new compact Sawstop
- Thread starter MarcV
- Start date
SRSemenza said:
Thanks. I knew, thats why i posted it on FOG. Some people are always going to hold onto the past litigation with the owner no matter what. All I care about is that they make good saws and I thought a small one like this would be useful for others on this site.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2016
- Messages
- 3,014
" It just seemed like some of the posters might not have realized the ownership in general based on the comments."
I'm well aware, and most of the issues that irk people happened in the early years when SS was on it's own.
And MarcV quoted me but added his own comments onto the end of mine which makes it appear as though they are my comments.
Everything after 'what goes around comes around' is not me.
I'm well aware, and most of the issues that irk people happened in the early years when SS was on it's own.
And MarcV quoted me but added his own comments onto the end of mine which makes it appear as though they are my comments.
Everything after 'what goes around comes around' is not me.
It's great to see more options being offered by SS. I own the Jobsite pro saw and am really not a big fan of the fence. This new model would interest me if the table were bigger.
Like others I am unhappy with how all of this has played out over the years. Business is business and I get that the big tool makers wanted to protect their margins and that SS wanted to protect its patent but we are talking about life changing injuries to their customers. It was a **** move for SS to lobby the US government to require this type of feature when their patent was broad enough to make them the only game in town. It is a glaring example of one of the weaknesses inherent to capitalism.
With the patent expiring soon we should start seeing some decent competition which will hopefully result in better products at lower prices.
Like others I am unhappy with how all of this has played out over the years. Business is business and I get that the big tool makers wanted to protect their margins and that SS wanted to protect its patent but we are talking about life changing injuries to their customers. It was a **** move for SS to lobby the US government to require this type of feature when their patent was broad enough to make them the only game in town. It is a glaring example of one of the weaknesses inherent to capitalism.
With the patent expiring soon we should start seeing some decent competition which will hopefully result in better products at lower prices.
"Soon? As in 1 year, 5 years or 10 years? I don't think anyone outside SawStop really knows the answer."
Patents are public information. I just read a nice summary by a patent lawyer on Reddit. The original patent and some others have already expired. The last patent will expire in 2024. Companies interested in the technology are likely already well along in their R&D efforts. The main issue appears to be whether or not a competing company wants to get into a patent fight before the last patent expires.
Sawstop/Festool may be attempting to head off the competition with the new lower priced model. This technology can only be cheapened a certain amount before reliability becomes an issue. Perhaps they think competition on price alone will be seen as too risky. Competition on features they can deal with. We shall see in the next few years.
Patents are public information. I just read a nice summary by a patent lawyer on Reddit. The original patent and some others have already expired. The last patent will expire in 2024. Companies interested in the technology are likely already well along in their R&D efforts. The main issue appears to be whether or not a competing company wants to get into a patent fight before the last patent expires.
Sawstop/Festool may be attempting to head off the competition with the new lower priced model. This technology can only be cheapened a certain amount before reliability becomes an issue. Perhaps they think competition on price alone will be seen as too risky. Competition on features they can deal with. We shall see in the next few years.
This is great news for me. I was considering getting one of the smaller Dewalt's because the Job Site was too large and gets mixed reviews for the price. Importing the TKS 80 didn't seem worth it although if it were available here I'd probably find it worth the cost. I don't have storage space for a larger saw but hate having to drive up to a shared wood shop anytime I am ripping narrow stock.
I wouldn't count on competition coming out in 2024. There are lots of patent shenanigans that can happen, it doesn't seem as clear cut as when the existing patents expire.
I wouldn't count on competition coming out in 2024. There are lots of patent shenanigans that can happen, it doesn't seem as clear cut as when the existing patents expire.
The two weaknesses on the jobsite pro are the fence and the crank.
The fence is very difficult to micro adjust. To some extent any biesemeyer style fence can have this problem however on larger saws it is usually mitigated by really wide guides that have adjustments. With the jobsite pro there isn't a way to snug the fence enough to keep it parallel to the blade when tapping it back and forth.
The crank has the quick up/down feature which is nice in theory however it is such a pain when trying to dial in a non-thru cut such as a dado. It has some degree of stiction so when it starts to move it jumps a bit.
It is nice to have a belt drive on a portable table saw and the power is adequate for everything I need it to do.
The fence is very difficult to micro adjust. To some extent any biesemeyer style fence can have this problem however on larger saws it is usually mitigated by really wide guides that have adjustments. With the jobsite pro there isn't a way to snug the fence enough to keep it parallel to the blade when tapping it back and forth.
The crank has the quick up/down feature which is nice in theory however it is such a pain when trying to dial in a non-thru cut such as a dado. It has some degree of stiction so when it starts to move it jumps a bit.
It is nice to have a belt drive on a portable table saw and the power is adequate for everything I need it to do.
I assumed when TTC bought SS that the original owner wanted out before the patents expired and reduced the SS to just another saw with safety features and having to compete with all the other manufacturers selling the same thing. It would be a safe bet to assume Bosch will re-enter the US market as well. Fein experienced the same problem when the patents expired on the Multitool which got pushed aside by every manufacturer producing the same tool for a lot less money. I got the impression that the original owner of SS was an entrepreneur interested in nothing more than how much he could get out of it especially when he tried to make all other saws illegal. Perhaps that is a cynical view but that is how I saw it.
Michael Kellough
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2007
- Messages
- 7,101
Mini Me said:
That’s how it was portrayed by those who resented the idea that they might be required to buy a different saw just because it had safety features they felt they didn’t need.
Mini Me said:
Besides the safety features the build quality of the PCS and ICS are excellent and exceed that of most saws in their price range. The job site saw leaves a lot to be desired, but it is a cheap saw and you have to decide where you are going to spend your money on the design. The inventor saw a market: spinning blade of finger amputation with the only safety device being a plastic blade cover that no one uses. No manufacturers bothered to pursue improving safety because they did not have to and did not see it as being a marketable solution that would draw in customers because it would require a significant increase in the cost to recover R&D costs. As we all know cost is the primary force in most purchases especially power tools. The exception in the US is this forum.
Inventors get patents to make it worthwhile and these patents were rightfully deserved and the inventor has reaped the rewards. Attempting to mandate a legitimate safety device on a saw was a bad move though all table saws need a safety device other than a splitter and blade cover. Most cheap saws should not even be on the market as they add a crappy fence and substandard construction which degrade safety farther. Many use the attempt to force their device into all saws and the destruction of blades as reasons not to buy one of their saws. Both are poor reasons as fingers are more important than taking a foolish stand against the company (or having to replace a blade). I had 15 years of tablesaw experience without an accident. I saw the SawStop demo and bought the PCS that day (2009 I believe). I made it 7 years without an incident and had a save that would have taken my thumb off at a minimum. The cut was the width of the blade and had a depth of 1/8" at best requiring a bandaid for a few days. This minor nick did not cost me an ER bill, rehabilitation time, or loss of income as the thumb remained. I have not had another incident since. The point is that accidents with dangerous equipment happen no matter how diligent you are. Why gamble on your fingers, hand or livelihood.
Bosch has given it a go, but is tangled up in patents of which I believe TTS (SawStop) holds many with a good number of years left in them. We are lucky that people are willing to spend money designing a product that benefits everyone. Without SawStop we would still be dependent on plastic blade covers that no one uses anyway. This is no different than any other safety device with the best example I can think of being airbags. My estimation is within 10 years these (or similar devices) will be on all saws and there will not be $100 table saws.
Safety technology such as SS introduced should be universal and having it protected by patent seems to me to be a a some what back handed form of blackmail, if you want it you have to pay me the inventor what I want. I think every saw should have this type of technology but the business ethics of the inventor left a bad taste in the mouth for a lot pf people. Safety belts and air bags are not patent protected as an example and I wonder if personal primary safety devices such as this should be allowed to be patented. Just my view and I don't want to start any SS v's the rest argument because for me it all comes down to business ethics.
One misunderstanding (or misinformation?!) that has been circulating about SawStop's inventor is that he asked for the sky in terms of money, and the PTI refused.
"In the end, no tool company ever licensed the technology. Ryobi came close to signing an agreement back in 2002. The agreement said that Ryobi would pay SawStop 3% of the wholesale price of each saw sold with the SawStop system. If and when the power tool industry adopted SawStop, the royalty would increase to 8%. Ryobi kept stalling, and the agreement was never signed. Ryobi is now losing personal injury lawsuits based on not signing that agreement."
https://hackaday.com/2017/06/22/ask-hackaday-sawstop-bastion-of-safety-or-patent-troll/
FW also covered the question of costs here:
https://www.finewoodworking.com/201...eve-gass-defends-the-latest-tablesaw-verdicts
"In the end, no tool company ever licensed the technology. Ryobi came close to signing an agreement back in 2002. The agreement said that Ryobi would pay SawStop 3% of the wholesale price of each saw sold with the SawStop system. If and when the power tool industry adopted SawStop, the royalty would increase to 8%. Ryobi kept stalling, and the agreement was never signed. Ryobi is now losing personal injury lawsuits based on not signing that agreement."
https://hackaday.com/2017/06/22/ask-hackaday-sawstop-bastion-of-safety-or-patent-troll/
FW also covered the question of costs here:
https://www.finewoodworking.com/201...eve-gass-defends-the-latest-tablesaw-verdicts
Some safety items become more of a hazard than assistance. We all have had tools that we felt required you to hold down three buttons and cross your legs to get them to work. I gave a saw away like that once because I hated it so much. I think it should be choice. Yes, I would consider a SawStop if I were in the market, but I should not be required to buy it, it should be my choice. Heck, I think I should be able to make the choice whether to wear a seat belt or take a chance that I end up kissing the windshield, but that choice has been taken away from me.
Seat belts took awhile to catch on. I think Nash (at least in the US) was the first company to introduce seat belts in 1949. Tucker was also a big safety feature vehicle. I imagine the idea came from the use of seatbelts in bombers and fighter planes. From the hood ornaments on, cars often took their styling from airplanes. Just think on the fins in the late 1950's, and models like the Hudson Terraplane. However, despite the aviation angle, seatbelts were not popular. Ford offered seatbelts as an option in the mid-1950's, but again no one wanted them. It was not until 1966 that they were required, and that was late in the year, so the model year 1967 was probably the first cars with mandatory seat belts.
If the SawStop technology was required, some companies would cheapen it up so much that I am afraid it would be more of a hazard-I know what that blade will do to me now, but if I THINK I am protected and some company has cheapen it up too much, I may be in trouble. Just think of companies like Craftsman-they cheapened their power tools up so much that they became unusable. (OK-I am left handed making a circular saw hard to use, and it was only two buttons I had to hold down, but it was a hazard and I got rid of that piece of junk).
Anyway, to each their own.
Seat belts took awhile to catch on. I think Nash (at least in the US) was the first company to introduce seat belts in 1949. Tucker was also a big safety feature vehicle. I imagine the idea came from the use of seatbelts in bombers and fighter planes. From the hood ornaments on, cars often took their styling from airplanes. Just think on the fins in the late 1950's, and models like the Hudson Terraplane. However, despite the aviation angle, seatbelts were not popular. Ford offered seatbelts as an option in the mid-1950's, but again no one wanted them. It was not until 1966 that they were required, and that was late in the year, so the model year 1967 was probably the first cars with mandatory seat belts.
If the SawStop technology was required, some companies would cheapen it up so much that I am afraid it would be more of a hazard-I know what that blade will do to me now, but if I THINK I am protected and some company has cheapen it up too much, I may be in trouble. Just think of companies like Craftsman-they cheapened their power tools up so much that they became unusable. (OK-I am left handed making a circular saw hard to use, and it was only two buttons I had to hold down, but it was a hazard and I got rid of that piece of junk).
Anyway, to each their own.
ChuckS said:
That comment is on an article about how Bosch lost a lawsuit in 2017 and the saw would no longer be sold, so how much better it may be is irrelevant if someone is shopping for a table saw with such a safety feature. Unless that commenter thinks that it's better to have a table saw that won't destroy a blade, and will instead continue to slice through the user's finger.
PaulMarcel
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,976
ChuckS said:
True, speechless, because it is so incredibly wrong. Mine fired once. I didn't hear a thing, just that the blade wasn't there anymore. No debris everywhere, no bearings launching into the walls, and considering how many demos they've done at my local Woodcraft on the saw they use, it was clearly designed for the stress.
That's just an uninformed and deliberately slanted comment to feed the nay-sayers. The nay-sayers who always say "it's silly because you can just flip a switch to by-pass it so everyone will".
Similar threads
