Bosch to Compete Against Saw Stop

[Cheese]

Well, here's an interesting article that compares the ReaXX to the SawStop table saw. However, the most interesting part of the article is when they compare the safety aspects of the saws using a human hand and a finger.

That's right...so this guy Kenny decides to offer up the use of his palm and digits in the name of science.

They use 2 different tests;
The first utilized an open palm hit. We slapped the “meaty” part of Kenny's palm onto the top of the full-speed spinning blade.
The second test we performed was a finger drag as Kenny dragged his pointer finger across the blade.
https://www.protoolreviews.com/tools/power/corded/saws/bosch-reaxx-1041a-vs-sawstop-jss-mca/14982/

 

[jimbo51]

Wow. Remember fellows, do not try this at home! Yes, I think I knew that.

 

[nickao]

If you're going to buy a cabinet saw, contractor's saw, or a jobsite saw, it has always seemed to me that, given the quality of the Sawstop saws, it doesn't make much sense to miss the opportunity for safety because of your feelings about a company.

This is certainly true.  There is an abundance of research in psychology showing that people consistently overestimate their abilities.  This means that one should be very skeptical of any table saw user who believes that he or she is too good to need a Sawstop.  Presumably everyone who cuts off one of his or her fingers with a table saw at some point thinks, "I never thought that would happen!!"

This is so NOT TRUE.

What the heck, this is the USA where we decide to buy things based on WHO SELLS THEM(it's at least a large factor).

So if the the Ku Klux Clan comes out with the best saw ever invented it means we should not take that as a factor. That another company uses 6 year old's to build the parts for the best router ever made in history,  we should not take that as a factor?

Of course we should take the owners views and actions into account no matter how great the product is!!!!

There are loads of companies and products that were far Superior that went nowhere because of who sold them and rightfully so!

I don't like the owner of the Saw Stop's views.  And that's a great reason not to buy one. It's one way for consumers to send a message to companies, it's valid and it works.

 

[Tezzer]

This is so NOT TRUE.

What the heck, this is the USA where we decide to buy things based on WHO SELLS THEM(it's at least a large factor).

So if the the Ku Klux Clan comes out with the best saw ever invented it means we should not take that as a factor. That another company uses 6 year old's to build the parts for the best router ever made in history,  we should not take that as a factor?

Of course we should take the owners views and actions into account no matter how great the product is!!!!

There are loads of companies and products that were far Superior that went nowhere because of who sold them and rightfully so!

I don't like the owner of the Saw Stop's views.  And that's a great reason not to buy one. It's one way for consumers to send a message to companies, it's valid and it works.

Spot on

 

[ChuckM]

I don't like the owner of the Saw Stop's views.  And that's a great reason not to buy one. It's one way for consumers to send a message to companies, it's valid and it works.

I don't care about the views of the owner of SAWSTOP and have a SAWSTOP. But I agree totally with you that anyone can decide to buy or not to buy based on their views of the owner or the company that sells the product. If we blindly buy something just because it is the best out there, we'll just be a herd of sheep.

 

[grbmds]

I didn't know that the Sawstop owner was a bigot or maybe I wouldn't have bought the product. I guess that means that people know what each and every company stands for ideologically when buying a tool? I freely admit I don't and, unless they have made a political, racial, or some other statement related to world status, I buy tools because they are great tools or a better value or they just are plain useful to me. I was at the Handworks Tool show last weekend and I can't think of any of the tool makers that I asked about his political or social views. They made great tools and that was the important thing. A guy protecting his patents isn't sufficient for me not buy a great tool. He's just a guy protecting his business interests; in other words, kind of a normal business man trying to remain successful.

 

[Rip Van Winkle]

The above comments that mention the KKK weren't meant to imply that Gass or Sawstop were bigots. The KKK comment was an analogy.

The analogy was that the KKK and its members have committed acts that numerous people consider morally reprehensible, and some people chose not to support businesses that are owned by, or support, the KKK because of this.

Steve Gass, the founder of Sawstop, after patenting "his" technology, tried to use lawsuits against manufacturers, and have legislation passed, to try force and coerce, manufacturers and the public to purchase "his" technology, even when those manufacturers and individuals may not want to, and people also find this morally reprehensible, and may choose not to purchase Sawstop saws, or other items that contain Technology from Gass because of this.

 

[nickao]

The above comments that mention the KKK weren't meant to imply that Gass or Sawstop were bigots. The KKK comment was an analogy.

The analogy was that the KKK and its members have committed acts that numerous people consider morally reprehensible, and some people chose not to support businesses that are owned by, or support, the KKK because of this.

Steve Gass, the founder of Sawstop, after patenting "his" technology, tried to use lawsuits against manufacturers, and have legislation passed, to try force and coerce, manufacturers and the public to purchase "his" technology, even when those manufacturers and individuals may not want to, and people also find this morally reprehensible, and may choose not to purchase Sawstop saws, or other items that contain Technology from Gass because of this.

Thanks RIP, you can read! I appreciate it.

My lord of course not, where does it say I ever called them bigots or anything else. It was an extreme example  I thought I had to use to make people understand the point. A couple guys said oh yeah 100% we should not care about the owners views since the tool is so good. I had to try to put a stop to that train of thought ASAP. I feel the  owners actions are important in a purchase decision and should be for everyone. Even if we have to purchase products some may consider not quite as good as the company with the owners we philosophically oppose might sell.

I'll get into a little on why I don't like the Sawstop owners, but come on, everyone knows the story. He is a control freak that tried to use the rationale of safety when it was and is really all about money. Just say, "I wanted to change the law so I could make more money" and I would respect the guy a whole lot more. And this isn't even personal, its the business actions I base my statements on. The court case and its proceedings and the interviews and articles over the years are what made me feel the way I do. I am sure the guy is fine to go drink a beer with as most people are if you don't get into their business dealings and political or religious backgrounds.

 

[Svar]

So Steve Guss tried to legislate things to make more money? LOL! You just described every major corporation that employs armies of lobbyists to do just that. If you guys applied the same standards to everyone that you apply to Guss you'd end up buying pretty much nothing. Not filling your tank with imported petroleum would be a good start.

 

[antss]

Not exactly apples to apples Svar .

No one forces me to buy a gasoline powered car.  I can purchase an electric powered one and Fiskar makes one with solar panels on the roof.

How'd you feel if he convinced congress to mandate that for all new automobiles?

              ----------------------------

At what point does personal responsibility for one's safety enter into the equation ?

Peanut Butter can be a killer, should we outlaw or regulate that now too ?

 

[estley]

while it's not 100% apples to apples, I do see validity in Svar's argument. We all like to root for the little guy vs big corporations, and cry a river when the corporation blocks/smashes/burries the little guy. We also love to bitch and moan about how corporations cut corners and end up offering inferior products so they can fatten their margins up somewhere.

What baffles me, is that now, the big corporations had a chance of licensing this guy's tech, for one reason or another, that didn't work out. Now the little guy is fighting back, and he grew fangs, and all of the sudden, there's outrage that he's fighting dirty.

I do understand that nobody wants this to be legislated, and be forced to buy this product; so as in any argument, there's two sides to the story.

 

[antss]

Agreed , but one has to draw the line somewhere.  It's not as if people relish being bent over by Biggie Co. ; they are often just powerless to do anything about it.

Rubber stamping the behavior by saying "everyone's doing it" is part of the problem.

 

[grbmds]

[member=3373]Dovetail65[/member] No. No one called Steve Gass a bigot. I was merely taking the extreme analogy and sarcastically or "tongue in cheek" making a point. The analogy of a company supporting bigotry and racism was extreme and doesn't apply in the Sawstop situation. It's not morally reprehensible to attempt to protect one's rights or patents or even creativity. It's only common sense that he would take whatever legal means available to protect what, whether you like the guy or not (and I don't personally like him), was an innovative and genius of an idea to solve a huge problem which, for many years, no one came close to matching. I don't blame him and I don't feel that his actions, totally within the law by the way, are morally reprehensible. It doesn't even come close. That's my only point. This is why these discussions get out of control. You can't really make points which everyone takes in the right way. So, sorry for the rant here. I'm done forever with this unresolvable topic.

 

[Holmz]

Correct [member=19734]grbmds[/member] .
If someone wants to save their fingers, or have confidence that their fingers will remain, then they can buy his saw.
He is not morally responsible for the 80 billion fingers in the world.

people do not have a God given right to his creativity for which they are adverse to pay a heavenly price for.