Feds tackle tablesaw safety - Higher prices are on the way?

[joraft]

When an accident happens to a family member or a co-worker, you will revise your attitude to safety equipment.

Very true, but that's just human nature. When an accident or illness strikes close to home, people often even become very active in crusading for more regulations or more research.

 

[vkumar]

I won't speak to the government / economy aspect, but...

The inventor of this product - who did get patents just any sane inventor would - did offer the technology to all sorts of saw manufacturers.  They refused to buy the product or pay the price.  He then reacted to those reactions and produced his own saw.

Frankly, that is just business.  I can't knock him for that.  Nor would I expect him to place his technology out in the public domain just like I won't willingly give my work away for free.

Peter

On another forum Shiraz Balolia president of Grizzly went through the process of negotiations with Gass.  Supposedly Gass wanted something of the order of $ 500 for the license, plus the cost of the parts.  Grizzly turned it down due to the fact that for the sub $ 1500 saws they typically sell, this would have added another  $ 1k (allowing for the usual manufacturer markup), making it a non-viable business proposition.  If the license fee were lower this might have happened already.  I am sure the big boys such as Delta, Jet/Powermatic must have also tried to negotiate--it is just not public.
On other safety products such as lap seat belts and air bags--this technology was more readily available from a licensing point of view which allowed for easier propagation.

Disclaimer
I have no skin on this.  I would buy a Sawstop today if I was in the market for a saw. I think it is a great product.

Vijay

 

[bruegf]

Fred, I was kind of think the same thing. The one difference is, your finger need to touch the saw blade to activate the Saw Stop system. In the Whirlwind system your finger touches the guard.

So the question is, how long will it take your finger to travel from the guard to the blade. In the additional time it takes for your finger to move from the guard to the blade, how much will the blade have slowed down or even stopped. In the videos the guard it pretty big, with some substantial space between the guard and the blade.

I agree, the distance between the blade and the guard will help when pushing at normal feed speeds.  But the guard is so bulky, I can't imagine that many people will ultimately leave it on the saw most the time.   My previous saw had a bulky guard and I had a hard time even finding it when I gave the saw away after buying the sawstop.

Fred

 

[Aegwyn11]

This has been some very interesting reading. I have to admit that I'm split, but lean towards the "no government mandate" side. I think mandating this on circular saws could lead people to get more comfortable around power tools in general, which could cause major problems around other tools that don't/can't have these types of brakes (routers and shapers come to mind...I could see this tech easily adapted for bandsaws but not sure how you could possibly adapt to routers or shapers without running the risk of destroying the tool or sending shrapnel all over the place). I hate to say it, but a circular saw injury at least has a chance of allowing you to pick up the severed piece and get it reattached. Not sure how the hospital would react if you brought in a coffee cup containing the soup that used to be your finger after a similar accident involving a shaper or router.

Assuming this tech, or something similar like the Whirlwind becomes more prevalent, I agree that it should be mandated, but not by the goverment. Insurance companies and individual businesses are the place to mandate this kind of thing IMHO.

As for the "it'll never happen to me" mentality, I have a little story to share. I'm an extreemly advanced snow skiier and up until last season, never wore a helmet....didn't see the need. I'm always very careful, particularily when I'm skiing more advanced terrain. Last year on the 2nd day wearing a helmet, I was skiing with my wife and family near the bottom of the mountain on some easy cruiser runs. The family was already at the bottom at the lift, so I was MOVING so that I could catch up. I went over what I thought was a small bump (it was actually a 10 ft. drop off with hard pack snow and no incline on the landing). I couldn't lean back quick enough and my ski tips planted, flipping me over onto my head. My dad was the only person who saw this happen and he said I landed on my head, folded into a ball, and rolled for a good 20-30 ft. I firmly believe that if I hadn't had the helmet on, it would have been a bad hospital visit, if not a drive straight to the morgue. As is, I only had to deal with a very bad concussion.

My point is that I was comfortable. That kind of accident is much less likely for me on more advanced terrain because I'm simply not as comfortable. When we get too comfortable, thats when bad stuff happens and safety precautions really help. If you look at a typical ski mountain today, the majority of people on it are wearing helmets. Not because the government said "you have to!!", but because they chose to.

 

[tiralie]

My point is that I was comfortable. That kind of accident is much less likely for me on more advanced terrain because I'm simply not as comfortable. When we get too comfortable, thats when bad stuff happens and safety precautions really help. If you look at a typical ski mountain today, the majority of people on it are wearing helmets. Not because the government said "you have to!!", but because they chose to.

Good point.
This same phenomenon has been attributed to a greater incidence of concussions among younger (minor

 

[John Stevens]

It cost you and everyone every single time someone that is non insured goes to the ER.

Yes, but only because of federal regulations, another example of government and private business firms acting in concert to thwart competition.  (And at the risk of flogging a horse ad nauseum, that's something Frederic Bastiat was writing about in 1850.)

I luckily  have insurance, but if I did not WE pay for it in added premiums and taxes and entitlement programs.. Even for people that are insured, insurance covered visits drive up premium prices. If I did do something stupid you may pay for it in that way anyway, even though it may not be in the saw price now.

Yes, but you participate in insurance by choice, not because you're compelled to do it by the threat of government force.  Or at least not until that provision of the Affordable Care Act becomes law.  And insurers can write a policy to require policy holders to use certain safety devices.  If you've ever had homeowner's insurance from Amica, I think you'll know what I'm talking about.  They come out and inspect the exterior of your house from time to time and if they don't like something, they tell you what you need to change in order to be able to renew your policy.  It keeps their premiums down and quality of service up compared to other insurers.  And if you don't like it, you can do what I did, which was to take out a homeowner's policy from a different insurer.  In any event, it gives you an idea of what a commercial liability insurer could do to a business firm that uses table saws.

Regards,

John

 

[awdriven]

If I were buying a cabinet-size table saw, I would go for the Sawstop. It's a quality tool AND has the blade safety system. It's worth the extra money.

As it stands, I don't have a dedicated shop, and very limited space. I'd love to see Festool integrate a similar system into their TS saws, which would be useful in standard use and also when inverted in a CMS and used table saw-style.

On the subject of ABS - I took a number of performance driving courses and in an emergency situation it really is harder than you think to remember to modulate the brake. I did an exercise where you'd drive full-speed towards a pair of lights. The instructor could remotely trip either a left-hand or right-hand light that would be your cue as the driver to brake hard and swerve left or right. This would happen unpredictably any time over maybe a 15 second range as you drove towards the lights. Even when you are ready for it to happen somewhere in the very near future, it was not easy.  Now take that theoretical situation and change it to a daily driving scenario where you're in a relaxed state and not expecting anything to happen - and suddenly there is a city bus in your path. ABS has reached a real level of maturity and is very effective.

The other thing about ABS that someone mentioned is that modern systems are 4-channel systems where each wheel can be independently modulated. There have been times where I was in a braking situation and passed over a slick manhole cover while braking. I could feel the front wheel pulse momentarily as it passed over the manhole, then the rear wheel. No way to do that with a single brake pedal. I've tested the system by putting the right side wheels on an ice patch and braked - the car stopped straight rather than veering towards the higher-traction side.

 

[Aegwyn11]

One thing to remember about ABS is that (unless it changed since the last time I bought a car, which has been several years), it is NOT government mandated to be present. You can (or at least you could recently) buy cars without ABS, but the only ones that fit that were either super cheap eco-boxes or super high end supercars.

If ABS is government mandated now, I apologize. At least just a few years ago it wasn't (my wife's '06 Toyota does not have ABS, shame on her..).

 

[allen r austin]

as a former paramedic, and some one who cut off the end of a thumb.
most of you have overlooked one thing
it may be you that is hurt, or as bad, someone you care about
the end
Allen

 

[harry_]

Here's a point that I'm surprised hasn't been brought up yet.

Stephen Gass developes the Saw Stop technology and protects the idea with so many patents it is nearly impossible for anyone to produce a competing product. He then works tirelessly to get his product mandated by government regulation.

Is this a guy with a sincere concern for the safety of others, or a just a guy with a brilliant business plan?  [smile]

.

Must they be mutually exclusive?

 

[upscale]

Whilst this was a router and the thread is about tablesaws, accidents happen and if the technology is available for a little extra I would want it fitted on my saw.

You have to understand the main motivation behind these complaints. It's not the safety issue or even the cost issue, even though these things are of a definite concern. It's the being forced to use the technology issue that really irks many Americans.

More than any country in the world, Americans take their freedoms and their rights more seriously than anybody else. And, when someone comes along, be it government, an individual trying to get their product mandated like Steven Gass or even the insurance industry forcing companies to comply, Americans get really upset. This "being forced to do something" hatred is ingrained in almost every American and not something that can easily be reasoned away.

 

[jmbfestool]

Keeping it short!

I think its a good invention!  I dont think it should be the Law I think it should be optional I think the government instead of making it the law for companies to own sawstop for their employers they should insure that insurance companies reward companies (lower premiums) who sell their old table saw for a new one with saw stop or have a sawstop installed. Making it the law I think is wrong some people(small companies) could not afford if they already own a table saw.
 
Also it detects flesh using a small electric current or something well I would be really angry if I was for example cutting WET wood or something which trigged the sawstop even though my hands where no where near! I would want them the buy me a new blade and install a new saw stop again. IF it happened twice that the sawtop stopped the blade because of what I was cutting or something I would RIP the DAM thing out cus im sure their would be times that the sawstop will go off for some other reason than flesh.  What about a portable table I have had mine out side and sometimes it rains a little while im inside and I didnt realise but a little bit of rain doesnt harm anything but would it set the stopsaw off?

why dont they make something which doesnt damage anything! Then it would be amazing!   Like have two brake disk pads which clamp the blade really tight either side so not causing damage to the teeth but also the centre of the blade which normal is  fixed would be able to pivot down with a large spring to push it down so when the sawstop kicks in it releases the blade allowing it to drop down and the disk pads clamps the blade at the front just like how it stops the blade NOW which forces the blade to drop down at the back with the large spring this helps to ensure the blade drops down quick.   You then simply release the pads  and lift the blade back up to lock it back.  No damage done every one is happy!

Oh also out of principle I dont like the Fact Grass is trying to make it the law hes being greedy hes going to make millions out of his invention any way he being a D head!  

 

[bruegf]

Yes, but you participate in insurance by choice, not because you're compelled to do it by the threat of government force.  Or at least not until that provision of the Affordable Care Act becomes law. 

It amazes me that so many people use this argument.  The reality is that almost all of us already have mandated insurance - only its state mandated instead of a federal mandate.  Only New Hampshire doesn't mandate car insurance.  I suggest that those that feel so strongly about mandated insurance stop driving cars to show that they truly believe what they're saying - walk the walk instead of talking the talk.

We're going to pay for health care one way or the other.  Either by buying insurance or by paying enough for our service to help pay for all the other people that don't have coverage but aren't denied service.  I personally think mandated health insurance is just as reasonable as mandated care insurance.  If you don't want to buy, you should be able to opt out, but then healthcare providers should have the right to refuse care unless you pay up front.

I had a friend that was the database administrator for a large hospital.  He once told me that of all the people that used the hospital only half payed anything at all, and of the half that paid, they only paid half their bill on average.  That means that anyone that paid their bill in full essentially paid for 3 other people.  And we wonder why healthcare costs are so high.

Fred

 

[Sparktrician]

Yes, but you participate in insurance by choice, not because you're compelled to do it by the threat of government force.  Or at least not until that provision of the Affordable Care Act becomes law. 

It amazes me that so many people use this argument.   The reality is that almost all of us already have mandated insurance - only its state mandated instead of a federal mandate.   Only New Hampshire doesn't mandate car insurance.  I suggest that those that feel so strongly about mandated insurance stop driving cars to show that they truly believe what they're saying - walk the walk instead of talking the talk.

We're going to pay for health care one way or the other.   Either by buying insurance or by paying enough for our service to help pay for all the other people that don't have coverage but aren't denied service.   I personally think mandated health insurance is just as reasonable as mandated care insurance.   If you don't want to buy, you should be able to opt out, but then healthcare providers should have the right to refuse care unless you pay up front.

I had a friend that was the database administrator for a large hospital.  He once told me that of all the people that used the hospital only half payed anything at all, and of the half that paid, they only paid half their bill on average.   That means that anyone that paid their bill in full essentially paid for 3 other people.  And we wonder why healthcare costs are so high.

Fred

One has to ask, then, of the people that paid part or none of their bill, what percentage are illegal immigrants? 

[mad]

 

[Joe Smith]

I hate when threads start to go down these roads.  This is exactly why I do not frequent most woodworking websites. 

 

[jmbfestool]

I hate when threads start to go down these roads.  This is exactly why I do not frequent most woodworking websites. 

I agree but I am with Sparktician! I am very bad for it so when bruegf said what he said I had immigrants in my head aswell lol so I closed the topic cus I know Ill go on about immigrants aswell lol!

c I cant help my self!

JMB

 

[harry_]

Yes, but you participate in insurance by choice, not because you're compelled to do it by the threat of government force.  Or at least not until that provision of the Affordable Care Act becomes law. 

It amazes me that so many people use this argument.   The reality is that almost all of us already have mandated insurance - only its state mandated instead of a federal mandate.   Only New Hampshire doesn't mandate car insurance.  I suggest that those that feel so strongly about mandated insurance stop driving cars to show that they truly believe what they're saying - walk the walk instead of talking the talk.

We're going to pay for health care one way or the other.   Either by buying insurance or by paying enough for our service to help pay for all the other people that don't have coverage but aren't denied service.   I personally think mandated health insurance is just as reasonable as mandated care insurance.   If you don't want to buy, you should be able to opt out, but then healthcare providers should have the right to refuse care unless you pay up front.

I had a friend that was the database administrator for a large hospital.  He once told me that of all the people that used the hospital only half payed anything at all, and of the half that paid, they only paid half their bill on average.   That means that anyone that paid their bill in full essentially paid for 3 other people.  And we wonder why healthcare costs are so high.

Fred

I do not really have an issue with it becoming mandatory, i guess.
I would still have a choice to buy a table saw or not.
I have a choice to drive a car, or not.

The Affordable Care Act does not grant me that same choice..... unless of course, buried in there someplace is the full legalization of suicide. For as long as you breathe, you are compelled to buy. When it comes to the ACA, we all pay for healthcare in some way, shape, or form. It is MHO that `if you think healthcare is expensive now, what untill it is free`.  It is also my opinion that "healthcare reform" does not equal "everyone buys insurance". I would rather pay an extra $xxx for my healthcare than pay $x, for every single thing else I do, which is exactly what the ACA will bring about.

Back to the sawstop.... we ALL have tools that have different features 'mandated', the majority of them overlooked. For example: grounded cords, double insulated, trigger interlocks.... etc.

Another thing to consider is given the time from inception to production, this patent is probably already 1/2 way to it's expiration. In another handful of years (probably the time it take to litigate & legislate) it will have become, or be very close to expiring. Then is falls into the public domain anyhow. How long is a patent good for 14 years, 17?

Will cost go up? probably.

I will agree about insurance companies rewarding employers using them. It is my understanding that they do this already. buy enough to pay for a sawstop cabinet saw in a couple of years.

For the record, New Hampshire _does_ require insurance,.... unless you have a bond in place for X amount of dollars. Admittedly, not very well enforced.

 

[jmbfestool]

Yes, but you participate in insurance by choice, not because you're compelled to do it by the threat of government force.  Or at least not until that provision of the Affordable Care Act becomes law. 

It amazes me that so many people use this argument.   The reality is that almost all of us already have mandated insurance - only its state mandated instead of a federal mandate.   Only New Hampshire doesn't mandate car insurance.  I suggest that those that feel so strongly about mandated insurance stop driving cars to show that they truly believe what they're saying - walk the walk instead of talking the talk.

We're going to pay for health care one way or the other.   Either by buying insurance or by paying enough for our service to help pay for all the other people that don't have coverage but aren't denied service.   I personally think mandated health insurance is just as reasonable as mandated care insurance.   If you don't want to buy, you should be able to opt out, but then healthcare providers should have the right to refuse care unless you pay up front.

I had a friend that was the database administrator for a large hospital.  He once told me that of all the people that used the hospital only half payed anything at all, and of the half that paid, they only paid half their bill on average.   That means that anyone that paid their bill in full essentially paid for 3 other people.  And we wonder why healthcare costs are so high.

Fred

I do not really have an issue with it becoming mandatory, i guess.
I would still have a choice to buy a table saw or not.
I have a choice to drive a car, or not.

The Affordable Care Act does not grant me that same choice..... unless of course, buried in there someplace is the full legalization of suicide. For as long as you breathe, you are compelled to buy. When it comes to the ACA, we all pay for healthcare in some way, shape, or form. It is MHO that `if you think healthcare is expensive now, what untill it is free`.  It is also my opinion that "healthcare reform" does not equal "everyone buys insurance". I would rather pay an extra $xxx for my healthcare than pay $x, for every single thing else I do, which is exactly what the ACA will bring about.

Back to the sawstop.... we ALL have tools that have different features 'mandated', the majority of them overlooked. For example: grounded cords, double insulated, trigger interlocks.... etc.

Another thing to consider is given the time from inception to production, this patent is probably already 1/2 way to it's expiration. In another handful of years (probably the time it take to litigate & legislate) it will have become, or be very close to expiring. Then is falls into the public domain anyhow. How long is a patent good for 14 years, 17?

Will cost go up? probably.

I will agree about insurance companies rewarding employers using them. It is my understanding that they do this already. buy enough to pay for a sawstop cabinet saw in a couple of years.

For the record, New Hampshire _does_ require insurance,.... unless you have a bond in place for X amount of dollars. Admittedly, not very well enforced.

If I could be assured the device would NEVER go off unless my finger  touched the blade I would would not be so against it but I am sure this device will be triggered by accident ALOT so alot of unhappy people with brand new bladed smashed just because he forgot to switch it off when cutting something which would trigger the device.  A grounded cord double insulated trigger interlocks etc all them do not cause damage to the tool but all they do is protect you but it does not affect how you work so of course these things can not be compared with the sawstop.   You say you dont have to buy a saw  so thats your choice but you NEED a saw to do your job quicker a better just like you need a car to get to the job so its not really a choice is it.  

JMB

 

[windmill man]

Hi Harry,

Good to see you back on here.

John

 

[Brice Burrell]

JMB, I believe the newest idea gaining traction is a version that just drops the saw blade down below the table top, so you won't have any damage.

Hi Harry,

Good to see you back on here.

John

I agree, good to see you here again.