Is The Corded HK55 "Underpowered"

[onocoffee]

With the upcoming HKC 55 K announced, I remember hearing a number of people talking about the current HKC 55 is "underpowered" with only one battery.

If the HKC is underpowered, I was wondering if the old corded HK 55 is also considered "underpowered"? And if so, why? I would have thought that being corded, the HK 55 would have good power - at least as much as the TS55 R/F.

Thoughts?

 

[Cheese]

FWIW...I have the corded TS 55 EQ and I quit using it once the battery powered saws were released. You'll not notice this when cutting sheet goods but on thick hardwoods there is a noticeable difference. From most powerful to least powerful, this is how I'd rate the 55 series saws I own.
1. MT 55cc
2. TSC 55 K
3. HKC 55
4. TSC 55 R
5. TS 55 EQ

 

[Crazyraceguy]

I have never heard of anyone complaining that tte HK55 was underpowered, some say the TS55 is, though I don't really agree there either.
If someone insists on cutting 8/4 Oak with it......sure. They are probably using the wrong blade too.
Stick with sheet goods and reasonable hardwood (with the correct blade) and it will be ine.

 

[bwehman]

I solo built a spec house with basically the HKC 55 as the main saw and though I wouldn't say it's underpowered straight up, there have been times I've wondered if I should've instead got the HK. That being said, it feels like a brand new saw and absolutely sings through 2x material with a sharp blade. More than any other saw I've owned, it responds like night and day to a new/sharp/clean blade.

 

[COBill]

There is a video online basically stating that most of the underpowered complaints about track saws like the HKC 55 are due to using the wrong blade.

YouTube: I don't get why people say this about track saws

 

[Fourmi]

Stick with sheet goods

Before I got rid of my TS55, I used to call it the TS19... (3/4" for you guys over there)

 

[P_K]

I've ripped lots of 5/4 x 14 ft long white oak boards using my HKC 55 and never had it bog down mid-cut except when the battery ran out. Using a guide rail and the correct blade are key.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

Before I got rid of my TS55, I used to call it the TS19... (3/4" for you guys over there)

Point taken, for sure, although it would be 20 for you guys. Right?
For us, it just depends on the type of material. MDF, Particle Board, and melamine coated PB, are usually pretty close to a true 3/4" (19mm) but most Plywood comes in the next lower metric thickness. 3/4" ply is very close to 18mm) It's often marked 23/32" though. Same with 1/2", marked 15/32", which is effectively 12mm. All of them are like that.
I have no clue as to why, it's only Plywood though? The only real exception there is MDO, it's 3/4".
Americans can kid themselves that these under sizes are fractional, but sheet goods are sold all over the world, metric is far more universal. As crazy as it soulds, cabinet shops can also buy 11/16" Particle Board. It is intended for laminated cabinets. A layer of vertical grade laminate on the outside and either white or black liner, on the inside, and the thickness matches the other 3/4" parts.

@COBill

I honestly don't know how people can be into such expensive tools and not use them properly? (correct blade)
I get the "Joe homeowner", but he is not even aware that track saws even exist. Those guys use a 7 1/4" circular saw and saw big groves in their saws horses.

 

[Fourmi]

Point taken, for sure, although it would be 20 for you guys. Right?

Strangely no, 19mm board is our standard. So a lot of material here, although sold in metric is based on imperial sizes.
We can buy 19mm plywood in 2440mm x 1220mm - this is 3/4" 8' x 4' - strange world..!

 

[Crazyraceguy]

So, the whole world is confused?
The UK is just as much of a mess as the US, but I wasn't really aware that other metric countries involved in this mixed measure thing too?
19 is just a funny number, to be the standard, it's obviously to match up to 3/4". The crazy thing is that our standard is referred to as 3/4", but it's really 18mm. Weirder yet, everybody knows it's undersized, so they call it 23/32".Apparently to help with that American anxiety over metric?
The same applies to the sheet size, 2440mm x 1220mm is 96" x 48". The part I don't understand is the reversal of the dimensions. For us, the length of the grain is the last number. (Thickness, width, length) 3/4" 4' x 8'
Soft wood building lumber too. We would call it a 2" x 4", but I have seen/heard Brits say 4" x 2".

 

[luvmytoolz]

Yeah it is a bit weird, result of legacy industrial based measurements used I think. A mate used to run a metal fabrication business and while I didn't quite get it, he was adamant the way imperial measurements worked for sheet metal was superior to metric.

DAR timber here is 19mm thick, MDF is 16/18mm thick, yellow tongue flooring is also 19mm thick but comes in 3600 x 750/800/900 and 1800 x 750/800/900 sizes, but cement sheets and some plywood are usually true imperial sizes but in 4.5/6.0/7.5/12/18mm thicknesses.

Definitely helps to be able to deal with both systems simultaneously, as many here will mix both for the one product.

 

[onocoffee]

So, the whole world is confused?
Apparently to help with that American anxiety over metric?

I don't understand the typical American adversity to metric (and I hear all sorts of YouTubers and podcasters make snide comments about it seemingly all the time). All Americans use the metric system every day.

Unless they're the type who wants to give us their 5/64 cents of an opinion...