Acceptable table saw tolerances?

[Greg Book]

I'm curious what are people's opinions of acceptable table saw tolerances? For example, arbor runout, blade/miter slot parallelism, and blade/fence parallelism. I know 0.000" is ideal, but is 0.005" or 0.010" acceptable?

[Kirk Simmons]

The new SawStop I bought last week showed up with the blade almost 3 mm out of sync with the left miter slot. It was extremely noticeable, and a great disappointment when buying a $3K saw.

However with a digital calibrator and about two hours I managed to get that down to .001 mm. Much better =)

That's all great and wonderful, but it doesn't answer your question. What it really comes down to is what are you willing to accept? I personally feel that anything under .010 is probably pretty good, and unlikely to affect your cuts very much. Once we're talking about such small measurements (under .005) you're starting to approach the limits of what is repeatably measurable with the equipment any rational individual might have on hand.

That being said, on my brand new saw that I'm going to have and use for a very long time I felt it was worth my while to get it as precise as possible. It did take a long time and a lot of screwing around but I think it'll be worth it over the long haul.

[Phil Thien]

I'm curious what are people's opinions of acceptable table saw tolerances? For example, arbor runout, blade/miter slot parallelism, and blade/fence parallelism. I know 0.000" is ideal, but is 0.005" or 0.010" acceptable?

Warning: None of this has anything to do with what MANUFACTURERS say. They don't give a darn what Phil in Milwaukee thinks the min/max values should be. But here are my thoughts...

Arbor runout: Well, measured right below the blade gullet I like to see total runout of .003" or less (thickness of a sheet of paper). That translates into .0006" at the arbor, I guess, if your blade is perfectly flat.

.001" and .002" at the arbor translate into .005" and .01" at the blade, respectively. So I'd say .001" on the arbor would be the most I'd like to see. Modern machining should make it easy to hit better than .001". Typically, these tolerances should be held to "tenths," which is short for ten-thousandths. Again, a manufacturer may not agree with me.

For miter slot parallelism, I'm going with .003" or better again. Once again, thickness of a sheet of paper. .01" would probably cause binding on sleds with two runners. If I saw .005" or .006", I would be disappointed, but I'd try to make it work.

[Jeff Duncan]

Not sure about arbor runout as I've never checked on any of the 5 or so tablesaws I've had. I'll have to check someday just for the heck of it. The remaining 2 are dependent on how much time you want to spend tuning your saw.

I like to set my fence so that it's about the thickness of a sheet of paper out (farther) from the blade at the back than the front.

As far as the blade/miter slot, I just try to get it as close as possible. I use static items to tune it dead on, but really never tried to measure it.

The arbor should run pretty true on a decent saw....doesn't mean it's going to be perfect, but generally good enough for most work. All the other setups have to be done once you have the saw setup in your shop. It doesn't matter if you spend $500 or $5000 on a saw, one bump in a shipping crate can knock all those alignments out. Any piece of equipment you buy, used or new, needs to be setup once you bring it into your shop.
good luck,
JeffD

[Howard Acheson]

>>>> For example, arbor runout, blade/miter slot parallelism, and blade/fence parallelism.

Arbor runout is a non-issue in most cases. It should be minimal.

Blade to miter slot should be minimally 0.003" but most can, and should, get it to 0.001".

Fence to miter slot should by as close to 0.001" as you can get it. However, if you use a Forrest or Freud Fusion blade, kicking the fence out at the back by a couple of thousands is recommended by the manufacturers to minimize burning.

[Van Huskey]

Arbor runout should be .001 or less, gets hard to measure below .001 anyway. The slightest touch can change the reading.

Parallelism both blade to miter slot and fence should be .003 or less, anything above .005 is where the problems start and get significant at .01. Around .01 is where slot to slot variation begins to cause binding with sleds and jigs that use both slots.

[Neal Clayton]

i spent a day last time i cleaned the tables and got a new fence for mine (bout 4 years ago) and got within .002 on everything, i would consider .003 good enough. could probably have spent another few hours getting to .001, but meh....wood doesn't stay within .001 after you cut it so what's the point ;).

[Greg Book]

Thanks for all the replies. This is actually related to the Craftsman 21833 I bought two months ago. The Grizzly hybrid and contractor saw's are on back order for a long long time, so I thought I would take a replacement 21833 and see if it was improved. So far its a lot better.

Runout on the blade (when spinning the blade and keeping the dial indicator at the edge) is about 0.001". Parallelism doesn't appear to change much as the blade is raised and lowered, perhaps 0.008" total difference. And that change happens mainly when its cranked to the stop at full height. It stays parallel within 0.002" at nearly all heights if I crank the handle back a little after raising it. All this is right out of the box too.

I still need to finish assembling it and cut some wood to see if it really is improved, but it seems they fixed some of the QC problems with the latest batch of saws.

[glenn bradley]

I've got blade to miter slot at .001" at 90* and 45*. Fence to miter "about" the same. I say "about" as the face of my fence has a good .003" of deviation in and out long it's surface. I keep waiting for it to be an issue but it is not.

Table surface I have .003" dip or rise at any given point. This required some manipulation; maker states .008" as their tolerance across the surface in any direction. If my run-out is a problem I have not noticed it (and I would) so I cannot speak to dealing with that problem. I have found that once well aligned, I can run TK blades without stabilizers and get glue-ready rips (featherboards and splitters help) and clean cross-cuts (with a sled or my Incras).

[Phil Thien]

Parallelism doesn't appear to change much as the blade is raised and lowered, perhaps 0.008" total difference. And that change happens mainly when its cranked to the stop at full height. It stays parallel within 0.002" at nearly all heights if I crank the handle back a little after raising it. All this is right out of the box too.

That is normal. The mechanism will "torque" when you're all the way at the top. When you hit the top, back it off a little.

[Chad Bender]

Thanks for all the replies. This is actually related to the Craftsman 21833 I bought two months ago. The Grizzly hybrid and contractor saw's are on back order for a long long time, so I thought I would take a replacement 21833 and see if it was improved. So far its a lot better.


Good to hear that this copy ended up better than before. Like I said in an earlier post, my 21833 has been great (once I spent a couple of evenings tweaking the alignment).

The only irritation I've experienced is the right adjustment screw on the fence tends to drift when I move the fence all the way to the right of the rails. The screw position is quite repeatable and I've gotten to the point where I can set it back properly by eye. I got some thread lock to try and keep the screw from moving, but haven't bothered to use it yet.