TS-75 rip cut with stock blade, 1.75” red oak

[Tom the Remodeler]

Hi [member=82780]ericsink[/member],

When I was using a TS-75, I found the "Universal" blade to generally live up to its name. It would handle ripping thicker hardwoods, albeit at a slower pace than a "Standard" or "Panther" blade.

As stated before, I suggest keeping plenty of extra anti-splinter strip on hand, or just assign some guide rails for "rough" cutting, and reserve a track or two for "mission-critical" tasks where you are relying on the strip to indicate a cut line.

The TS-75 is a great saw, I'm excited to see what you produce with it.  [cool]

 

[ericsink]

I plan to gather a bit more info and then organize what I’ve learned.

It turns out it won’t be feasible for me to repeat the test cut with the 18T blade.  :'(

But, I’ve recently been making some YouTube videos just for fun, and I did one to give a better view of the 2.4-vs-2.6 splinter guard difference we’ve discussed here. If anyone is interested in seeing that, my fledgling and amateurish channel is linked in my sig. As an acknowledgement, the description for the video contains a link to this thread.

 

[Coen]

The panther blade for the TS75 also has a thicker kerf than the normal blades so it will recut your splinter guard.

Bob

That would only be the case if the body of the blade wasn't also thicker.

The only dimension that is important regarding the splinter strip is if kerf minus blade thickness is equal.

The TS 75 "Wood Standard" 18 teeth blade also has a 2.6 kerf just as the 16 teeth "Wood Rip cut" (= Panther) blade has for the TS 75. All the other blades are 2.4 except the blade for steel, which is 2.2
Body thickness isn't specified in the Festool catalog, sadly.

 

[mino]

...
Body thickness isn't specified in the Festool catalog, sadly.

Yup, was neither on the web, or even marked on the blades ..

But at least the web has been fixed:https://www.festool.com/accessory/s...e-cut-saw-blades/wood-standard/493197---210x2,6x30-w18

 

[bobtskutter]

Interesting...
The WOOD UNIVERSAL HW 210x2,4x30 W36 is 1.8mm thick
The Saw blade WOOD STANDARD HW 210x2,6x30 W18 is also 1.8mm thick

Guess that explains why the thicker kerf blade recuts the splinter guard, the edge of the teeth are 0.1mm further away from the plate of the saw blade.

Thanks

Regards
Bob

 

[mino]

..
Guess that explains why the thicker kerf blade recuts the splinter guard, the edge of the teeth are 0.1mm further away from the plate of the saw blade.

To be fair here, the blades wobble is more than that ... so this is not really consequential to the anti-splinter function of the strip. Which is its "as designed" purpose.

But it does remind one that things like properly-calibrated parallel guides are essential for precise cuts .. And that pencil marks aligned to the splinter strip are inherently just approximate as one needs to count with a 0.5 mm (0.02") leeway at best.

 

[Coen]

So it should come with a 0.1mm spacer

 

[Coen]

...
Body thickness isn't specified in the Festool catalog, sadly.

Yup, was neither on the web, or even marked on the blades ..

But at least the web has been fixed:https://www.festool.com/accessory/s...e-cut-saw-blades/wood-standard/493197---210x2,6x30-w18

Ah good. I only checked the 2022 catalog PDF, since that is 100x faster than navigating the Festool website.

..
Guess that explains why the thicker kerf blade recuts the splinter guard, the edge of the teeth are 0.1mm further away from the plate of the saw blade.

To be fair here, the blades wobble is more than that ... so this is not really consequential to the anti-splinter function of the strip. Which is its "as designed" purpose.

But it does remind one that things like properly-calibrated parallel guides are essential for precise cuts .. And that pencil marks aligned to the splinter strip are inherently just approximate as one needs to count with a 0.5 mm (0.02") leeway at best.

I think blade whobble is even more with the Panther blade?

Also noted the 240mm blades for the AP 85 aren't in the catalog anymore.

 

[ericsink]

consequential to the anti-splinter function of the strip. Which is its "as designed" purpose.

I’ve been thinking about this, and it seems like an important thing to remember.  Considering that the splinter guard isn’t really designed to be a reliable reference for measurement, it works fairly well in practice to use it that way, but there are limits.

With a well tuned quality table saw, there is a point where speaking of further precision is silly.  I’ll call it the Silliness Point.  People sometimes disagree about where that point is.  Can a table saw reliably attain precision of 1/1000 of an inch?  I doubt it, but I once saw a couple of guys have a pretty big online argument about that very question.  I commonly see folks mention 1/64 of an inch as the level of precision that is good enough for most woodworking.  I assume that for a table saw, my Silliness Point is somewhere in between those two numbers.

When measuring against the splinter guard, there should be a similar notion of a Silliness Point.  I’m not sure where that point is, but I think it’s an interesting question.  Intuitively, the available precision is not as good as the table saw case.  As [member=61254]mino[/member] points out, the splinter guard isn’t designed for that.

 

[mino]

I’ve been thinking about this, and it seems like an important thing to remember.  Considering that the splinter guard isn’t really designed to be a reliable reference for measurement, it works fairly well in practice to use it that way, but there are limits.

With a well tuned quality table saw, there is a point where speaking of further precision is silly.  I’ll call it the Silliness Point.  People sometimes disagree about where that point is.  Can a table saw reliably attain precision of 1/1000 of an inch?  I doubt it, but I once saw a couple of guys have a pretty big online argument about that very question.  I commonly see folks mention 1/64 of an inch as the level of precision that is good enough for most woodworking.  I assume that for a table saw, my Silliness Point is somewhere in between those two numbers.

When measuring against the splinter guard, there should be a similar notion of a Silliness Point.  I’m not sure where that point is, but I think it’s an interesting question.  Intuitively, the available precision is not as good as the table saw case.  As [member=61254]mino[/member] points out, the splinter guard isn’t designed for that.

Some points of reference /I am a bit of an accuracy junkie due to the way I design stuff/:

The FS/2, freely placed on stock, can be relied to be are accurate to within about 0.2 mm across the length, the extrusions are mostly within 0.1 mm on the shorter lengths *). This is at the reference rib the saw rides on. The back side tends to be a bit more "wavy" than the rib but well within 0.05 mm relative to it, this makes it suitable for referencing. (Still potentially problematic for non-calibratable squares using short rail length as reference).

In practice, with the inherent blade wobble on bearings and the whole saw "freedom" of movement once cams are properly tuned, one can achieve consistent accuracy within the cut itself down to about 0.2 mm (0.01").

Hence a proper placement of the cut, beyond what the eyeball Mark 1 can do, it worthy of consideration. That entails either a calibrated reference in the form of parallel guides or a cross-cut fence. With those, repeatable accuracy within that 0.2 mm error is indeed achievable.

That is, indeed, overkill for natural wood. But a must on many designs from engineered materials which do not include leeways for material movement or inaccuracy.

/mostly written for posterity as you seem more than aware of the concepts ../

*) The "issue" with longer rails is not that they would be more/less straight but that at the longer lengths the elasticity of the material allows the rails to deflect enough for it to matter. The (very strong) anti-slip strips can then "preserve" such a deflection. At about 2000 mm cut length, the technique of the rail placement and securing gets to have a bigger influence than the rail straightness itself. Though it is very much feasible get within 0.2 mm or so, it depends on proper handling.