Back to Back Tablesaws

[Garth Almgren]

Take a look at some of Frank Howarth's videos on YouTube. He has three saws grouped similar to what you're thinking.

And he has stated he doesn't like having them back-to-back - in order to use one saw he has to drop the blade on the other, losing the height setting and thereby negating any advantage of having two saws set up.

[Steve Peterson]

Mr Adams, for me, adjusting the rip fence is something that happens frequently. Often it is set within 6 inches or less of the blade, sometimes much more. I picture you putting them back to back as you say meaning the rip fence on the other saw is always going to be in the way. Now you need to adjust not only the one you are working on but the other as well, hence I said side by side to imply that the two would not interfere with each other.

The fence on my PM66 sticks out the back by around 6". Separating the 2 saws by a foot or more would solve this problem.

Another issue is the miter slots need a cutout in the outfeed table. If the saws are truly back to back, then you would need to cut slots in the factory extension table. Or add a spacer between the saws and cut slots in the spacer.

If I had the space, I would build a 4' by 7' table between the saws to give plenty of flat table space and storage underneath as well.

Steve

[Charles Taylor]

Take a look at some of Frank Howarth's videos on YouTube. He has three saws grouped similar to what you're thinking.

And he has stated he doesn't like having them back-to-back - in order to use one saw he has to drop the blade on the other, losing the height setting and thereby negating any advantage of having two saws set up.

Yessir. I can see that.

I'd probably try this configuration myself, if I had the room. (My contractor saw is disassembled and stored in a cabinet because I don't have room for two table saws.) Maybe I'd come to the same conclusion.

[Jeff Duncan]

Hi Peter, that's exactly how I intend to set them up. Surprisingly, I couldn't find a picture on the internet to demonstrate. The casters and the PM2000 have a sordid history, some of them fail right off the pallet.

I don't think it's surprising at all since it's a much less practical way to set them up. Of course it's personal preference in the end, but I've said it before that I just don't get why anyone would ever want their table saws back to back? Side by side makes so much more sense and gives you a much larger out-feed table/auxilary work surface. Back to back just means your running back and forth to drop blades and move fences all the time.

That said as far as your question of what to check, well as much as you can. You say you have the same saw so you should know exactly how everything is suppose to move and feel. I'd want to go over it with a fine tooth comb and then run some test cuts, and it better be perfect for the money your talking about. I've had 4 tablesaws over the last 20 years and so far have spent less than half of what your talking about, and built a LOT of cabinetry, custom doors etc.. For the price….it had better be perfect.

good luck,
JeffD

[Kent Adams]

And he has stated he doesn't like having them back-to-back - in order to use one saw he has to drop the blade on the other, losing the height setting and thereby negating any advantage of having two saws set up.

The way Frank has his set up is not how I plan on setting them up. He basically has a back to back mirror saw, my blades would be on opposing sides. Not the same thing as I'm asking.

[Garth Almgren]

Something like this?

----------------------------
|              |           |
|              |   TS 2    |
|              |           |
|              ------------|
|-----------               |
|          |               |
|   TS 1   |               |
|          |               |
----------------------------

That would work, if you have the space for it.

[Kent Adams]

Something like this?

----------------------------
|              |           |
|              |   TS 2    |
|              |           |
|              ------------|
|-----------               |
|          |               |
|   TS 1   |               |
|          |               |
----------------------------

That would work, if you have the space for it.

More like this: