Mtr-x or kapex-60

[berlinguyinca]

Hi,

Random question. I got a TSC55 and the angle thingy (I hate this thing due to lack of accuracy )for the rails about a year ago and now added a parf2 mft top, ct25 and of1400 to the collection aswell as some TSO parallel guides.

So far I'm pretty happy and this replaced more or less most of the tools I actually used in my old shop. Which makes me happy and is pure hobby usage at this point.

Now I'm considering adding a Kapex 60 (dust collection is my main desired feature).

But looking at the TSO offerings, I really like the concepts of the MTR-X and think it could handle everything I would use a miter saw for, while having a smaller footprint and other usability advantages, while saving me 600 dollars.

The one feature I really like about the Kapex, is the ease of cutting lap joints. But I can do this with the router on the mft style top without issues.

Anyone has some ideas if this is feasible?

Any limitations using the MTR over the Kapex for cutting angles? I don't do any molding or so. Maybe cutting some 45 degrees angles once in a while for frames.

 

[usernumber1]

if you dont need to cross cut many pieces i'm sure its fine.
you're going to hate yourself cutting 20 pieces of board to same dimension using mtr-x. miter saw is pretty handy but many don't need it or aren't using it in their workflow

 

[berlinguyinca]

if you dont need to cross cut many pieces i'm sure its fine.
you're going to hate yourself cutting 20 pieces of board to same dimension using mtr-x. miter saw is pretty handy but many don't need it or aren't using it in their workflow

Thanks for the feedback. Yes I get the part.about crosscutting and constantly lifting the rail. Which is one of my main grievances with the track saw approach right now

And hating my life, yeah I just realized I need to cut about 100 fence boards to length and width. Which sounds slightly frustrating Todo.

 

[Dane]

My feeling is if you don’t know if you need a miter saw or not, you probably don’t.  And if you do, you probably don’t need a Kapex.  Almost any miter saw can be tuned to give clean cut.  The kapex really shines if you are trim carpenter doing production or a furniture maker with a use case already in mind and you really need the dust collection or the durability of the kapex to improve your existing workflow.  It’s not a speculative tool.  It’s a tool you buy because you’ve used a miter saw for decades and really want to treat yourself to the best version of that tool.  For your first miter saw, just get a decent enough one.

 

[woodferret]

Mitre saw for speed, esp. for sneaking up on a fit and a reasonable fitment of a backer board for breakout.  But you could just do that with a shooting board.  The TSO parallel guides with multiple flag stops pretty much takes care of a lot of the repetitive cuts.

The only thing I can think of that I'd trust the mitre saw more is 45-deg cuts on narrow stock.  The track saw is tippy.

 

[woodferret]

And hating my life, yeah I just realized I need to cut about 100 fence boards to length and width. Which sounds slightly frustrating Todo.

Gang cut.

 

[ChuckM]

I'm sure I can survive without a miter saw as I have a table saw. Or for that matter, I can do without a bandsaw (a jigsaw or a scrollsaw can handle a lot of bandsawing tasks) or a drill press (handheld drills in its place).

But where is the fun of woodworking when I can produce only 20% of what I otherwise can if not for limiting myself to only one or two machines.

Imagine doing these mirror angled cuts (68 in total) on a table saw crosscut sled:

[attachimg=1]

I definitely can live without my KS120 as a woodworker, but my shop life would be a bit miserable.

 

[smorgasbord]

Imagine doing these mirror angled cuts (68 in total) on a table saw crosscut sled:

I would totally choose a small parts crosscut sled over any miter saw for that. Here's one:=73s

 

[ChuckM]

A) By the time I finished building half of the sled, I'd have made all my 68 angled cuts on the miter saw
B) That sled, as presented, doesn't cut pieces at the angle I needed, mirrored or not.
C) Given the laser lines, it's easier to set up or align the miter saw blade with any desired angle than angling the work against a variable fence on a sled.

I do have a standard crosscut sled, which I use to handle small parts as well, and I don't see what benefits this small sled brings to the table compared to my regular one.

 

[Michael Kellough]

if you dont need to cross cut many pieces i'm sure its fine.
you're going to hate yourself cutting 20 pieces of board to same dimension using mtr-x. miter saw is pretty handy but many don't need it or aren't using it in their workflow

Thanks for the feedback. Yes I get the part.about crosscutting and constantly lifting the rail. Which is one of my main grievances with the track saw approach right now

And hating my life, yeah I just realized I need to cut about 100 fence boards to length and width. Which sounds slightly frustrating Todo.

[attachimg=1]

 

[smorgasbord]

A) By the time I finished building half of the sled, I'd have made all my 68 angled cuts on the miter saw

I guess you forgot that you had to build two jigs for your Kapex cuts! You built a false bottom with low back fence jig and then a secondary jig to hold the previously-cut piece at the proper angle and location. Those took time to build as well.

B) That sled, as presented, doesn't cut pieces at the angle I needed, mirrored or not.

Neither does your Kapex jig, which is why you have a secondary jig, blue-taped to the first jig.

C) Given the laser lines, it's easier to set up or align the miter saw blade with any desired angle than angling the work against a variable fence on a sled.

In both cases, the secondary jig is what holds the pieces at the proper angle and location, and the kerf is the better blade cut locator than the laser line.

Which brings us to the answer that I probably should have first provided, which is that your secondary jig could have been blue-taped to a large cross-cut sled just as well as it is blue-taped to your Kapex jig, and that the kerf in both cases serves the same for alignment.

I do have a standard crosscut sled, which I use to handle small parts as well, and I don't see what benefits this small sled brings to the table compared to my regular one.

The video does a pretty good job showing the benefits.

Look, there are many ways to skin cats and cut boards. I was simply responding to your "Imagine doing these mirror angled cuts (68 in total) on a table saw crosscut sled" comment, with not just imagination, but an example.

We could have a debate about which is better - but like many such debates, the answer comes down to personal preference and what other tools we already own, and I guess we can add what jigs we have already built.

 

[ChuckM]

A) By the time I finished building half of the sled, I'd have made all my 68 angled cuts on the miter saw

I guess you forgot that you had to build two jigs for your Kapex cuts! You built a false bottom with low back fence jig and then a secondary jig to hold the previously-cut piece at the proper angle and location. Those took time to build as well.

- The jig has been built not for this particular job. It's been around for several years as a general safety jig for cutting small parts and precision stuff. The "cradle" - the secondary jig -- took minutes to setup: place the workpiece against the fence, turn the sawhead with laser lines to match the angled line on the workpiece, doubleface tape the two cradle pieces on the jig against the workpiece. Done.

- If I used the table saw crosscut sled, which also is already built, the set-up for the same angled cuts wouldn't be that straightforward.

B) That sled, as presented, doesn't cut pieces at the angle I needed, mirrored or not.


Neither does your Kapex jig, which is why you have a secondary jig, blue-taped to the first jig.

- With the crosscut sled, the setup wouldn't be as easy as turning on the laser and taping the cradle pieces?

By the way, I wasn't trying to compare my miter jig with a crosscut sled, I was saying how the crosscut sled as seen in the video cannot handle those angled cuts. That comment is valid and remains so.

C) Given the laser lines, it's easier to set up or align the miter saw blade with any desired angle than angling the work against a variable fence on a sled.

In both cases, the secondary jig is what holds the pieces at the proper angle and location, and the kerf is the better blade cut locator than the laser line.

Which brings us to the answer that I probably should have first provided, which is that your secondary jig could have been blue-taped to a large cross-cut sled just as well as it is blue-taped to your Kapex jig, and that the kerf in both cases serves the same for alignment.

- I fully disagree with such over-simplification. With the table saw, we'd be talking about cutting angles on a fence square to the blade, and aligning a piece at an angle to the fence on the crosscut sled is never as simple you painted it. It may be good in theory, but in woodworking, practice is what matters. For one thing, unlike my miter saw/laser lines approach, you have to do test cuts and/or adjustments to be sure the angle cuts are even right. There's a reason why a miter fence comes as an accessory for a table saw.

***

I do have a standard crosscut sled, which I use to handle small parts as well, and I don't see what benefits this small sled brings to the table compared to my regular one.

The video does a pretty good job showing the benefits.

Whatever they're, they elude me.

***

Look, there are many ways to skin cats and cut boards. I was simply responding to your "Imagine doing these mirror angled cuts (68 in total) on a table saw crosscut sled" comment, with not just imagination, but an example.

We could have a debate about which is better - but like many such debates, the answer comes down to personal preference and what other tools we already own, and I guess we can add what jigs we have already built.


That's fair, but my response is not about which one is better, but about how the small crosscut sled itself that you linked to can handle the example of angled cuts I demonstrated with the miter saw.  "That sled, as presented, doesn't cut pieces at the angle I needed, mirrored or not."

In your current post, you offer additional information, some of which I don't entirely agree with, on how the crosscut sled may then be modified (such as taping) in order to do what I did with the miter saw method. That position is different from "I would totally choose a small parts crosscut sled over any miter saw for that", that being making those angled cuts using a sled featured in the WS video. Had you said that you would choose a small parts crosscut sled with a secondary jig over any miter saw or referenced the WS crosscut sleds with the need for some modifications, I wouldn't have voiced any disagreements.

 

[smorgasbord]

- The jig has been built not for this particular job. It's been around for several years as a general safety jig for cutting small parts and precision stuff. The "cradle" - the secondary jig -- took minutes to setup: place the workpiece against the fence, turn the sawhead with laser lines to match the angled line on the workpiece, doubleface tape the two cradle pieces on the jig against the workpiece. Done.

Same is true for the small parts cross-cut sled. I could have written:
"The crosscut sled has been built not for this particular job. It's been around for several years as a general safety jig for cutting small parts and precision stuff. The "cradle" - the secondary jig -- took minutes to setup: place the workpiece against the fence, match the angled line on the workpiece against the kerf in the sled, doubleface tape the two cradle pieces on the jig against the workpiece. Done."

It really is an apples-to-apples comparison, and fully answers your original statement about not imaging cutting this on a tablesaw crosscut sled. And, I'll continue to argue the kerf is more accurate a determination of where the blade will cut than the laser. Even a Festool laser has some thickness to it.

 

[ChuckM]

By "That sled, as presented, doesn't cut pieces at the angle I needed, mirrored or not," I didn't rule out all table saw sleds. Suffice to say that the WS crosscut sleds or any typical crosscut sled alone cannot do the angled cuts shown in my miter saw photo, the primary point I conveyed in my earlier response. And I've never suggested that I made those angled cuts on the Kapex by itself without using any jigs. That has never been my position, and the photo I used clearly shows that.

 

[usernumber1]

table saw for ripping

miter saw for crosscuts

am i missing something, you guys are arguing sleds? to do the secondary function, which is always custom built

 

[smorgasbord]

table saw for ripping

miter saw for crosscuts

am i missing something, you guys are arguing sleds? to do the secondary function, which is always custom built

Yeah, we're talking cutting small parts, not rip vs crosscut. Hard to tell from [member=57948]ChuckS[/member] 's photo which way the grain is oriented for his example. For what we're discussing, what matters more for that may be whether you've got the appropriate rip or crosscut blade, thin-kerf, etc.

By "That sled, as presented, doesn't cut pieces at the angle I needed, mirrored or not," I didn't rule out all table saw sleds.

But by "Imagine doing these mirror angled cuts (68 in total) on a table saw crosscut sled", you did rule them out.

 

[ChuckM]

By "That sled, as presented, doesn't cut pieces at the angle I needed, mirrored or not," I didn't rule out all table saw sleds.

But by "Imagine doing these mirror angled cuts (68 in total) on a table saw crosscut sled", you did rule them out.

Then it's all misunderstanding.

Imagine ...how more complicated to set up for those cuts on a crosscut sled. I've made angled cuts on the crosscut sled, but, of course, it wasn't like just plain sleds as featured in the WS video:

[attachimg=1]