Forrest Woodworker II - can it really do it all?

[Chris Padilla]

I was perusing Forrest's site and the claim about the WWII replacing a ripping and crosscutting blade (and combo) blade seems unreal to me but I have ZERO experience with Forrest save for the fact that everyone seems to like them quite a bit.

I could sell my arsenal of blades to pick up 2-3 WWIIs if the claims are true.

What's the skinny from the collective here?

Thanks.....

[mreza Salav]

The answer is: NO.
It's a good blade in all but not excellent in either.
I personally prefer Freud Fusion to that (both are in the same class).

My general experience: if something is supposed to do several jobs at the same time (to replace several things specifically built for them) it will not be as good in either of them.

[Jason Whitaker]

Chris,

I am all about convenience and for me the WWII (along with the Ridge Carbide) is the perfect tool for that work ethic.

e.g. Today i was working on some various projects and was ripping/crosscutting 3/4 ply, 4/4 walnut, 4/4 paduak, some 3/4 MDF and some 5/4 Cherry...and I can honestly say that with a ZCI in I had little to no tearout whatsoever and close to glass smooth edges (rip and cross).

I am sure if I were to get top notch Rip Blades and Crosscut blades I could equal or better those results, but to change out the blade each time for me simply is not worth it.

Just my opinion/observation

p.s. There is also the "Made down the street" appeal/made in US Pride for me as I live only 20 minutes away which perhaps makes me a bit biased.

[Rod Sheridan]

Well Chris, if one blade would do it all, tool suppliers wouldn't bother making hundreds of types.:D

Nothing rips like a rip blade because you need few teeth with very deep gullets.

A cross cut blade is the opposite, it needs many shearing teeth with small gullets.

A combination blade is 80% crosscut, 20% rip.

Don't sell your blade collection yet......Rod.

[Pat Germain]

I have a 40 tooth WWII combo blade. I also have a 60 tooth Freud crosscut blade. I've tried making the same cuts in the same wood with both blades and I typically can't tell the difference. Sometimes the 60 tooth does cut a little cleaner. My WWII rips 8/4 maple, walnut and even hickory quite well. And I'm using an anemic Craftsman contractor saw.

To be fair, my WWII is sharpened by a local wizard who made it cut better than new. If you buy a WWII, I think you'll be very happy with it. It's a great blade that will give you good service for a long time. There are certainly other good blades as well, but I'm very happy with my WWII.

[Jacob Mac]

Not in my experience. And even comparing the WWII to other combo blades the WWII isn't my favorite. I like Freud and Tenryu better. But that is just me, and I am not an expert by any means.

[Doug Shepard]

It's a good blade but doesn't excel at either task. It's almost as good for crosscutting as an 80 tooth blade but not quite. There's no question in my mind that it's not up to the ripping performance of a dedicated 24 tooth rip blade. Sheet stuff comes out better with my 80 tooth as well. The WWII is in my saw at the moment but I dont feel I can leave it in there for everything.

[Jim Becker]

I have been using the Forrest WW-II 40t for my main blades (I have two) for years now including keeping them in service on my slider. They do the majority of my cutting with excellent results, both for general ripping and all cross-cutting. I keep them sharp (I have one to go in for sharpening right now) and they have not let me down. For ripping really thick or thick/rough material, I have a Woodworker II 20 ripping blade.

I do believe it it true that a dedicated, designed for the specific cut blade will give better results than a general purpose blade like the WW-II, but honestly, for me it would be marginal enough to discourage me from constantly having to change my blade.

[Danny Thompson]

Another vote for the Fusion. Incredibly smooth cuts.

[Gary Herrmann]

The only time I take my WWII off the ts is to put on my dado stack. There may be better blades, and I won't argue that a general purpose blade can replace a number of specialty blades, but I get very clean rip and cross cuts with mine.

[Todd Solomon]

I sold a WWII 40-tooth on a saw I sold 5 years ago. I bought dedicated crosscut and rip blades, to replace it for my new saw. These are Guhdo blades, pretty expensive German blades. The Guhdos cut nice, but for most work, the WWII did a better job. The WWII ripped without burning, unless the cut was really thick. I would say for 95% of the cuts I do, the WWII was better than either Guhdo. The Guhdos are a lot noiser than the WWII as well, and one of the Guhdos is a "Piano Plus" quiet blade.

So I've come full circle, and have just ordered a WWII. I'll use it for everything except really thick rips, which I'll use the Guhdo for.

I'm looking forward to mounting it on the saw, to see if it's as good as I remember. I run a Forrest Chopmaster on my miter saw. Same experience, exceptional cuts. I'm a big fan of Forrest blades.

[Bruce Page]

The only time my WWII leaves the arbor is when I have a LOT of ripping to do, or I’m cutting laminates.

[David Christopher]

I have a 80 tooth Tenryu blade and I cut every thing from curly maple to MFD to small green logs I have even cut through a couple of nails and a screw or two and it still cuts like new ....I wouldnt buy any thing else and it was only $ 60

[george wilson]

The Williamsburg Millwork shop had some trouble with Forrest blades shedding teeth,and not from nails. I had a brand new one lose a tooth. When I sent it back I stuck a post it note on it that it had lost the tooth with a few hour's use. It came back fixed like new,resharpened,no charge.

[John Thompson]

I have two Amana 20 T .. 2 CMT 24 T rip blades.. an Infinity General 40 T .. a Infinity Super General 40 T and they all serve different purposes therefore I change them as needed. Yesterday saw 4 blade changes during a 9 hour span which takes a tad over a minute for me to change.

So.. around 5 minutes for 4 changes. Most of us will spend far more time reading post here so it depends where your priorities are I suppose. And one 40 T Combo blade of any make will not do it all as well as dedicated blades IMO. No way..

Sarge..

[Tom Esh]

It's worth noting that the WWII comes in both 40 and 30-tooth flavors. I started with the 40-tooth, but after trying the 30 I like it better. Crosscut is almost as smooth as the 40 (a couple swipes of sandpaper difference), but it rips way better. The 40 can require a substantial feed rate (and pressure) when ripping anything thicker than 4/4 - or you'll get burning.

[Neal Clayton]

I have been using the Forrest WW-II 40t for my main blades (I have two) for years now including keeping them in service on my slider. They do the majority of my cutting with excellent results, both for general ripping and all cross-cutting. I keep them sharp (I have one to go in for sharpening right now) and they have not let me down. For ripping really thick or thick/rough material, I have a Woodworker II 20 ripping blade.

I do believe it it true that a dedicated, designed for the specific cut blade will give better results than a general purpose blade like the WW-II, but honestly, for me it would be marginal enough to discourage me from constantly having to change my blade.

i agree. only use a WW2 and a dado set. didn't bother buying a dedicated ripping blade when i wore my old one out.

[Narayan Nayar]

My TS' arbor has seen three things:

Forrest WWII
Freud Glue Line Rip Blade
Freud Dial-a-Width dado

I'd say my WWII is on the saw about 85% of the time. I won't switch out blades for a few cuts, but if I'm processing a lot of stock off the jointer or planer and have some long rips, I'll switch the blades. You can definitely rip 8' boards with the WWII, but it's a lot easier with a blade designed for that cut.

[Steve Rozmiarek]

This question sure does rile some people up. There are folks that seem to just refuse to spend over $100 on a blade, and it must be crap, although I suspect most of them have never even tried one.

When I got my new saw, I bought a dedicated rip and a crosscut blade. Felder uses that two pins design for the braking, so I thought that I'd try their blades rather than having someone redrill. These Felders are Leitz made, expensive blades. Like Todd said about the Ghudo's, they work well, better than most, and they are noisy. After using them for a while, and being underimpressed, I called Forrest and ordered a 12" WWII. It cuts better, rip or crosscut, than the Felders. Costs half as much as each of them as well. I had a 10" WWII on my previous saw, and it was flawless as well. I cut solid and ply with mine, cross and rip on a sliding table saw. I do use the scoring feature for ply, but it wouldn't be nessecary.

Maybe someone can explain why a dedicated rip blade is better? If you can rip a 12/4 at normal speeds and get just as smooth as a 3/4" board would be, how would a rip blade be better? I don't think there is any rason to be changing blades, and as a result, someone sure could talk me out of a couple very lightly used Felder blades...

[glenn bradley]

The answer is: NO.
It's a good blade in all but not excellent in either.
I personally prefer Freud Fusion to that (both are in the same class).

My general experience: if something is supposed to do several jobs at the same time (to replace several things specifically built for them) it will not be as good in either of them.

I have never gotten the performance out of the WWII that I get out of dedicated blades. It does REALLY good at the shows. Just average at my shop. My 40T Lietz ($50) does just as well but, YMMV; many folks run combo blades for everything. Depends what your doing, eh?

[Tom Veatch]

Chris, in my probably not very well informed opinion, a good combo blade does a better job ripping than a crosscut blade and a better job crosscutting than a rip blade. Based on that:

If you do a lot of "batch" processing it's worthwhile, at least to me, to swap out the blade to match the task - use dedicated rip and crosscut blades.

On the other hand, if the work flow is back and forth, a crosscut or two followed by a few rip cuts, then back to crosscutting, etc., I find it a RPITA to swap blades for one or two cuts, and wind up ripping with a crosscut blade and/or crosscutting with a rip blade. A good combo blade solves that problem. May not be as good for a specific cut as a blade designed for that cut, but 'tis better than a blade designed for the other cut direction.

So, I'd say depends on how your work flows. Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer choice.

[mreza Salav]

This question sure does rile some people up. There are folks that seem to just refuse to spend over $100 on a blade, and it must be crap, although I suspect most of them have never even tried one.

.....
Maybe someone can explain why a dedicated rip blade is better? If you can rip a 12/4 at normal speeds and get just as smooth as a 3/4" board would be, how would a rip blade be better? I don't think there is any rason to be changing blades, and as a result, someone sure could talk me out of a couple very lightly used Felder blades...

I suppose every person who is giving opinion here about WWII must have owned/tried one (I have had both WWII and Fusion). And these people are giving their opinion based on the experience they have had. So maybe it's not appropriate to say they "... seem to just refuse to spend over $100 on a blade, and it must be crap, although I suspect most of them have never even tried one."

And BTW, all these companies (including FWW) that build dedicated blades (rip/cross-cut/etc) don't understand that a single blade can do all the jobs :rolleyes:

[Rick Fisher]

I have always used Freud blades. I picked up a WWII for the first time a few weeks ago.

Its a great blade to use. Its not as good as my Glue line rip blade but much more versatile.

I am pretty impressed with it so far.

[Dewey Torres]

Just for credentials sake I am posting a pic showing I own both the WWII and the Fusion (not an easy pic BTW).

The Freud is IMO the better blade. It has a higher ATB blade angle and a special side grind that is only available with this blade. It is so nice I forgot all about my dedicated cut blades all together. The WWII is also a very nice blade and it is hard to tell the difference unless you have both like I do but again…the Freud wins.

One other thing with the Fusion that you may want to know is that you do not want to take it to just anybody to sharpen it. I am fortunate here in the Springs that I have a guy that does a great job on the fusion (and he ships ...send me a PM if interested) but I would not take it to the first local sharpener in the book for sure!

[Steve Rozmiarek]

I suppose every person who is giving opinion here about WWII must have owned/tried one (I have had both WWII and Fusion). And these people are giving their opinion based on the experience they have had. So maybe it's not appropriate to say they "... seem to just refuse to spend over $100 on a blade, and it must be crap, although I suspect most of them have never even tried one."

And BTW, all these companies (including FWW) that build dedicated blades (rip/cross-cut/etc) don't understand that a single blade can do all the jobs :rolleyes:

Not sure I understand what you're getting at, but as the description of the smilie you used is "sarcastic", I'll assume you took a jab. I should have added "assume" between the "and" and "it", and you need to not quote a portion of my post out of context, but I still stand behind what I intended to say. This type of thread always get a lot of some variation of " I use brand X and it ONLY costs 1/2 of Forrests price!". Nothing wrong with that, it doesn't directly address the question, but I personally am glad to hear that others are making great blades too.

I don't think you should use the companies generation of a product as a deciding factor of the value of a product. As long as there is a market for something, no matter how misguided, someone will make it. Be it saw blades, ultrasonic varmit control, Yugo's, or whatever. In my original example, I bought two blades, when as it turns out, I would have been more happy with the one they didn't even offer. Call me odd, but I suspect that there may have been a desire to pad the profit margin by selling two blades, rather than none...

My opinion is my opinion. Nothing more. Read it if you like, weigh my arguments as you want, then do what you wish with my conclusions. I post my thoughts here, as I'm sure others do, to share ideas and to participate constructively in conversations that add to my enjoyment of this hobby, and allow me to learn without nessecarily requiring first hand experience. If you want to debate my opinions in a good natured manner, great! This forum is a civil forum, lets keep it that way.

BTW, my experiance with a Freud Fusion was dismal, and was the reason behind the aquisition of my first Forrest blade. I have since had other good Freud products.

[Steve Rozmiarek]

Don't want to derail this thread, but I just caught a second of "How its Made" on the TV earlier, and they where in the Leitz factory, making saw blades. The one that caught my eye had a couple big carbide teeth, or rakers or something in the body of the blade. New one to me. Anyone else see that or know why you'd want such a thing?

[scott spencer]

Definining excellence of blade performance seems to be where we disagree most. It really depends on the need and the expectation, not to mention the influence the rest of our cutting system has on a given blade. A general purpose blade is excellent at being versatile by design, but by design, there's no way a general purpose blade (including the WWII) is AS good as a specialized blade in the extreme regions of the task the blade was intended for....that's pretty much a matter of physics, but quantifying the end performance depends somewhat on how you define what those results need to be.

There are pros and cons to every design. The WWII, Fusion, Super General, TS2000, Gold Medal, etc, will all give a glue line edge on rips in fairly thick wood and minimal tearout on crosscuts, and may be "good nuff" for most applications, but 40 tooth blade isn't as efficient at thick ripping as a 24 tooth blade of similar quality... yet it will yield a smoother cut. What's most important to you for a thick ripping application? Your answer should dictate which blade is most appropriate for that application. On the flip side, a 40T blade will have more tearout and rougher edges on a crosscut than a good 60 tooth or 80 tooth blade (a matter of physics again), but the level of tearout might very well be acceptable to you....however, you're likely to find an 80T blade causing burn marks on a 6/4" rip that your 40T doesn't, requiring you to switch the blade for that task.....and again, which blade best suits your needs and preferences is the correct blade to use.

[mike johnston]

Wow is this timely. Yesterday I took 5 blades to be sharpened, and since I live about 40 miles from the shop, I called ahead of time to see if they could sharpen one of my blades while I waited. They told me that could be done. So when I arived at said shop I handed them my beloved wwII and said this is the one I would like sharpened now. To which he replied no way, it's missing several teeth, and they couldn't get to that right away. I knew it was getting dull but I didn't see the missing teeth. Despite needing dentures it is still a very nice blade.
Mike

[Tom Esh]

Don't want to derail this thread, but I just caught a second of "How its Made" on the TV earlier, and they where in the Leitz factory, making saw blades. The one that caught my eye had a couple big carbide teeth, or rakers or something in the body of the blade. New one to me. Anyone else see that or know why you'd want such a thing?

To square up the bottom of a non-through cut (groove).

[Sonny Edmonds]

Short answer is "No."

I am and have always come back to being, a dedicated purpose blade user.

Universal blades are like the universal tires for motorcycles back in the 1960's, can't do anything well. Including holding air.

If it is sold hard, there is something basically weak behind it. Glitz and shiny stuff does not always equate to performance where the grain meets the steel.

I use Industrial Quality blades in an Industrial Quality saw. My shop has tools, not toys. ;)

[mreza Salav]

My opinion is my opinion. Nothing more. Read it if you like, weigh my arguments as you want, then do what you wish with my conclusions. I post my thoughts here, as I'm sure others do, to share ideas and to participate constructively in conversations that add to my enjoyment of this hobby, and allow me to learn without nessecarily requiring first hand experience. If you want to debate my opinions in a good natured manner, great! This forum is a civil forum, lets keep it that way.



Yes, everybody has the right to express their opinion/experience, no doubt about it. What I said **politely** was that *it may not be appropriate* to say most of those who are expressing their opinion here may not have tried/owned the blade in question. It kind of questions whether they have the right to express any opinion here. You own WWII and liked it a lot, I have owned it and wasn't as impressed. We can agree to disagree whether it is excellent at all cases or not, without each other of lying or other things.

[Mike Robbins]

The 30T WWII TK blade is probably as close as it gets to one blade that can do it all. I've ripped lots of 8/4 stock with it and it cuts without burning or drama with a moderate feed rate on my Ridgid 3660. Rips are glue-up ready clean, and crosscuts are 'clean enough'. If the end grain isn't visible, they're ready to go for whatever joinery without sanding. If they're visible, I'd be sanding anyway no matter how clean the cut was to ensure it took finish predictibly.

It sits in my saw about 90% of the time, and I could probably use it for everything if it weren't for the fact that I'm a sucker for a good deal and have 24T and 80T freud blades (the 'craftsman profession' version of the avantis) that I got dirt cheap on sale + c'man club coupons with sears gift cards from my discover cashback. Still haven't used the 24T on anything yet, but the 80T gets regular work in plywood.

[Steve Rozmiarek]

Here is a photo of the side raker blade I was wondering about. I guess its a rip. The slots in the body contain the carbide teeth.

http://usa.felder-gruppe.at/admin/upload/shop/3182_adetail_big.jpg (http://usa.felder-gruppe.at/?page=shop_node&node=3571&PHPSESSID=7f0ae9189db37800ec6e4413f9141f91)

Scott has a good point about what each of us consider a good cut. I'd like to know how everybody elses criteria compare.

I'm looking for the smoothest cut, no burning, and very little tearout. Speed is not that important to me, and I usually use a backer board if I am crosscutting for a permanant edge, so while I want no tearout, I will use alternate methods to completely eliminate if required. BTW, no zero clerance insert yet. Working on that.

[Greg Narozniak]

I started out with a Forrest WW2 and it worked well, I later added a LU84 and it cut just as well for less than half the price. I have not tried the Freud Fusion but I have yet to read a bad thing about it.

Forrest is a great blade but there are other choices that will work just as well. the LU84, WW2, Ridge Carbide, Tenru, Fusion, etc, do an amazing job for all general cutting. As others have said unless your ripping a ton of material where a dedicated rip blade would benefit you.

[John Thompson]

Steve, that blade picture you posted is a 20 T rip blade made for gang cutting just as my Amana 20 T blades for around $60. For stock over 2" and over 8/4 for that matter your rips can be feed faster without resistance on a rip blade with fewer teeth which allows more gullet space to remove waste. A good rip blade will have flat tooth grind as opposed to ATB as a cross-cut or combo.

My 20 T blade will rip faster than my rip blade with 24 T. The 24 T will rip faster than my 40 T General with ATB at a 20* grind. The General wil rip faster than my 40 T Super General with 30* ATB grind and double side grind like the Fusion. They all have a specific purpose depending on number of teeth.. type of grind.. angle of grind.. gullet space.. etc. etc. as Knotscott mentioned.

If you don't do a lot of ripping in thick stock a 40 T will work fine if you take your time and or looking for a smooth cut. But.. someone who uses a 20 T blade usually has thick stock.. lots of it and smooth is not a corcern as you rip 1/8" over and take it to the jointer for a 1/16" pass on each side which is smoother than Any blade is going to make.

I ripped 2000 linear feet of hickory several months ago for a client that had air dried it. I would not consider using a 40 T Super General with 30* ATB and double side grind. Nor would I consider the 40 T General with 20* ATB grind. Just too slow and can't handle thick stock without burn and resistence. Those blades are made to leave a smooth cut but jsut aren't designed to remove waste as well as a dedicated rip blade.

If I were to use but one blade.. I would probably opt for a 30 T with standard ATB design with moderate angle but not radical like the Fusion or Super General. Those 30* angles are just not a good compromise for ripping. So.. we all have our preferences based on cost.. our own needs and work-flow.. don't like to change blades which takes little time IMO.. etc. etc..

Again.. can one blade do it all? Probably.. Can one blade do it all well? Probably not and in my own experience.. definitely not.

Sarge..

[David Keller NC]

Chris - Just my $0.02. My answer to your question is: It depends.

If your work flow in the shop is a bit like mine then my answer is "yes" - generally, that involves jointing a board's face, running it through a planer, ripping it to width on the TS, jointing that edge with a handplane, and then cross-cutting it for the parts that I need. In other words, in any given hour in the shop, the TS gets used constantly as a back-and-forth between rips and crosscuts.

This used to be an incredible pain, because I was switching the rip blade (a Freud) and the cross-cut (also a Freud) constantly.

I can't say that the Forrest WWII was the only reason for this, but it now stays in my saw 100% of the time. I am considerably more efficient in this mode, though the Forrest is a bit slower than my Freud rip blade.

And generally, because the surface characteristics of the cuts are not acceptable to use off the machine (mainly because of inappropriate tool marks and I don't sand anything), everything gets at least a swipe with a hand-plane any way. But having said that, if I was building shop cabinets, or utility stuff, I'd use the cuts right off of the saw - it's that good.

Mostly, my Freud blade now sits quitely in its case. The only exception is when I know I"ve got to rip 400 linear feet of a stack of lumber, and then I might change it out, but sometimes not even then.

[Tom Walz]

Forrest WWII has a very narrow side clearance and a unique ground shoulder that make it an excellent blade for getting smooth cuts. However the very narrow side clearance allows the cut wood fibers to spring back and rub against the steel blade even with the ground back shoulder. This rubbing and the heat thus generated makes it largely unsuitable for sustained cutting in a production environment. However Forrest targets hobbyists, artisans, craftspeople and similar who typically do not do sustained cutting and there the blade performs very well.

Forrest blades give beautiful cuts in shows because the Forrest folks have gone to a lot of trouble to fine tune the saws, practice cutting, select the best woods and generally do everything they can to make their product look good. Personally I think that is to be expected.

A rip blade will give you a square top which will be stronger and stay sharp much longer.
A rip blade will also have a greater side clearance so that you can feed more material, faster and longer without generating as much heat. Less heat means longer blade life and cleaner blades.

[Tom Walz]

Dear Steve Rozmiarek:

Many of those special blades are all that someone else uses. Woodworking is an art at any level. Different artists prefer different tools for different versions of the same tool.

The tool you show is a “strob” saw. It is pronounced the same as strobe but it is named after the Weyerhaeuser engineer who invented it and his name was stroblinger.

The inserts are strobs. They help keep the saw blade centered in the cut and the move saw dust out of the cut.


Tom Walz

[Gene Howe]

Aw Heck. Just buy another saw.;)

[Doug Miller 303]

I tend to agree with what most people here have said. My Paw uses a WWII for most of his cutting, and really likes it. Only takes it out when there is a risk of hitting a nail, or plywood.

I personally use a CMT, and I really like it. I don't think it is as nice as the Forrest, but I run the risk of hitting nails far too often to spend the $$$.

The only thing I would disagree with the others is the Freud. I've had quite a few, (one in the table saw) and probably won't buy any more. From what I've seen, the quality control has gone down hill fast. And, I also wonder if they actually do any real world testing of their products. Never use a 12" Freud miter saw blade, it is not stiff enough to make straight cuts in crown molding. Trust me, I've got a brand new $80 blade that sits around collecting dust.

Doug

[Mark Singer]

If you are going to plane , sand or scrape the wood after it leaves the saw, the smoothness is not too much of an issue. There are many good blades for sale, the WW II is certainly a good one. If I am just ripping I will usually change to a 24 tooth rip blade . The surface leaving the blade is always planed or jointed before boards are joined.

[Steve Rozmiarek]

Dear Steve Rozmiarek:

Many of those special blades are all that someone else uses. Woodworking is an art at any level. Different artists prefer different tools for different versions of the same tool.

The tool you show is a “strob” saw. It is pronounced the same as strobe but it is named after the Weyerhaeuser engineer who invented it and his name was stroblinger.

The inserts are strobs. They help keep the saw blade centered in the cut and the move saw dust out of the cut.


Tom Walz

Thanks for the info Tom,

[Dewey Torres]

Forget what is written here and do me a favor!

Send me your address and I will send you my Fusion and one of my WWII's

You have to agree to send them back but at least you will see what you are (or not) missing and draw you own dog gone conclusions!

I pay to ship them to you and you pay to ship them back... no rush.

deal???

[Bill Stoffels]

Chris,
I did a side by side comparison of about 5 blades the two that were exceptional in my opinion were the forrest and the Freud.
I still have both but for the $$$$ Freud was real hard to beat.
Just my opinion.
No blade does it all !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Chris Padilla]

Good stuff, Folks. I guess it was about time for me to add some thoughts.

I've always been one to change between rip and crosscut blades and it really isn't *that* big of a deal but I was just wondering what people really thought about Forrest.

I have mostly CMT blades and lately, I've not been too happy with them but you know what, I think the suckers need SHARPENED!! LOL...shocking, I know. :D

I also picked up some Freud blades (Glue Line Rip, 12" crosscut for the miter box) and they've done all right. I noticed some chipping on my Freud Glue Line rip so I'm not too happy about that. I know I didn't bang the blade against anything so I'm wondering about the quality of the carbide on it.

The 12" Freud blade on the miter box has done well for me (96-tooth) and I've even been using it on my TS for the extra height.

I finally found a local sharpening service that is open on Saturdays and I'm going to send them a few of my blades and PRAY they do a good job. I wasn't liking having to send my blades out to some sharpening service (like Forrest) so I really hope this local outfit is as good as they claim on their website! Cross your fingers! :D :D

[Todd Solomon]

Good stuff, Folks. I guess it was about time for me to add some thoughts.

I've always been one to change between rip and crosscut blades and it really isn't *that* big of a deal but I was just wondering what people really thought about Forrest.

I have mostly CMT blades and lately, I've not been too happy with them but you know what, I think the suckers need SHARPENED!! LOL...shocking, I know. :D

I also picked up some Freud blades (Glue Line Rip, 12" crosscut for the miter box) and they've done all right. I noticed some chipping on my Freud Glue Line rip so I'm not too happy about that. I know I didn't bang the blade against anything so I'm wondering about the quality of the carbide on it.

The 12" Freud blade on the miter box has done well for me (96-tooth) and I've even been using it on my TS for the extra height.

I finally found a local sharpening service that is open on Saturdays and I'm going to send them a few of my blades and PRAY they do a good job. I wasn't liking having to send my blades out to some sharpening service (like Forrest) so I really hope this local outfit is as good as they claim on their website! Cross your fingers! :D :D

Chris,

Let me know how they do on the sharpening, some of my blades are due as well. I'm in San Jose, what's their name and city?

Todd

[Chris Padilla]

Chris,

Let me know how they do on the sharpening, some of my blades are due as well. I'm in San Jose, what's their name and city?

Todd

http://www.sharpeningmechanics.com/ They're in SJ. I'm heading there at 9 am this Saturday to drop some blades off. Hopefully I can pick them up the following Saturday...at 9 am.... :)

[scott spencer]

Chris - You're close enough to Scott Whiting in AZ that shipping shouldn't be cost prohibitive....especially if you have more than one blade to send. I've read nothing but positive comments about his ability and service.

I took my Forrest to a local sharpening service once.....it cut well afterwards, but they took an awful lot of carbide off for one sharpening. It won't happen again.

[Chris Padilla]

Thanks, Scott. The local guy gets ONE chance. :)

[Paul Johnstone]

This question sure does rile some people up. There are folks that seem to just refuse to spend over $100 on a blade, and it must be crap, although I suspect most of them have never even tried one.
...

I don't think anyone is saying that.

You actually end up spending more on dedicated blades. My crosscut blade was around 90 and my ripping blade 40-50.

It's all a personal preference. I like seperate blades, because to me, there is a difference. I don't mind spending about 40 seconds to change blades when I need to.

Some people think the convienence of a combo blade is well worth the compromises made in blade design. Others don't think there is a compromise in performance. That's fine. This is all a matter of personal preference, nothing to get upset about. I don't think anyone said that the Forest blade was crap, they just liked dedicated blades better.

[Brian D Anderson]

So this has me wondering. Would there be a market for a saw that has some type of quick change blade mechanism? Or can you have a saw with two arbors and two blades that you can raise independently? Hmmmmmm?

Or like was mentioned above, should you just buy two saws? :D We should start a new trend . . . every woodworker should have two cabinet saws back to back to be "cool". :D (regardless of how much room you have in your one car garage/shop ;))

-Brian

[Steve Rozmiarek]

So this has me wondering. Would there be a market for a saw that has some type of quick change blade mechanism? Or can you have a saw with two arbors and two blades that you can raise independently? Hmmmmmm?

Or like was mentioned above, should you just buy two saws? :D We should start a new trend . . . every woodworker should have two cabinet saws back to back to be "cool". :D (regardless of how much room you have in your one car garage/shop ;))

-Brian


Brian, its been done. Google Oliver dual arbor. Dual 5hp motors, quick change, massive amouonts of cast iron, and in this market, cheap.

Can't find a good photo easy or I'd post one, trying to avoid getting busted for not working on this stupid spreadsheet. The boss is a PAIN:D!

[Brian D Anderson]

Brian, its been done. Google Oliver dual arbor. Dual 5hp motors, quick change, massive amouonts of cast iron, and in this market, cheap.

Can't find a good photo easy or I'd post one, trying to avoid getting busted for not working on this stupid spreadsheet. The boss is a PITA:D!

Right after I posted that, I kind of figured that like most ideas I've had . . . it's probably been done already. :D

[JayStPeter]

I'm pretty lazy about changing blades. The WWII is on my saw most of the time. I have a dedicated ripping blade that goes on for two reasons, either I'm ripping > 5/4 or I want a flat bottom groove cut. I have a dedicated crosscut blade that does a great job, but there is really no reason to put it on. Sure, there might be blades that give a "better" cut, but there is rarely a reason I want/need a better cut. If the cut shows, it'll get planed or sanded anyway. If not, it's almost always good enough for a glue joint.
About 5 years ago, I tried some less expensive blades for a second blade. Wound up getting a 2nd WWII eventually.

[Dewey Torres]

Sharpening service if local does not work:

http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=103846

[Tom Walz]

My pleasure, Sir.

I was going to write much more but the day sort of got away from me.

Strob saws can be used as gang saws and that is currently the application where they are most used. Edger saws have largely become guided and you can’t use strobs with guides.

We have more saw blade info at
http://www.carbideprocessors.com/tech_saw_blade_index.htm (http://www.carbideprocessors.com/tech_saw_blade_index.htm)

I was going to write another book but decided to put the info up article by article here. It is easier for me and more accessible for anyone interested. Besides research is much more fun than writing.

[Ed Brady]

This has certainly been an interesting thread and while I have not read every word I did not notice comments about the virtues of thin kerf blades. The latest issue of Fine Woodworking had a piece about the advantages of narrow (3/32) kerf blades especially with low powered saws like mine (a Shopsmith). Based on that and what I have read here I am thinking of a 3/32 30 tooth WWII. I do mostly ripping on the table. By the way I was looking at prices and feedback on the Amazon site and for what it is worth buyers love the WWII blades. Also, FYI the standard (.125) 40 tooth WWII is $77.00 at Amazon right now.

I'd appreciate any feedback on my logic for the 30 tooth blade or suggestions for an alternative.

Thanks

[Steve Rozmiarek]

This has certainly been an interesting thread and while I have not read every word I did not notice comments about the virtues of thin kerf blades. The latest issue of Fine Woodworking had a piece about the advantages of narrow (3/32) kerf blades especially with low powered saws like mine (a Shopsmith). Based on that and what I have read here I am thinking of a 3/32 30 tooth WWII. I do mostly ripping on the table. By the way I was looking at prices and feedback on the Amazon site and for what it is worth buyers love the WWII blades. Also, FYI the standard (.125) 40 tooth WWII is $77.00 at Amazon right now.

I'd appreciate any feedback on my logic for the 30 tooth blade or suggestions for an alternative.

Thanks

Yikes Ed! You sure you want to open that thin kerf can o worms?;) I have an opinion on them, but it was formed due to one blade, so lets just say all of my blades are NOT thin kerf now.

[Chris Padilla]

Too late, Steve!! Thin kerf is good for underpowerd saws and there really isn't a need for them on a typical cabinet saw. On typical cabinet saws, one actually wants the thicker-bodied blade for stability purposes and for heat dissipation. Also, there is more blade to braze the carbide to and the carbide is larger so potentially longer lasting. Just look at any larger commerical blades...they do not use "thin-kerf" because they simply wouldn't last....

For special purposes or cutting thin grooves/dadoes, I could see the need for a thin-kerf on a cabinet saw but I don't think it would perform well over time with moderate to heavy use on such a saw.

:)

[Al Willits]

I wonder how much of how well a blade performs, is the users input, we/some/? tend to develop a style and method of use and possibly different blades will perform differently for different people, so maybe that blade that works well for you might not for me?

Also what kind of work working your doing would make a difference, having to make many pieces/cut all alike would make changing blades not much of a big deal, single piece work and multiple cuts might make a combination blade easier to deal with.

I'm not sure what kind of saw makes for a 20 second change out, but mine that's several minutes at least, and considering I am doing piece work right now, my WW2 stays in for the most part.

I'll change over to a 80 tooth Freud blade for plywood, and if I was going to go a lot of cutting on wood I suspected may have hidden objects in it, I'd use one of the cheaper 24 tooth blades I have.

I have several other blades and I'll use them as needed, for me each blade does something different and I try to remember which does what, but for general purpose, the WW2 does just fine.

Never tried the fusion, may have to next blade I buy

Al

[scott spencer]

This has certainly been an interesting thread and while I have not read every word I did not notice comments about the virtues of thin kerf blades. The latest issue of Fine Woodworking had a piece about the advantages of narrow (3/32) kerf blades especially with low powered saws like mine (a Shopsmith). Based on that and what I have read here I am thinking of a 3/32 30 tooth WWII. I do mostly ripping on the table. By the way I was looking at prices and feedback on the Amazon site and for what it is worth buyers love the WWII blades. Also, FYI the standard (.125) 40 tooth WWII is $77.00 at Amazon right now.

I'd appreciate any feedback on my logic for the 30 tooth blade or suggestions for an alternative.

Thanks

The 30T TK WWII on my former 22124 was a match made in heaven for hardwoods. It cut darn near as cleanly as the 40T, but loafed through thick stuck much easier....nearly as easily as my 24T TK FTG rippers, but much cleaner. A good TK was a blessing in thicker materials for a smallish saw.

[Steve Rozmiarek]

Just read in the new FWW mag that t/k blades are all new designs or something. Haven't actually read the story yet...