SawStop Service

[Birdhunter]

I had triggered the safety on my SawStop. I had a backup cartridge but could not get it to work. Kept getting an error message. I tried a second cartridge. It worked flawlessly.

I called SawStop service this morning and explained the problem. The agent could not have been nicer or more helpful. I am getting a replacement for the defective cartridge and sending the defective cartridge back for testing. This was exactly how I would have wanted the problem handled.

 

[Packard]

This is going to sound like it is off-topic, but I promise it will circle back on-topic.

In the early 1960s when I was first getting involved with photography, a friend of mine wrote to the FR Corporation (a smaller provider of photography chemistry) saying that their fixer ruined his roll of film. 

They responded by sending him a huge box filled with samples of every product they sold.  My friend said, “This is great! I’m gonna write to Kodak next”.  And he did.

Kodak wrote back (this before the Internet) including a small glass bottle and return packaging and postage and saying, “Please send us a sample of the offending chemical so we can determine what went wrong.”

A few weeks later they wrote back itemizing an incorrect dilution of the chemicals and a contamination (citric acid—probably from recycling an orange juice bottle).  Their conclusion was “operator error”. 

My friend was furious with Kodak and only bought from FR from that time forward.

I, on the other hand, was mightily impressed.  Kodak spent way more to analyze the sample than FR spent on the box of goodies. 

Kodak was concerned with the quality of their product.  FR was only trying to keep the customer happy.

Saw Stop’s approach addressed both. It left you feeling good about the company, and they will have an opportunity to figure out what went wrong.  The icing on the cake would be for them to write to you after the defective product arrives with something like, “Thak you for bringing this to our attention.  We have isolated the problem and implemented production line changes to prevent this from happening again in the future.”

If they did not ask for the defective one to be returned to them, then they would have missed the boat.  I’m impressed.

 

[jeh]

I can see the SawStop haters rallying with the torches and pitchforks for the saw being out of service with a bad cartridge. Absolutely crazy, but haters are going to hate.

 

[Packard]

Why do people hate Saw Stop?  If I weren’t 75, I would go and get one.  But at my age, it would only be used for a few years, so it’s not going to happen.

Always invest in safety.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

I don't know if they still do it, but that was the "offer" they made from the beginning. You send in your spent cartridge and they send you a replacement, presumably to get "real world" examples to test?

We have had a couple of bad units too. One of them threw an error code, the other simply wouldn't fully seat in the mount. It fit both pins, but the electronic plug wouldn't engage.
They took both in for testing. This was when we were advised that the belt may require replacement.
Apparently, they are somehow conductive and part of the triggering circuit.

 

[Tom the Remodeler]

Why do people hate Saw Stop?  If I weren’t 75, I would go and get one.  But at my age, it would only be used for a few years, so it’s not going to happen.

Always invest in safety.

There was a lot of bad blood with the original inventor/owner of SawStop, who seemed to be more interested in being a patent troll than actually getting the tech out into the world.

I'm generally not a huge fan of SawStops, not because of the brand/technology, but because I think it fundamentally doesn't address the poor design, implementation, and work habits around "traditional" cabinet-style table saws. Also, the SawStop tech does nothing to address kick-back injuries.

More specifically, the SawStop tech assumes unsafe work practices. That's great that they're trying to prevent amputations and I don't fault the effort, but it doesn't address the underlying issue of workers putting themselves in a situation where, if a mistake is made, they run the risk of an amputation. Sort of like closing the barn doors as the last horse is running out.

I just don't see/understand the fascination with cabinet saws. More specifically, I have not yet heard somebody articulate a task where a cabinet saw excels, either for safety or quality of finished product. They (cabinet saws) seem like a "jack of all trades, master of none" machine.

One person's opinion.....

 

[Packard]

Cabinet saws are superior for dust collection.  Other than that, not much that affects me.

 

[Michael Kellough]

Cabinet saws are superior for dust collection.  Other than that, not much that affects me.

I think that is debatable. Compared to what?

However, there is no doubt that table/cabinet saws are better at being tables than sliders.

 

[Birdhunter]

My saw was temporarily out of service because I was careless. I had a backup cartridge on the shelf and had another one ordered. I lost a few hours fooling around with a cartridge that I could not get to work. Thanks to Amazon doing an over night delivery, I had a second backup. The cartridge delivered by Amazon worked perfectly. SawStop completely satisfied my issue with the possibly defective cartridge.

 

[Crazyraceguy]

There was a lot of bad blood with the original inventor/owner of SawStop, who seemed to be more interested in being a patent troll than actually getting the tech out into the world.

I'm generally not a huge fan of SawStops, not because of the brand/technology, but because I think it fundamentally doesn't address the poor design, implementation, and work habits around "traditional" cabinet-style table saws. Also, the SawStop tech does nothing to address kick-back injuries.

More specifically, the SawStop tech assumes unsafe work practices. That's great that they're trying to prevent amputations and I don't fault the effort, but it doesn't address the underlying issue of workers putting themselves in a situation where, if a mistake is made, they run the risk of an amputation. Sort of like closing the barn doors as the last horse is running out.

I just don't see/understand the fascination with cabinet saws. More specifically, I have not yet heard somebody articulate a task where a cabinet saw excels, either for safety or quality of finished product. They (cabinet saws) seem like a "jack of all trades, master of none" machine.

One person's opinion.....

I think a guy has a right to make his money back from the time/effort/implementation of his intellectual property. He offered to license it to the big manufacturers and they turned it down. Profit was more important to them. Since no one would back him, they produced a saw to use the new tech.
Give them credit for doing a good job. They didn't just go with the bare minimum, it's at least as good as the other cabinet saws on the market.

As far as design, they weren't exactly trying to re-invent the wheel, just improve safety. If you get too far away from familiar, you are holding yourself back.

"Unsafe practices" are indeed the cause of all of these injuries, are they not?

 

[Tom the Remodeler]

There was a lot of bad blood with the original inventor/owner of SawStop, who seemed to be more interested in being a patent troll than actually getting the tech out into the world.

I'm generally not a huge fan of SawStops, not because of the brand/technology, but because I think it fundamentally doesn't address the poor design, implementation, and work habits around "traditional" cabinet-style table saws. Also, the SawStop tech does nothing to address kick-back injuries.

More specifically, the SawStop tech assumes unsafe work practices. That's great that they're trying to prevent amputations and I don't fault the effort, but it doesn't address the underlying issue of workers putting themselves in a situation where, if a mistake is made, they run the risk of an amputation. Sort of like closing the barn doors as the last horse is running out.

I just don't see/understand the fascination with cabinet saws. More specifically, I have not yet heard somebody articulate a task where a cabinet saw excels, either for safety or quality of finished product. They (cabinet saws) seem like a "jack of all trades, master of none" machine.

One person's opinion.....

I think a guy has a right to make his money back from the time/effort/implementation of his intellectual property. He offered to license it to the big manufacturers and they turned it down. Profit was more important to them. Since no one would back him, they produced a saw to use the new tech.
Give them credit for doing a good job. They didn't just go with the bare minimum, it's at least as good as the other cabinet saws on the market.

As far as design, they weren't exactly trying to re-invent the wheel, just improve safety. If you get too far away from familiar, you are holding yourself back.

"Unsafe practices" are indeed the cause of all of these injuries, are they not?

I entirely agree with you about wanting to see a return on investment. I think the bad taste comes from him seemingly wanting it both ways. If he was really invested in wanting the broadest possible distribution of the technology, he could have licensed it out at $3/machine, and still done well for himself with the well-made SawStop products. My perception is that the license offer was a token gesture to cover the patent troll behavior.

Regarding unsafe work practices, a lot of that is related to the fundamental design flaws of the cabinet saw, which more or less require the operator to stand directly in the path of kick-back events, and there's a lot of hand-feeding and hand "clamping" where other machines would use a power feeder or pneumatic or eccentric clamps.

As you point out, there's a lot of inertia behind cabinet saws, it's just disappointing that the solution turned out to be more of a bandaid than a cure.

 

[Tom the Remodeler]

Cabinet saws are superior for dust collection.  Other than that, not much that affects me.

I would make the respectful observation that my bandsaw (FB710) has superior dust collection to any cabinet saw I've seen/used. Also, significantly safer in terms of material support (1m in-feed and out-feed support tables), kickback (none), guarding, etc....

 

[Packard]

My Contractors’ II saw rests on legs.  For practical purposes, I could only enclose the dust extraction area on 5 sides.  One side always remains open.  So with the whole shop dust collector on, it is probably no more than 80% effective. 

A cabinet saw, on the other hand is fully enclosed with an engineered extraction port in place. Dust collection is probably over 90% effective.  I don’t have a cabinet saw so I can’t be more precise. 

Cabinet saws have more powerful motors, but the motor in my Contractors’ saw has always been sufficient. 

So for my point of view, dust collection is the main attraction.

But if I were setting up shop and had an unlimited budget, I would get a cabinet saw with a very long sliding table. 

If Saw Stop did not offer such a saw, I would have to make a serious decision.

 

[Tom the Remodeler]

My Contractors’ II saw rests on legs.  For practical purposes, I could only enclose the dust extraction area on 5 sides.  One side always remains open.  So with the whole shop dust collector on, it is probably no more than 80% effective. 

A cabinet saw, on the other hand is fully enclosed with an engineered extraction port in place. Dust collection is probably over 90% effective.  I don’t have a cabinet saw so I can’t be more precise. 

Cabinet saws have more powerful motors, but the motor in my Contractors’ saw has always been sufficient. 

So for my point of view, dust collection is the main attraction.

But if I were setting up shop and had an unlimited budget, I would get a cabinet saw with a very long sliding table. 

If Saw Stop did not offer such a saw, I would have to make a serious decision.

Hi Packard,

If you had an unlimited budget, you wouldn't have to choose between a slider or a "safety" saw, as there are several brands (Altendorf, SCM, Felder) which offer sliding table saws with variations of hand/flesh sensing technology. Bonus, all of them trigger the system prior to flesh contact, so ostensibly safer than the SawStop tech.

I saw the SCM system being demonstrated at Fensterbau in March, the system was pretty impressive, with the user able to wave his hand very near the blade without activating, then rapidly swing his hand at the blade and triggering the system. No cuts/bandages necessary to activate, and the system re-set itself in less than a minute without destroying the blade or needing to change a cartridge.

The other benefit of sliders is that, when used properly with clamps or a Fritz/Franz, your hands should never be near the blade, thus theoretically negating the need for the technology in the first place. Never mind optimal positioning to avoid kick-back injuries.

In terms of cabinet saws vs. bandsaws, it's been my experience that circular saw blades tend to produce dust, whereas bandsaws tend to produce chips. Of course this is highly variable depending on blades, material being cut, etc..., but that's my experience. In my experience, modern, Euro-style bandsaws tend to have superior dust collection to cabinet saws, as it's easier to capture the relatively slow-moving chips than it is to capture the dust coming off a circular saw blade. And, if/when the chips do escape, they immediately fall to the floor, and are thus not a lung/breathing hazard.

That being said, cabinet-style table saws have certainly come a long ways and there are a lot of very talented woodworkers who find ways to produce amazing pieces with them. My primary curiosity is why they are still such a foundational piece of machinery in many shops when they have been eclipsed in every meaningful aspect by other, more capable machines (bandsaws, shapers, sliders, etc....)?

 

[Packard]

From my experience, band saw cuts are never as smooth as table saw cuts.  So band saws have an uphill journey to replace table saws.

 

[Cheese]

From my experience, band saw cuts are never as smooth as table saw cuts.  So band saws have an uphill journey to replace table saws.

Not in my world... [smile]...I purchased my FIRST band saw in 1992, while I purchased my FIRST table saw in 2006. The band saw is a lot more flexible for other uses than a table saw. I also feel it's inherently safer to use although some butchers may not think that's the case.  [big grin]

Especially with the availability of track saws, the table saw has taken on a diminished need in woodworking. My table saw has had drawer fronts of spalted maple sitting on it for the last 2 years, while both the track saw & band saw have been used continually during that time. I could get by without a table saw but I'd never get rid of the band saw.

 

[Tom the Remodeler]

From my experience, band saw cuts are never as smooth as table saw cuts.  So band saws have an uphill journey to replace table saws.

Hi Packard,

I 100% agree with you that, generally, a table saw will produce a better quality rip cut than a bandsaw.

I will also make the follow-up observation that, depending on what you're doing, the above observation is generally irrelevant, as most projects involve several post-ripping operations such as jointing, planing, routing/shaping, drum/widebelt sanding, etc... So, unless you're processing plywood/sheet goods, the quality of the rip cut will often be irrelevant.

In the case of sheet goods, it has been my experience that a well-tuned track saw with a sharp blade and TSO parallel guides will produce a better cut on plywood than trying to safely handle a sheet of plywood on a cabinet saw. Most cabinet saws lack a scoring blade, whereas many modern track saws have some facility for pre-scoring shot goods with delicate surfaces which are prone to chipping.

I have a colleague with whom I am consulting as he is planning out a semi-retirement shop. He started with the idea that the table saw is the "Heart of the Shop", but once we reviewed his needs and planned work, we could not come up with any operation or task that required a table saw. Break down sheets of plywood? Track saw. Rip wide or narrow strips of solid lumber? Bandsaw, then a finish pass on the jointer/planer, or router table/shaper with offset fence. Precision crosscuts? Miter saw, bandsaw, MFT/3, etc.... Dados and/or dovetails? Freehand router with jigs or router table.

All of which is to say that the traditional cabinet table saw can perform a lot of tasks, but it doesn't perform any of them particularly well when compared to other machines. Again, a sort of "jack of all trades, master of none" that, by the way, occupies a big shop footprint and can be very expensive.

 

[jeh]

There was a lot of bad blood with the original inventor/owner of SawStop, who seemed to be more interested in being a patent troll than actually getting the tech out into the world.

I'm generally not a huge fan of SawStops, not because of the brand/technology, but because I think it fundamentally doesn't address the poor design, implementation, and work habits around "traditional" cabinet-style table saws. Also, the SawStop tech does nothing to address kick-back injuries.

More specifically, the SawStop tech assumes unsafe work practices. That's great that they're trying to prevent amputations and I don't fault the effort, but it doesn't address the underlying issue of workers putting themselves in a situation where, if a mistake is made, they run the risk of an amputation. Sort of like closing the barn doors as the last horse is running out.

I just don't see/understand the fascination with cabinet saws. More specifically, I have not yet heard somebody articulate a task where a cabinet saw excels, either for safety or quality of finished product. They (cabinet saws) seem like a "jack of all trades, master of none" machine.

One person's opinion.....

I think a guy has a right to make his money back from the time/effort/implementation of his intellectual property. He offered to license it to the big manufacturers and they turned it down. Profit was more important to them. Since no one would back him, they produced a saw to use the new tech.
Give them credit for doing a good job. They didn't just go with the bare minimum, it's at least as good as the other cabinet saws on the market.

As far as design, they weren't exactly trying to re-invent the wheel, just improve safety. If you get too far away from familiar, you are holding yourself back.

"Unsafe practices" are indeed the cause of all of these injuries, are they not?

I entirely agree with you about wanting to see a return on investment. I think the bad taste comes from him seemingly wanting it both ways. If he was really invested in wanting the broadest possible distribution of the technology, he could have licensed it out at $3/machine, and still done well for himself with the well-made SawStop products. My perception is that the license offer was a token gesture to cover the patent troll behavior.

Regarding unsafe work practices, a lot of that is related to the fundamental design flaws of the cabinet saw, which more or less require the operator to stand directly in the path of kick-back events, and there's a lot of hand-feeding and hand "clamping" where other machines would use a power feeder or pneumatic or eccentric clamps.

As you point out, there's a lot of inertia behind cabinet saws, it's just disappointing that the solution turned out to be more of a bandaid than a cure.

SawStop has said they are giving away the critical patent (840 I think) so anyone can develop a saw using their implementation be it at their own development costs.

 

[jeh]

From my experience, band saw cuts are never as smooth as table saw cuts.  So band saws have an uphill journey to replace table saws.

Hi Packard,

I 100% agree with you that, generally, a table saw will produce a better quality rip cut than a bandsaw.

I will also make the follow-up observation that, depending on what you're doing, the above observation is generally irrelevant, as most projects involve several post-ripping operations such as jointing, planing, routing/shaping, drum/widebelt sanding, etc... So, unless you're processing plywood/sheet goods, the quality of the rip cut will often be irrelevant.

In the case of sheet goods, it has been my experience that a well-tuned track saw with a sharp blade and TSO parallel guides will produce a better cut on plywood than trying to safely handle a sheet of plywood on a cabinet saw. Most cabinet saws lack a scoring blade, whereas many modern track saws have some facility for pre-scoring shot goods with delicate surfaces which are prone to chipping.

I have a colleague with whom I am consulting as he is planning out a semi-retirement shop. He started with the idea that the table saw is the "Heart of the Shop", but once we reviewed his needs and planned work, we could not come up with any operation or task that required a table saw. Break down sheets of plywood? Track saw. Rip wide or narrow strips of solid lumber? Bandsaw, then a finish pass on the jointer/planer, or router table/shaper with offset fence. Precision crosscuts? Miter saw, bandsaw, MFT/3, etc.... Dados and/or dovetails? Freehand router with jigs or router table.

All of which is to say that the traditional cabinet table saw can perform a lot of tasks, but it doesn't perform any of them particularly well when compared to other machines. Again, a sort of "jack of all trades, master of none" that, by the way, occupies a big shop footprint and can be very expensive.

I have a track saw and massive cabinet saw and will add a different opinion to the "jack of all trades, master of none". I would say it is true if you have a cheap saw or are without adequate out feed and possible in feed support. A table saw just cannot be beat for setup time. I can dial in my rip width and know it is spot on every time. By the time the parallel guides are setup and attached to the rail I have already made my cut and if more of the same cut are required I just keep feeding without having to move anything but the wood.
If you are using the Festool fence and have to join to rails you almost always need a 2nd gadget to guarantee the rails parallel. (I believe you are all in on Mafell so at least you do not have that step)

A table saw also exceeds when cutting stock narrower than the width of rail whether single or multiple cuts. I've also never had a tearout issues but that can depend on material being cut.

I do break down large pieces of plywood using a track saw because it is easier to bring the saw to the wood and it is a great way to get a guaranteed straight and clean edge before moving to the table saw. There is not question a track saw excels in the field with the parallel guides, but even then for small pieces a portable table saw will beat it every time.

For dados I have been using an MF 26cc but it makes no sense for most people as an only track saw unless you are willing to live with the shallower cutting capacity when used with a standard blade.

For a "jack of trades, master of none", for those who do not know them, watch some of the radial arm saw videos. Beyond miter cuts it gets sketchy pretty quickly. I have seen an image from a manual showing the ripping of a sheet of plywood vertically (blade is horizontal and facing the user) and it has to be the most (or close to) dangerous cut you can make with any tool. It is crazy how much it can do, but you would have to be nuts to try some of them.

 

[Tom the Remodeler]

SawStop has said they are giving away the critical patent (840 I think) so anyone can develop a saw using their implementation be it at their own development costs.

(snip)

Hi JimH2,

I did see that SawStop was proposing giving a way one of their patents. Is this the patent that was due to expire in a year or so anyways? Not being snarky here, just curious as I haven't looked at exactly how many patents they hold which relate to their technology, and when those patents expire.

Now that there are several other competing technologies on the market which circumvent the SawStop tech/patents, my suspicion is that SawStop's hope is that they can get other brands to adopt the SawStop contact/cartridge system, thereby allowing them to still capitalize on selling more cartridges, as opposed to the contactless/no-cartridge being employed by the other manufacturers.

In terms of nailing a measurement, my normal procedure is to rip a board at the bandsaw to my finished dimension plus 6mm, which allows me to straighten one edge on the jointer (usually taking 1mm - 3mm), then mill to final dimension in the thicknesser. It's not necessarily a "better" process, but I'd contend that a timber surface coming out of the thicknesser will likely have a better surface than off a table saw. But, as with everything woodworking, it really depends on what kind of work you're producing....