Does anyone review based on longevity

[ShawnRussell]

I was talking to another woodworker about a jointer/planer and talking about reviews I have read. He stated that all reviews touch on a few items but never address the longevity of a tool, the quality of engineering, and if parts will be available X number of years down the road.

Has anyone ever seen a magazine review that did address these questions?

There has been a few threads talking about tool shoot outs and now I completely question even reading tool reviews.

I am in the market for a combo jointer/planer and it seems the best advice is just talking to someone who actually owns the tool and has had the tool for a period of time.

done venting... just seems like the hours of online research and buying old pdf magazines to read tool reviews was a total waste of time and money.

 

[AlexThePalex]

Totally agree with you. I think the best reviews are to be found on websites that allow customer feedback like Amazon or Newegg. Magazines don't tend to do reviews like that, they only want to talk about new stuff. So naturally they can only sum up a bunch of features, and not go into how something holds up over time.

I don't know about any woodworking/tool sites that have such a customer feedback feature except for Amazon.

 

[chrisrosenb]

I take all reviews with a grain of salt. I do not trust any of them. Too many are paid for, in one way or another, by manufactures, retailer, competitors & disgruntled buyers. Very few are true, unbiased reviews. 

You are correct that the best why to find out about a product, is to talk to people that have used the product you are wanting to purchase. Although I do not completely take the word of those users either.

 

[NYC Tiny Shop]

Shawn,
You bring up a valid point. Projected longevity is a major factor, when choosing a tool.   I do see that many reviews will comment on the quality of build.  I've had a Craftsman drill since the 60's, that's still going strong.  The thing is a beast.  This is one of the reasons why I look towards the quality of build.  I think that in most cases, quality equals longevity.  After using a Domino XL or any of the Festool sanders, one can experience the quality of the build.  The same goes for the Mafell P1cc jigsaw.  I expect these tools to last 50 years! ...like my Craftsman.
That said, I have also been researching Jointers, Planers, and Combos.  Powermatic Tools are very appealing - both because of the quality and the company's longevity.  The Hammer A3 looks like a great jointer/planer, but I would have to see it in person and try it.  In the end, reviews are one thing, but I like to use the tool before committing to purchasing it.

 

[Michael Kellough]

Few would have predicted 20 years ago that Delta would become one of the most difficult lines to get parts for.

 

[Scott B.]

We started a "On Further Review" section on our review site so that we could go back and add info on tools and products further into their life cycles. It has also allowed us to show modifications, maintenance and tips after the fact.

I agree with Shawn that this type of info is more useful than bell and whistle open box type of info. The question of how it performs over time is really important.

 

[RJNeal]

I'm with the grain of salt idea, the review help in knowing what not to consider.
Rick

 

[rljatl]

About the best feature of magazine reviews is the ability to compare basic specs in one place for similar tools and I do find some value in that.  Otherwise, the actual review part doesn't mean much.

I also agree that the customer reviews on Amazon can be helpful.  Always read the comments that are sometimes made about a review.  The comments can help explain a bad review or add information such as product updates that may correct a design flaw.

 

[RC]

I just wish people on Amazon who give 1-star ratings to items just based on bad packaging, delayed delivery or just plain silliness would go away or be peer-moderated away.

I love the people who actually bother to revisit their initial reviews later after experiences with their items though sometimes I do get the feeling that some of them are somehow biased/paid for and hence unreliable.

 

[RDMuller]

This post really hits a sore spot for me.     I agree with most everything that has been said so far in this thread.

In assorted roles in the "day job" over the last 45 years, I have always had some function as a data scientist.   Within the last 10 years, I was attending a morning symposia at a statistical software meeting on warranty analysis.  A person from the appliance manufacturer here in the states that makes at least 8 to 10 brands of home appliances under assorted names  was using this presentation to show what a wonderful job they were doing with all of their brands in perform better than the time limits on their warranties.   In other words, without saying it, making more money or saving more money than they were expecting to pay out.  When pressed by a question from the floor (me), he fumbled around and admitted that this has nothing to do with the long term longevity of the product  (what is in it for the consumer -- reality is that the customer is better off to have it fail while under, not after warranty).    

Automobile reviews are another example of something that really isn't useful.   Here in the states, there is an auto emergency service (AAA) that rescues drivers when their cars have failed.  Talk to them about the failures they see long after the warranty has expired.   Those conversations plus some bitter expenses on cars from the 1990's have soured me on the big 3 here in the US.  I know that was 15 years ago, but I hate $1000 to $3000 repair costs for silly things like fuel pumps (embedded within gas tanks), automatic transmissions, air conditioning, brakes etc.  I don't forget that when I shop for a new vehicle

You get what you pay for.   These tools are the same way.  I like the Festool attitude of how can we make it better, not how can we make it cheaper.

 

[NYC Tiny Shop]

You get what you pay for.   These tools are the same way.  I like the Festool attitude of how can we make it better, not how can we make it cheaper.
[/quote]

I agree with everything you said here, except after seeing the lower quality difference between the Domino 500 with metal pins and the recent issue with plastic pins, I'm not completely convinced of Festool's current commitment to quality.

 

[greg mann]

You get what you pay for.   These tools are the same way.  I like the Festool attitude of how can we make it better, not how can we make it cheaper.

I agree with everything you said here, except after seeing the lower quality difference between the Domino 500 with metal pins and the recent issue with plastic pins, I'm not completely convinced of Festool's current commitment to quality.
[/quote]

From a different perspective I tink the time has passed where plastic automatically equates to low quality. We hear complaints that tools are 'too heavy' or contain too much plastic or are too flimsy. The MFT gets panned because it is too flimsy for use with a hand plane, but many of us would like it to be even lighter to move around. The pins on the Domino,along with other plastic components, could be metal but we would begin to complain about the weight, I think.

 

[Rocky]

You can't please humans, they will find something wrong with everything.

 

[jacko9]

You might want to check out the Old Woodworking machines site @

http://owwm.org/

There are a lot of old timers there with many years of experience.

Jack

 

[NYC Tiny Shop]

Greg Mann,
The Domino XL has metal pins. The pins don't weigh that much! Poor argument.

 

[semenza]

Greg Mann,
The Domino XL has metal pins. The pins don't weigh that much! Poor argument.

If I recall the pins were switched for some other reason. Why plastic paddles instead of metal paddles?? I don't know, but in this case I don't see a need for metal and I don't see the plastic as necessarily being lower quality. Who knows maybe the plastic actually functioned better for the flip in?  ???  JMO.

Seth

 

[tjbnwi]

As I recall the change in pin design was for 2 reasons, a possible design conflict with another manufacture (not sure if this is truly the case) and the end user (this I have seen more than once and did once).

I have the pin model, I can tell you that the end user did cause problems with the pins. If you had to replunge a mortice after glue up and did not wipe the glue off the pins, the pin would become locked in the boss. I had it happen once but was able to get the pin freed up. Now I'm vigilant about wiping the pins if I get glue on them. The paddles solve the problem, the change was made to better serve the habits of the customer.

The 700 pins are a different design than the original 500 pin design.

Tom

 

[RC]

The change was initiated by suspicion of a possible patent infringement as documented in this thread by a Festool employee, but turned out not to be the case. During the testing their focus group apparently preferred the new design over the pin-version and hence it ended up being in the upgraded version anyway.

 

[NYC Tiny Shop]

This is all very interesting. I own both the newer Domino 500 and the Domino 700 XL, and use both quite often.  I don't know anything about focus groups, etc. (And, I don't think that I would ever have wet glue anywhere near my domino pins.  [huh] )
All I can do is speak from my own experience. IMO, the pins, pin design, and general quality/build of the XL is superior to the 500. 
I'm not saying that because of this, Festool is going downhill. I just disagree with their choice, in this instance.

 

[GreenGA]

I was thinking the exact same thing myself.

Few would have predicted 20 years ago that Delta would become one of the most difficult lines to get parts for.