TS 55 blade in TSC 55k?

[eightball]

This is probably a dumb question but...can I use TS55 blades in the TSC 55k?

Considering an upgrade and trying to weigh all the options. Have more than a few blades for the TS 55.

 

[Willy Eckerslike]

The TSC uses blades with a 1.8mm kerf whilst the TS blades are 2.2mm.  The thinner blades require less power - a good thing in a cordless saw.

The may be issues with the offset of the blade and your splinter guard(s).  I replaced my guards when I got my TSC and haven't used the TS since, so cannot advise.

 

[Cheese]

The TSC 55 K is such a nice saw I'd just stay with the thinner blades it was designed to use. The thicker blades can be used because the riving knife was eliminated but battery runtime will go down, and if you use the dustbag, the bag will have to be emptied more often.

Also, some of the 2.2 kerf blades have the same amount of carbide overhang as the 1.8 kerf blades while other blades do not. This leads to splinter guards being cut to a different dimension.

Here's a 12 tooth rip blade in 1.8 kerf & 2.2 kerf versions. The plate thickness and the carbide insert thickness are different but the distance the carbide overhangs the plate is the same on both blades, .61 mm.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

Here's a 52 tooth alum/plastic blade in 1.8 kerf & 2.2 kerf versions. The plate thickness and carbide thickness are different but the carbide overhang is different on both blades, .66 mm vs .43 mm.

[attachimg=3]

[attachimg=4]

Finally, here's a Festool comparison between the TSC 2.2 kerf vs the TSC 1.8 kerf.

[attachimg=5]

 

[eightball]

Thanks so much for the replies. Greatly appreciated.

Not saying the following is a good idea and would clearly decrease battery life but . . .

Based on the above, am I right that you could exclusively use TS55 blades in a TSC 55K and you'd avoid the rail issue?

 

[Coen]

The TSC 55 K is such a nice saw I'd just stay with the thinner blades it was designed to use. The thicker blades can be used because the riving knife was eliminated but battery runtime will go down, and if you use the dustbag, the bag will have to be emptied more often.

Also, some of the 2.2 kerf blades have the same amount of carbide overhang as the 1.8 kerf blades while other blades do not. This leads to splinter guards being cut to a different dimension.

Here's a 12 tooth rip blade in 1.8 kerf & 2.2 kerf versions. The plate thickness and the carbide insert thickness are different but the distance the carbide overhangs the plate is the same on both blades, .61 mm.

[attachimg=1]

[attachimg=2]

Here's a 52 tooth alum/plastic blade in 1.8 kerf & 2.2 kerf versions. The plate thickness and carbide thickness are different but the carbide overhang is different on both blades, .66 mm vs .43 mm.

[attachimg=3]

[attachimg=4]

Finally, here's a Festool comparison between the TSC 2.2 kerf vs the TSC 1.8 kerf.

[attachimg=5]

Huh what? Even within same kerf width the blades have different overhang??  [blink]

 

[Cheese]

Huh what? Even within same kerf width the blades have different overhang??  [blink]

Ya that surprised me too...I'd think you'd want to maintain the same amount of overhang at least, on the same blade kerf widths.  [eek]

 

[woodferret]

Are those older blades?  I thought they fixed that discrepancy.

 

[Cheese]

Are those older blades?  I thought they fixed that discrepancy.

Ya the older 2.2 kerf blades for the TS 55.

 

[Coen]

Are those older blades?  I thought they fixed that discrepancy.

Ya the older 2.2 kerf blades for the TS 55.

I think he means even older, when the kerf width was also different among TS55 blades

 

[peter halle]

That kerf difference was on the Panter Ripping blade which was wider and thus cut more off the splinter blade.  That was later changed to match the 2.2 mm standard.

Peter