Another Dumb Bandsaw Question

[John Mark Lane]

Sorry...but I'm honestly puzzled by this.

It looks like the Rikon bandsaws have the slot in the table for changing the blade running back toward the side of the table where you would strand (well, I guess some people call it the front of the saw?). In other words, running parallel to the direct the blade faces. Whereas other saws have the slot running off to the right.

I've seen reference to there being a problem with installing fences on the Rikon. This has to be the reason. Right?

So why in the world would they do that?

Mark

[glenn bradley]

I suppose that is the reason. It is easier to get larger blades off if the slot runs toward the front but, the fence would have to be designed for this. Is the Rikon fence not good or not designed correctly for this type of table?

Hmmm, I went looking at their 14 and 16 that come with a fence. Both seem to take this into account. I do see the standard 14" does not come with a fence and certainly an aftermarket may not take the design into consideration. If I was buying a saw that I was going to plan to add aftermarket stuff to I would be inclined to get a Delta (or clone) 14". There are tons of aftermarket goodies for those saws. Of course by the time you buy a bunch of them you could just buy a saw that comes better equipped? Man, I am rambling; sorry.

P.s. my small Delta BS slot runs in line (one piece trunnion) and my larger Grizzly BS slot runs perpendicular( split trunnion).

[John Mark Lane]

Thanks for the response, Glenn. The Rikon stock fences do account for this, with the rail ending just shy of the slot. But the ability to handle wider blades doesn't appear to be a logical explanation of why they put the slot that way. For example, the Rikon 10-325, the saw I am most tempted by, handles a maximum 3/4 inch blade. But the Jet 16, which is in many ways its closest competitor, takes a 1 1/2 inch blade. Similarly, the Laguna LT14 takes a 1 inch blade, and like the Jet, the slot is perpendicular to the blade.

Really, my question is not whether the stock fence works around the issue. The question is, why in the world put the slot facing that way at all? I've removed and installed quite a few band saw blades over the years (albeit in Delta 14's and clones), and I can't imagine any reason for this.... What is Rikon thinking?

[bob hertle]

Generally bandsaws with double or split table trunnions have the blade slot exiting the side of the table. Machines with large single trunnions have the slot coming out the front. One could argue that one trunnion system is superior to the other, but both have their strengths and weaknesses. Blade change may be harder with wide blades on the side exit type. Front exit necessitates split fence rail, or unsupported right side of a continuous rail. We could go on and on, just like Ford vs. Chevy!

Regards
Bob

[Carroll Courtney]

I would think that having the entrance for the blade in the front is alittle on the riske side.Say you just installed the blade and you want to check to see if the blade is in the middle of the wheels(doors open) and then the blade comes off the wheel traveling towards the operator.:eek:Just a thought---Carroll

[John McClanahan]

The slot on my 12" Craftsman faces the feed end (front). I have to remove the fence rail to change blades. The rail mounts are slotted, with wing bolts, so its not a big deal.

John

[Van Huskey]

Bob has a lot of the answer in his post. I have used BS with the slot leading out both ways and to me it is a wash, you have to make the right hand turn with the blade somewhere. In all honestly as long as they have designed the saw/fence interaction correctly I would rather have the blade slot coming out behind the fence, when turning the corner with a wide blade there is less stuff to catch at the fence and you can see the entire process, back in the throat you can't. It would not effect my bandsaw choice as long as I could confirm either from users or myself that you don't have any issues changing out the widest blade the saw will tension correctly (ie I wouldn't worry if a cast 14" saw had issues with a 3/4" blade since they can't tension one properly anyway).

[george wilson]

I saw an old 20" bandsaw,a Yates American,with the slot coming out the front. I wouldn't like that at all,since I am always doing small work. The strips would fall into the slot. Of course,there is a throat plate,but thin strips would still be a pain.

[Curt Harms]

The blade changes are super easy, far better than the '90 vintage 15" grizzly I had previously. The blades go straight on and straight off, no twisting around the guides etc. After-market fences would require some creativity. You'd need to find a way to mount the fence on one half the table with enough room to twist and remove the blade on the other half, or move/remove the fence mounting mechanism.

[John Mark Lane]

Generally bandsaws with double or split table trunnions have the blade slot exiting the side of the table. Machines with large single trunnions have the slot coming out the front. One could argue that one trunnion system is superior to the other, but both have their strengths and weaknesses. Blade change may be harder with wide blades on the side exit type. Front exit necessitates split fence rail, or unsupported right side of a continuous rail. We could go on and on, just like Ford vs. Chevy!

Regards
Bob


Thanks for the reply, I'm trying to follow this (old, slow brain). So you're using the term "side" to refer to the right side if you're standing feeding material toward the blade, right? That seems to be the standard terminology in the BS world, if I'm understanding it right. I tend to call that the "front", because as I walk toward the bandsaw the "back" is the part up against a wall.

Anyway, if I'm getting this, a saw like the Jet steel saws, which have "side" exit slots, would have a double or split trunion? Whereas a saw like the Rikon would have a single trunion?

If there's no real inherent advantage to one trunion design over the other (I'm assuming each being a well built trunion of its type), then the only issue is the ease of blade changes?

In that case, again, I just don't understand why anyone would design a BS with the blade coming out the "front" (toward the rail)? I guess the idea is blade changes might be slightly easier ... if you have no fence rail, or if you take the rail off. Or if you have a rail like the stock Rikon rail, which only goes halfway across the front of the table.

But as Curt points out, that design seriously limits the ability to use any afternarket fence systems.

I'm still a bit puzzled by this.

Mark

[John Mark Lane]

.... In all honestly as long as they have designed the saw/fence interaction correctly I would rather have the blade slot coming out behind the fence, when turning the corner with a wide blade there is less stuff to catch at the fence and you can see the entire process, back in the throat you can't....


Van, when you say "coming out behind the fence", do you mean like the Rikon design -- that is, having the blade come out in a slot toward the fence rail? I'm having a hard time following all the terminology people are using here. Do you prefer the Rikon approach, and is that because the blade comes straight out, with less to get in the way? Is that it?

[John Mark Lane]

The blade changes are super easy, far better than the '90 vintage 15" grizzly I had previously. The blades go straight on and straight off, no twisting around the guides etc. After-market fences would require some creativity. You'd need to find a way to mount the fence on one half the table with enough room to twist and remove the blade on the other half, or move/remove the fence mounting mechanism.


Curt -- how happy are you with the stock Rikon fence system? Since it seems like you are largely limited to that fence/rail, I think it needs to be pretty darn good to justify choosing the Rikon over a saw with a "side" exit. FWIW, I plan to use the BS about 70% for resawing (hardwoods, but not gigantic pieces...).

Thanks,

mark

[Curt Harms]

Curt -- how happy are you with the stock Rikon fence system? Since it seems like you are largely limited to that fence/rail, I think it needs to be pretty darn good to justify choosing the Rikon over a saw with a "side" exit. FWIW, I plan to use the BS about 70% for resawing (hardwoods, but not gigantic pieces...).

Thanks,

mark

John, I did some mods to the stock fence. Here's the thread (http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?t=87611&highlight=Rikon+fence) The factory issue knobs and bolts that hold the fence to the "stub" were cheesy so I replaced them with T bolts & larger knobs. Is the Rikon fence a Laguna driftmaster fence? Clearly not. But it does what I need it to do. I've seen threads--I don't remember where-- about people who have spaced after market fences about 1" away from the table on one side and have a 1" gap on the other half of the table so there's room to get the blade off without touching the fence mounting mechanism. You'd lose 1" of fence past the blade but I doubt that would be an issue. I change blades pretty frequently so quick and easy blade change is a real plus.

[Van Huskey]

Van, when you say "coming out behind the fence", do you mean like the Rikon design -- that is, having the blade come out in a slot toward the fence rail? I'm having a hard time following all the terminology people are using here. Do you prefer the Rikon approach, and is that because the blade comes straight out, with less to get in the way? Is that it?

Correct like the Rikon design. My point is that you have to turn the blade 90* at some point to get it out, either while it is still in the throat (Jet) OR between the table and the fence rail (Rikon) given the option I think it is easier to turn the blade when you can see every obstacle (fence rail and table) versus when the view is partially obstructed when it has to be turned in the throat. The reality is this would be WAY down on my list of determining criteria for a band saw, as long as a particular saw didn't have problems removing (or installing) a blade it could tension. I have seen people post in the past about saws that were a pain to get the widest blade they were listed as being able to use on and off BUT those blades were always wider than I thought the saw was actually able to tension properly. For cast 14" saws and most 14" steel saws I see 1/2" blades as a maximum where I feel comfortable they will tension the blade correctly without too much deflection, this would also include a thin (below .022") 5/8" blade as well.

[John Mark Lane]

Van, as it turns out, your reason for liking the Rikon design is apparently consistent with the company's own thinking. I was wondering what their reasoning was, so I emailed them. I just picked one of the email addresses they list on their website, and wrote:

I’ve been trying to get an answer to this question on the forums, but coming up short. Decided I’d try the direct approach.

On your bandsaws, the slot for changing the blade comes toward the “front” of the saw (parallel to the blade). Most seem to have it perpendicular to the blade. Your saws would seem to present problems for aftermarket fence systems. Why in the world would you design a saw like that?

Mark


I got a response less than 12 hours later, which I quote below (with permission):

Hello Mark,

Simply put, we do not design for the aftermarket, they design to us. If we did there wouldn’t be an “after” market. We also find that changing blades on tables with perpendicular slots troublesome. All too often the blade will get pinched in the lower guide system of that style bandsaw.

If you dig deeper into the forums I am sure you will find threads praising the in-line slot design.

Regards,
Rod Burrow
Vice President
Tech Support/Customer Service

RIKON Power Tools Inc.
877-884-5167

I think it's pretty impressive that the company is so responsive. It's consistent with my experience a month or so ago, when I called to get some details on a couple of their machines. Someone got right on the phone, took measurements for me, and was very helpful.

Anyway, now at least I know what the reason is for the design. Thanks to all for the replies.

Mark

[bob hertle]

Thanks for the reply, I'm trying to follow this (old, slow brain). So you're using the term "side" to refer to the right side if you're standing feeding material toward the blade, right? That seems to be the standard terminology in the BS world, if I'm understanding it right. I tend to call that the "front", because as I walk toward the bandsaw the "back" is the part up against a wall.

Anyway, if I'm getting this, a saw like the Jet steel saws, which have "side" exit slots, would have a double or split trunion? Whereas a saw like the Rikon would have a single trunion?

If there's no real inherent advantage to one trunion design over the other (I'm assuming each being a well built trunion of its type), then the only issue is the ease of blade changes?

In that case, again, I just don't understand why anyone would design a BS with the blade coming out the "front" (toward the rail)? I guess the idea is blade changes might be slightly easier ... if you have no fence rail, or if you take the rail off. Or if you have a rail like the stock Rikon rail, which only goes halfway across the front of the table.

But as Curt points out, that design seriously limits the ability to use any afternarket fence systems.

I'm still a bit puzzled by this.

Mark

Mark,
I call the operator position of the bandsaw the "front". Sorry for the confusion! So you are correct that side exit means the right side when standing at the "front" or operators position. I'm a fan of massive single trunnions, but I certainly don't look down on double trunnions. If you look at the higher end saws, you'll see mostly single trunnions with large amounts of bearing area. Look at a DoAll or a Powermatic 81 and you'll see single trunnions with between 35 and 40 square inches of bearing area. Single lockup bolt that locks the table tightly enough to support the massive workpiece weights these saws are designed for. Page forward to todays steel frame Italian saws. The Laguna 16HD, and the 18 inch Resaw Master both use single trunnion designs, as does Agazzani. The double trunnion design also makes it usually more difficult to adjust the lower guides except for the elegant if somewhat complicated Delta 14 design.

To Vans point about having to turn the blade 90 degrees at some point with either design, I submit that if the fence rail standoff is larger than the max blade width, as it should be, there is no need to turn the blade at all on a front exit slot.

Proponents of the double trunnion will say that single trunnions require greater table overhang (cantilever). That is generally true, and the double trunnion allows the use of a somewhat lighter table. The distance from the front of the table to the "true" anchor point (the point where table load is transferred into the machine frame) is the same on both designs.

Did I say we could argue the point just like Ford vs. Chevy? I need to go build something!

Regards
Bob

[Curt Harms]

Bob, you ain't kiddin' about heavy table. Now a 10-325 in a toy compared to what you're talking about (DoAll etc.) but it can be a trick to hold the table and get the first machine screw started. The Rikon 10-325 is single trunion and the trunion doesn't mount in the center of the table. The table won't sit on the trunnion mounting surface by itself, it has to be held. I haven't removed my table often but I have a couple times to fuss with the lower blade guides.

[Ron Blaise]

Sorry...but I'm honestly puzzled by this.

It looks like the Rikon bandsaws have the slot in the table for changing the blade running back toward the side of the table where you would strand (well, I guess some people call it the front of the saw?). In other words, running parallel to the direct the blade faces. Whereas other saws have the slot running off to the right.

I've seen reference to there being a problem with installing fences on the Rikon. This has to be the reason. Right?

So why in the world would they do that?

Mark
I have an 18" Rikon and it would be very difficult to remove the blade to the side. It only takes a couple of minutes to reset the fence anyway. I did modify the original fence with a much better Bosh extrusion so the fence works much better now. I believe I still have an old review here somewhere on the forum that shows the change I made (Rikon 18" Bandsaw review)

[Paul Johnstone]

Curt -- how happy are you with the stock Rikon fence system? Since it seems like you are largely limited to that fence/rail, I think it needs to be pretty darn good to justify choosing the Rikon over a saw with a "side" exit. FWIW, I plan to use the BS about 70% for resawing (hardwoods, but not gigantic pieces...).

Thanks,

mark

I was able to retrofit a Kreg BS fence to mine.
Just used a piece of aluminum angle iron.
Bolted one piece of the angle iron through the threaded holes at the bottom of the table (as the stock Rikon fence mounts)
Now the other surface of the angle iron is perpendicular to the floor.
Attach the Kreg fence (or whatever) to that.
I can easily remove my fence with the threaded knobs (just like the Rikon fence).

[John Mark Lane]

This has been really interesting, to me at least. I've also been reading "The Bandsaw Book" at the same time, and I feel like I'm learning a lot about bandsaws. I had an old Delta 14 for years in my old shop, and never learned this stuff. I appreciate all the responses and info.

As it is, I'm once again leaning heavily toward the Rikon. The Jet 16 (my other choice) is very impressive. But $1,100, and no fence, not quick release blade tensioner, and although both companies have been great in communications, I like the Rikon responsiveness. And the 10-325 can be had for nearly half the price.

Now to watch for another sale (dang-it).

[Dave MacArthur]

John mark (ok, which one do I really use?)--
Last night I was trying to do some resaw, my 20" Agazzani has the slot coming out the front of the bandsaw. Unfortunately, for some reason the right side of the table is not perfectly level with the left side, which made my jointed board ride slightly angled and caused issues. Since this is a thread on that slot, thought I'd post this. I can flex the dang table up to be level with just finger/hand pressure, but can's see how cast iron table top would be 1/32" off. Messed with table mounting etc., but this is a real issue for me and I'll have to post in another thread (unless you want the answer in this thread) on how to deal with that slot causing table planar problems.

[John Mark Lane]

Dave --

I'm not sure I followed that. But either here or in another thread, whatever you prefer, I'd sure like to hear more about it.

BTW, my name is John Mark Lane, and when I registered I was led to believe I have to use my "real name", so I did. My dad is named John Lane, too (as is his dad, and as is my son...many generations of John Lanes). I always went by "Mark". but when I became a lawyer, there's another lawyer -- a rather infamous one -- named Mark Lane, so I started going by "J. Mark Lane". And to this day, many years later, many of my friends call me "JayMark".

Call me anything you like. I respond to just about everything.

:_)

Mark

[Van Huskey]

John mark (ok, which one do I really use?)--
Last night I was trying to do some resaw, my 20" Agazzani has the slot coming out the front of the bandsaw. Unfortunately, for some reason the right side of the table is not perfectly level with the left side, which made my jointed board ride slightly angled and caused issues. Since this is a thread on that slot, thought I'd post this. I can flex the dang table up to be level with just finger/hand pressure, but can's see how cast iron table top would be 1/32" off. Messed with table mounting etc., but this is a real issue for me and I'll have to post in another thread (unless you want the answer in this thread) on how to deal with that slot causing table planar problems.

Dave are you missing the pin that fits in the slot? If so that well may be your problem.

[Myk Rian]

Simply put, we do not design for the aftermarket, they design to us. If we did there wouldn’t be an “after” market.
This sounds like; "Screw everyone. We'll do it our own stupid way. Deal with it". :rolleyes: