Makita LS1019L miter saw mini review

[jpmeunier]

I use a 36mm on mine, it isn't perfect, but it does make a bit difference.

 

[blues]

I'm connecting my 27mm Festool hose on it and I'm not quite satisfied with dust collection. I'm wondering if anyone have this saw and connected the 36mm hose. First does it fit on the saw and second, do you see an improvement like with the Kapex?

I have the exact set up connected to a festool vac. Dust collection is quite decent. Surely not as good as kapex but almost there.  If you notice there are 2 input suction ports that combine to become one. Check if there is any blockage there. Also check if your vac bag is full. Cleaning them could help.  I think makita could have done a better job with their extraction.  Wish i had a 3d printer, could try and re engineer the port and connector.

 

[Francis_Beland]

Good Thank you. I was hesitating because I wanted to be sure it fit. That will be useful for my Makita, my TS55 and the cleaning kit. The last thing I must decide: AS or not.

 

[Paul Lande]

New forum member here.  I purchased a new Makita LS1219L from Acme Tools in December and got a nice Makita promotion discount.  I stumbled on this thread today and encountered the same problem with my 12 inch as some of you and the The Word Whisperer.  The blade did not remain square to fence from back to front.  When the blade was all the way back it was square to the fence, when the blade was pulled all the way to the fromt it was not square, so my cut on a wide board would not be square back to front.

At the time I came across this video:


at 4:13 he addresses the problem where the blade is not square to the fence throughout its full travel back to fornt, which I understand to be the problem raised by a number of people in this thread.  In any case it was the problem with my saw and I adjusted the detente plate (miter angle scale) as recommend in the video and on p. 29 of the Makita Instruction Manual for this saw.  This solved my problem: the blade is square to the fence from throughout its full travel back to front.  I also tried this method suggested by glass1 before and after the adjustment

glass1:

"I have found the blade not perfectly parellel to the slides to be a common issue on almost all scms. It’s the first thing I look for. I clamp a wide blade board to the saw. It does not matter the miter angle. With thread pushed all the way back I do,a plunge cut and with the blade still running I lift the blade up and pull it all the way out without cutting. Than I plunge down and mate the cuts. If the do not perfectly line up than the blade is not parellel to the slides. Most saws have no adjustment to fix if the blade is not parellel to the slides. My ls1019l is perfectly parellel. Dust collection is very good. Power is excellent.  Slides are smooth. Detent override. Easy to use safety and one can hold the blade guard up with the thumb. Flat table. It’s a great saw. "

Before I made any changes, the front and back cuts were not in perfect alignment.  After adjusting the detente plate they were.  So in my book:  "problem solved".

So I'm wondering, is the problem of the rails not being aligned with the blade discussed here a different problem than I experienced?

Thanks.

 

[RKA]

Yes, they are different issues.  If adjusting the miter detent plate fixed your issue, then the blade was in alignment with the guides to begin with.  All you did was adjust the 0 miter point which is the blade’s orientation to the fence.  If it wasn’t in alignment with the rails,  you would have seen problems checking the front and back of the blade across its travel.  No matter what you do, adjusting that miter plate won’t fix it.

To visualize the issue, imagine you set the blade up so it’s exactly 90 degrees to the fence.  It looks perfect and if you lower the blade to make a chop cut, it’s 90 degrees as expected.  Now imagine the rail is skewed 45 degrees relative to the blade.  That’s an extreme example that you would never see.  But as you pulled the blade out using the slides, it’s actually traveling sideways, remaining perpendicular to the fence.  But the front of the blade and back of the blade are traveling in two different paths.  Does that make sense?

 

[Paul Lande]

RKA,

Well I'm not sure we're communicating.  My problem, as I described above, was that the blade moved toward the end of the square (in exactly the same way as shown by The Wood Whisperer) as I moved the blade from back to front along the full travel along the guide rails.  This is also the phenomenon described by others in this thread (toward the end of the square blade, as in TWW, or away from the end of the square blade).

You seem to be saying that my problem is different than that described by The Wood Whisperer and some of those posting in this thread.  How so?  Is it not that when the blade is at the back of the rails (nearest the fence) it is in alignment with the fence, i.e. square to the fence, and when the blade is at the front of the rails it is not?  Do guide rails out of alignment produce a different problem?

If it is the same problem, why not adjust the miter detente plate first to bring the blade into alignment with the square along the full travel of the blade along the guide rails from back to front (or front to back)?

You said:
"If adjusting the miter detent plate fixed your issue, then the blade was in alignment with the guides to begin with.  All you did was adjust the 0 miter point which is the blade’s orientation to the fence."

The miter detente plate is circular, so adjusting it moves it in an arc in relation to the miter table.  What is actually happening is that the miter table is moving (in an arc) relative to the miter detente plate and relative to the fence at the back of the miter table.  We are therefore changing, by a small amount, the angle to the fence that the blade is moving back to front along the guide rails.
If the blade moves toward (or away from) the end of the blade of the square (as shown by TWW) it is not moving a 90o to the fence.  Adjusting the detente plate changes the angle at which the blade moves away from the fence as moves back to front along the guide rails because the miter detente plate moves in relation to miter table and changes the 0 (zero) angle relative to the fence.

You said:
"Now imagine the rail is skewed 45 degrees relative to the blade.  That’s an extreme example that you would never see.  But as you pulled the blade out using the slides, it’s actually traveling sideways, remaining perpendicular to the fence.  But the front of the blade and back of the blade are traveling in two different paths.  Does that make sense?"

Well, I suppose that could be happening, but I don't think that's what TWW is describing.  If that did happen, then I would agree that the blade and rails are not parallel to each other.  If that were the case I would think that there would be binding and/or burning as the blade moved through the wood much like a table saw blade that is not parallel to miter slot.  As I look at what TWW showed in his video and read the description of others in this thread, I think it is merely that the blade and rails are parallel, but are not square to the fence when the blade reaches its furthermost point as it moves from front to back.

In any case, when I got my saw, I had the same problem TWW showed in his video and adjusting the miter detente plate in the manner shown in the video I linked fixed it.  I wonder if TWW could have fixed his problem the same way.

 

[Mike Goetzke]

RKA,

Well I'm not sure we're communicating.  My problem, as I described above, was that the blade moved toward the end of the square (in exactly the same way as shown by The Wood Whisperer) as I moved the blade from back to front along the full travel along the guide rails.  This is also the phenomenon described by others in this thread (toward the end of the square blade, as in TWW, or away from the end of the square blade).

You seem to be saying that my problem is different than that described by The Wood Whisperer and some of those posting in this thread.  How so?  Is it not that when the blade is at the back of the rails (nearest the fence) it is in alignment with the fence, i.e. square to the fence, and when the blade is at the front of the rails it is not?  Do guide rails out of alignment produce a different problem?

If it is the same problem, why not adjust the miter detente plate first to bring the blade into alignment with the square along the full travel of the blade along the guide rails from back to front (or front to back)?

You said:
"If adjusting the miter detent plate fixed your issue, then the blade was in alignment with the guides to begin with.  All you did was adjust the 0 miter point which is the blade’s orientation to the fence."

The miter detente plate is circular, so adjusting it moves it in an arc in relation to the miter table.  What is actually happening is that the miter table is moving (in an arc) relative to the miter detente plate and relative to the fence at the back of the miter table.  We are therefore changing, by a small amount, the angle to the fence that the blade is moving back to front along the guide rails.
If the blade moves toward (or away from) the end of the blade of the square (as shown by TWW) it is not moving a 90o to the fence.  Adjusting the detente plate changes the angle at which the blade moves away from the fence as moves back to front along the guide rails because the miter detente plate moves in relation to miter table and changes the 0 (zero) angle relative to the fence.

You said:
"Now imagine the rail is skewed 45 degrees relative to the blade.  That’s an extreme example that you would never see.  But as you pulled the blade out using the slides, it’s actually traveling sideways, remaining perpendicular to the fence.  But the front of the blade and back of the blade are traveling in two different paths.  Does that make sense?"

Well, I suppose that could be happening, but I don't think that's what TWW is describing.  If that did happen, then I would agree that the blade and rails are not parallel to each other.  If that were the case I would think that there would be binding and/or burning as the blade moved through the wood much like a table saw blade that is not parallel to miter slot.  As I look at what TWW showed in his video and read the description of others in this thread, I think it is merely that the blade and rails are parallel, but are not square to the fence when the blade reaches its furthermost point as it moves from front to back.

In any case, when I got my saw, I had the same problem TWW showed in his video and adjusting the miter detente plate in the manner shown in the video I linked fixed it.  I wonder if TWW could have fixed his problem the same way.

[member=72728]Paul Lande[/member]

It is a different issue. This is a long thread did you read through all the posts or at least ones helping how to find and correct the issue?

I had the problem on my new Makita and this thread was very helpful to verify I had the issue and told me how to correct it.

Look above and read how to do the wide board cut test - if you pass it yes the wood whisperer video is for you. If not read on further to find out how to correct it.

Mike

 

[jakoblund]

RKA,

Well I'm not sure we're communicating.  My problem, as I described above, was that the blade moved toward the end of the square (in exactly the same way as shown by The Wood Whisperer) as I moved the blade from back to front along the full travel along the guide rails.  This is also the phenomenon described by others in this thread (toward the end of the square blade, as in TWW, or away from the end of the square blade).

You seem to be saying that my problem is different than that described by The Wood Whisperer and some of those posting in this thread.  How so?  Is it not that when the blade is at the back of the rails (nearest the fence) it is in alignment with the fence, i.e. square to the fence, and when the blade is at the front of the rails it is not?  Do guide rails out of alignment produce a different problem?

If it is the same problem, why not adjust the miter detente plate first to bring the blade into alignment with the square along the full travel of the blade along the guide rails from back to front (or front to back)?

You said:
"If adjusting the miter detent plate fixed your issue, then the blade was in alignment with the guides to begin with.  All you did was adjust the 0 miter point which is the blade’s orientation to the fence."

The miter detente plate is circular, so adjusting it moves it in an arc in relation to the miter table.  What is actually happening is that the miter table is moving (in an arc) relative to the miter detente plate and relative to the fence at the back of the miter table.  We are therefore changing, by a small amount, the angle to the fence that the blade is moving back to front along the guide rails.
If the blade moves toward (or away from) the end of the blade of the square (as shown by TWW) it is not moving a 90o to the fence.  Adjusting the detente plate changes the angle at which the blade moves away from the fence as moves back to front along the guide rails because the miter detente plate moves in relation to miter table and changes the 0 (zero) angle relative to the fence.

You said:
"Now imagine the rail is skewed 45 degrees relative to the blade.  That’s an extreme example that you would never see.  But as you pulled the blade out using the slides, it’s actually traveling sideways, remaining perpendicular to the fence.  But the front of the blade and back of the blade are traveling in two different paths.  Does that make sense?"

Well, I suppose that could be happening, but I don't think that's what TWW is describing.  If that did happen, then I would agree that the blade and rails are not parallel to each other.  If that were the case I would think that there would be binding and/or burning as the blade moved through the wood much like a table saw blade that is not parallel to miter slot.  As I look at what TWW showed in his video and read the description of others in this thread, I think it is merely that the blade and rails are parallel, but are not square to the fence when the blade reaches its furthermost point as it moves from front to back.

In any case, when I got my saw, I had the same problem TWW showed in his video and adjusting the miter detente plate in the manner shown in the video I linked fixed it.  I wonder if TWW could have fixed his problem the same way.

I've tried to draw an explanation to the two scenarios. Hope I've got it right

 

[teknojon]

Makita: LS1219L, LS1019L, LS004GD201 Rail Twist Fix Typeup

unplug the power / remove the batteries FIRST!!!!

Hi All, without access to the internet, i re-aligned an LS1019L the other day.

initially setting the blade square to the fence & bed with manaf's adj screws...
the cut at full rail extension was 'drifting' to the left by ~4mm.
(but remained square to the fence)

it is thought that the saw had either taken a wallop whilst bolted to the bench or kicked whilst a junior was
cutting 6"x2" @ 45°.  (it is not my saw and i did not cause the problem!!)

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

the tipping point towards solution was when i placed a steel rule on the bed (parallel + touching) on the left of the blade @ full rail forwards.

then the same** on the right side of the blade fully backwards. i noticed that the two straight edges were paralleled to each other.
(neither were indexed off the fence which was set square to the blade)

1 cup of tea later & i realise this is only possible if the blade is "falling out of square" to the bed as it is pulled forwards.
& i could only see this being possible if the rails were twisted.

placing a magnetic digital protractor (0.1° display) onto the base (zero'd) then mag'd onto the blade (retained 0.0°)
then moving forwards along rail to the front; +0.7° CW tilt.

using carbide depot's trig calc: 0.7° @ 305mm is about 4mm so that kinda hung together.

(no digi protractor? check the blade is still square to the bed @ fully forwards)

----------

I then looked for:

Makita PART DRAWING for LS1219 - two SET SCREWS M8X12 (part 177) holding on part 169 (HOLDER COMPLETE) to the rails

these were 'kin tight & i had to free them off with an impactor. digi protractor now shows +0.5°... AhhhHah!

placing a pine 1"x3/4"x1.5' thru the rails and twisting ACW, it settled @ +0.3°

over twisting to -0.3° to -0.4° & gunning the two grubs back up again & it held @ -0.1°

went for lunch & came back to find it on a pretty consistent zero.

it now cuts smoothly, does not leave blade marks on the cut surfaces + the rails have lost their graunchy feel.
+ big happy smiles from the owners! time will tell if it stays settled; fingers crossed!!
hope that helps someone else.

Cheers!
jon

:-j

p.s. wanting to visit my service contact & see what torque value 177 should be nipped up to.

**ok; i confess; it was a ratty bit of angle, but it was all i could find & was straight enough for the solution to become apparent - see attached.

 

[Pattington22]

I know this is an old thread but I’ve had the LS1219L since the summer and fiddled and farted around constantly to try to get square cuts. Came across this thread and went “hallelujah, this is the exact issue I am having!” That is, square at the fence but no parallel tracking. Will give glass’s fix a go and report back.