defies logic to pay premium prices for a tool only to use cheap blades to "save" some money. A better solution is to buy a second blade and have one always ready to go as soon as the other needs to be sharpened. Better blades that are cared for will be able to be resharpened multiple times.

Ye, I don’t follow the logic here. I have HKC55 that I use with a cheap Wen blade most of the time. I’m not going to ruin $70-80 blade when I  certainly know I’ll be hitting nails or screws through whatever I’m cutting.

Same for my TSC55, which is “designed” to work with 2.2mm blades. Surprisingly 1.8mm blades work just as well, if you don’t mind loosing the riving knife.

In the end of the day, if you have a bit of common sense, you’ll be fine.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

The whole thing of "use only the bits/blades made by the manufacturer" thing would fall on far less deaf ears if Festool could be bothered to actually sell them here in the NA market.
It's not funny that the rest of the world sees NA as North America......while we here see it as Not Available.
I have used aftermarket blades on my TS55 and TS75 for years with no issues, though I do get out the legit Festool ones for certain cuts, mostly double sided laminate or acrylic. I have Leitz or CMT for general use or ripping.
I have also experimented with Amana versions of Domino cutters. They seem to work just as well and last just as long as the genuine ones.
I don't own a single Festool router bit though. Very few of them are available anyway, a few of the flush trim insert bits, and the special short one for the MFK700. It would be nice of them to offer more, especially since the 8mm shanks are not so easy here. It can be done, through on-line sellers, but you aren't just going to walk into your local woodworking store and pick one up.
Honestly, it would be fine if they didn't make these things, not every tool manufacturer offers such accessories as "self-branded" bits/blades. But making them and then restricting their sales to specific regions? Make it make sense.
I get it with electronics or legal things like the European standard of how fast a table saw blade must stop when turned off. We can get the tighter restriction units here. The Laguna saw at my work is a perfect example. So I could see that saws make to American standards would not qualify over there.
However that is simply not the case with little accessories, which fall into the NAINA list.
Sure, I "know people" who would help me out with such things, but shipping becomes an issue, unless making large enough purchases to make it worth while.
sorry /rant

 

[mino]

...
sorry /rant

I think I will add mine too ...

1)
I do not think this thread has anything to do with Festool and more to do with the up-and-coming snowflake generation (no offense intended to ice snowflakes) which *expects* to be protected from themselves by the *insert-random-entity* by default.

This is not helped by the (US and EU) consumer laws state of affairs where the law standard is such that any moron can sue a manufacturer for not telling him/her that microwaves are not to be used for drying cats. Add to this that the law state has something to it given physics is a universally cursed word in schools for almost two generations by now (in US/West, not so in Germany(!)), it even turned racist lately! Beware physics!

This makes it so that:
- it is legally bad idea for Festool (Makita, Dewalt ...) to provide any generic guidance which could leave *ANY* possibility for the consumer needing to use his/her brain for any interpretation of the guidance whatsoever
- people got accustomed to this "nany takes care" state of afairs and forgot how to use their brains

These combined means that Festool is left to only single possible guidance they can safely make to not be sued into oblivion: "use only blades validated/approved for use with the saw, here is a list of those which we offer ...". If you look at guidance of other makers you will find very similar wordings there.

2)
Sadly the group of people who understood physics (sufficiently) and (consumer) law to comprehend why Festool makes the guidance they make AND why they cannot provide any other official guidance is getting smaller by the day. Even on FOG which is sad but hey, it is life. This makes it so that we have even semi-professionals treating manufacturer guidance as holy books ... with all that entails.

==========================================

I tried to write as clear and an simple guidance above as possible, but it just does not work. Not anymore. When the amount of people who are familiar with concepts of momentum, gyro effect etc. is getting close to zero you just cannot explain these things. It is like explaining The Solar system to The Church in the times of Galileo Galilei - when people do not have the basic toolset to comprehend one's statements one just ends up looking like a witch to them and not information gets exchanged. Thank God we do stake the Witches anymore!

To close this, IMO this topic as most similar comes to one simple question:
------------------------
Do you (whoever that be) know the physics of a spinning disc, having a basic understanding of the forces in play - aka can you calculate the change in centrifugal and gyro forces between a homogenous 160 mm disc of a 1.2 mm thickness compared to a 168 mm one with 1.1 mm thickness ?

Yes => you do not need to ask the question what blades are safe to use with your saw
No => you are best to follow the official guidance of the manufacturer.

Howgh.

sorry for the rant ... /having a cranky day