Todays USA today TS article

[Craig D Peltier]

Found this today in the paper, thought some would like to read it
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/manufacturing/2011-02-02-saws02_ST_N.htm

Im wondering if all our TS we have now will ever become worthless. Sell now.
I dont have a sawstop but like the technology.

[Ryan Hellmer]

Interesting article. I like the protected monopoly he has going on, now if he (Gass) can only get the regulators on board... I would love to have one, but I don't have $3,000 for anything right now, let alone a tablesaw that would only replace 1 of the 4 I already have (in which I have a grand total of $700 invested in).

Ryan

[Tony Bilello]

I dont think our table saws will become worthless, but they certainly will be worth less as the flesh eating technology improves and the costs go down. The owner of Saw Stop is an unscupulous business man. Though, I must admit, he makes money at it. He is like an activist pushing his product during a lawsuit. If he is truly concerned in saving fingers, he would not have taken out so many patents so as to make the technology available to him alone.
I have seen many SawStop demonstrations on video and it looks to me that the demo hot dog is moving much slower than most people push a piece of wood through a table saw. Keep in mind that at a slightly faster working speed, you finger will be going through the blade a little faster. Only one tooth on your blade has to travel about 1/2" or so to remove your finger. Does the SawStop work that fast? Can someone here run a hot dog through their SawStop at a normal working speed and post the results?

[Dave Lehnert]

How long is a patent good for, 15 years????. My guess after the patent runs out you will see the safety feature added to many other saws.

[Damion Bevacqua]

I have seen many SawStop demonstrations on video and it looks to me that the demo hot dog is moving much slower than most people push a piece of wood through a table saw. Keep in mind that at a slightly faster working speed, you finger will be going through the blade a little faster

I've wondered the same thing, frankly. Especially after watching the "live finger" demonstration - he slowly slid his finger closer and closer to the blade... Granted, that's more than I would try, but it seems he's playing a dangerous game. What's he going to do if someone loses a finger on a sawstop? That could be a heck of a verdict.

- Damion

[Van Huskey]

5,4,3,2,1...Lock

[Gerald Senburn]

IThe owner of Saw Stop is an unscupulous business man

In what way is he "unscupulous" ?

[Dave Lehnert]

The Sawstop is a great invention that most people are glad to have. Woodworkers are happy to have the choice. They just dislike having the choice made for them I guess. The reason for the debate.

[Todd Bin]

I saw a demo at my local woodcraft where we were all wondering the same thing. What if you fell into the blade. So he swung the hotdog like a bat at the blade. It barely broke the skin of the hotdog.

What if you had a great idea, would you just give it away? I don't necessarily blame the guy for trying to make a buck just like the rest of us. If you compare the sawstop to a comparable table saw like the PM2000 you are basically paying $1000 for the computer and break. Because let's face, it the saw stop on/off switch is not just a switch like on the PM2000; it is a computer.

~Todd

[Victor Robinson]

It's going to be a long time before any mandatory regulations are passed, implemented, and enforced. It's an interesting discussion for folks who like to think about public safety and policy, but most of us probably won't be affected by this drastically during our lifetimes. The first places that would actually see/feel the effects would be schools and production environments (where the saws are purchased and provided by employers or other large entities).

Enjoy your saw and keep making sawdust, regardless of which saw you have.

[Timothy Juvenal]

Definately a clever technology, and one would think it will be the wave of the future, but...

Never used one myself, but my niece has used one, at school I believe, and she told me that particular saw had a tendency to slam on the brake and shut down for no apparent reason. Maybe just a defective sensing unit, IDK. THe website says that it only takes 5 minutes to replace the $69 single use brake and blade. That's a chunk of change if the thing keeps going off half-cocked.

But you know, the Model T Ford had a lot of issues starting out, but the technology still supplanted the horse and wagon for the majority of us.

Timothy "you gonna eat that hot dog?" Juvenal

[Gerald Senburn]

comparable table saw like the PM2000 you are basically paying $1000 for the computer and break

I think the price difference between a PM2000 and the SS is only like $200.

[Michael MacDonald]

I am enjoying this thread. I think I will go back to the archived circa 2006 discussions on the SS technology and re-read them all...

[Van Huskey]

I think the price difference between a PM2000 and the SS is only like $200.

I think an objective review of the SS line would have the New Uni and PM2000 more comparable to the ICS than the PCS or at least somewhere in the middle. I have always seen the brake as costing 600-700 dollars when you do your best to compare apples to apples sans the brake.

[Salvatore Buscemi]

I dont think our table saws will become worthless, but they certainly will be worth less as the flesh eating technology improves and the costs go down.

I personally don't want anything with "flesh eating" technology!

anon

[Bob Rossi]

Wonder how many shares of SS Inez Tenenbaum owns.

[Van Huskey]

I personally don't want anything with "flesh eating" technology!

anon

I have a shop full of them, but I don't want machines where they have worked on perfecting the technique.

[Van Huskey]

Wonder how many shares of SS Inez Tenenbaum owns.

SS is privately held no? Even if it wasn't I would guess any stock she owns is in a blind trust, almost have to be in her position.

[mreza Salav]

I've wondered the same thing, frankly. Especially after watching the "live finger" demonstration - he slowly slid his finger closer and closer to the blade... Granted, that's more than I would try, but it seems he's playing a dangerous game. What's he going to do if someone loses a finger on a sawstop? That could be a heck of a verdict.

- Damion

I have seen a demo video (though cannot locate it now) that they "slash" a hot dog at running blade. Although the damage was more than a tiny nick still it looked like a very minor injury to the hot dog.

Also, I think (again have to go back and dig out the references) that it was argued that if this technology was implemented in all saws, the average cost added to a saw was about $150 or so.
I wonder how many people would have been willing to pay that extra $150 for this feature.

[Steven Hsieh]

On SawStop website, you see these picture of fingers of being saved. I wonder if all these people did it in purpose to see if the saw works?:rolleyes:

http://www.sawstop.com/finger_saves.php

[John Sanford]

It's going to be a long time before any mandatory regulations are passed, implemented, and enforced. It's an interesting discussion for folks who like to think about public safety and policy, but most of us probably won't be affected by this drastically during our lifetimes. The first places that would actually see/feel the effects would be schools and production environments (where the saws are purchased and provided by employers or other large entities).

Enjoy your saw and keep making sawdust, regardless of which saw you have.

I believe all of the public schools here (one of the largest school districts in the country), as well as many of the large resorts (they have fully equipped shops for the maintenance guys) here have switched over to SawStops. A wise thing to do. I am going to switch myself as resources are available. It is not, however, a "public safety" issue. Brakes on a truck that don't fail, or engines on airplanes that don't fall off, those can be rightly considered "public safety" issues because a failure/mishap directly affects people other than the users of the equipment, when the truck careens through the minivan, or the airplane falls on a nursing home. The miscasting of this as a "public safety" issue is one of the methods of justifying the removal of the woodworker's choice.

Compare the price differential of the SawStop CS vs other CS, the PCS vs other Cabinet saws, etc, and it looks to be around $600-800. That's 3-6 times the cost of the low end tablesaws that are "villians" in most of the injuries. I expect that the consumer market won't bear such cost.

As for Gass, I think he should a) be applauded for envisioning the technology, developing it and bringing it to market, and b) I think he should be thrashed within an foot of his life for trying to get it mandated. Personally, if I were "Imperator Americus Ironica", I would decree that the technology is mandated, and decree the patents null and void, placing the tech in the public domain, in the interest of public safety. :p That'll teach Gass! I'm not the Imperator though, much less an ironic one, so I'll simply kvetch from the sidelines, buy my SawStop, and oppose, if only online, those who want to mandate it.

As for how Gass is unscrupulous, my guess is that Tony is referring what he sees as the hypocrisy of Gass using the patent system (and hence government force) to protect his intellectual/private property rights, and then turning around and attempting to use the regulatory system (again, government force) to eliminate all competition based on "collective cost." By some lights, this is unscrupulous behavior. It may very well be profitable for Gass, but profit and scruples have been known to part company from time to time. :eek:

btw, last time I checked, a patent is good for 25 years, and unlike copywrite, patents are non-renewable.

[Jeremy Greiner]

I'm sure if Gass released his patents the other saw manufacturers would jump on adding this technology. He claims to be high and mighty wanting to protect everyone but he just wants to use the government to force the other saw manufacturers to license his patent from him.

I have no problem with someone getting rich on their idea, even a great idea such as this one.

If the government mandates this change, it should also invalidate his pattent that is really the only way to be fair to the other manufacturers.


-jeremy

[Joe Angrisani]

Timothy wrote: "THe website says that it only takes 5 minutes to replace the $69 single use brake and blade. That's a chunk of change if the thing keeps going off half-cocked."

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

The brake parts only are $69, right? As I understand it, your sawblade also gets wasted in the process as the aluminum "web" brings it to a weld-like halt. I wonder if SawStop pays for your blade AND brake when a stop fires falsely repeatedly.

Me? I vote for common sense in my hobby room. ALL my machines get my respect.

[Bob Falk]

I had the same question. The guy invents a safer product, tries to collaborate with existing saw manufacturers (who blow him off), and so he produces his own proprietary saw, does well (while reducing injuries to users), and now everyone seems to want to dis the guy. I would say that he is a entrepreneur that many could take a lesson from. Unscrupulous.....sheeze.....



In what way is he "unscupulous" ?
y

[hank dekeyser]

If it becomes government mandated, I think it would be an absolute outrage. Then again, look at all the "safety features" on automobiles that are mandated. It will come to fruit and theres nothing that can stop it (short of a revolution) I have cut 2 fingers in a saw, one in a router and shot myself 3 times w/ nail guns. I still have the full use of all my digits(AMen) and I know very well its my own dang fault for being sloppy, or careless, or whatever. (young and dumb) I'll keep my old saws and thats that. What next, a saftey cage for jointers. How they gonna implement this technology on a bandsaw ? It is an absolutely amazing piece of technology and it has it's place. I say let the people decide if they want a sawstop or not. Not only that, you'll need to have a spare brake on-hand at all times just in case ?!
my 2 cents

[Damion Bevacqua]

I saw a demo at my local woodcraft where we were all wondering the same thing. What if you fell into the blade. So he swung the hotdog like a bat at the blade. It barely broke the skin of the hotdog.

~Todd

Interesting... That has been bugging me!

[Craig D Peltier]

My opinion is simple. Dont care who made it, good for him. I like having the oppurtunity to buy one though.Its pricey but its also nice to not have one less finger or two. Wood pinches or lifts pretty easily if you dont have antikickback paws on it which could cause a finger loss. Not just the stupidity of not paying attention.

[mreza Salav]

How they gonna implement this technology on a bandsaw ?
my 2 cents

Well, they have that too; this video was on their website for a while but I couldn't find it there now; it's a prototype:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3PLwNccpXU

[Caleb Larru]

I hate sawstop for all the frivolous lawsuits that have came out since the technology was released. Somewhere along the way, people stopped being held accountable for their actions and society shifted that blame onto others. Anyone using power tools knows that there is a risk involved with unsafe behavior. Using their logic, I should be able to sue GM, Ford, or any other car maker for rear ending someone or running a red light and t boning someone because my car doesn't have "smart stop" technology like Mercedes does. Idiotic reasoning.

I can't wait until sawstop has a failure and someone loses a finger or hand because they get complacent with the saw. After all, if it is electronic, there will be a failure. Simple as that.

[Brad Gobble]

I'm sure if Gass released his patents the other saw manufacturers would jump on adding this technology. He claims to be high and mighty wanting to protect everyone but he just wants to use the government to force the other saw manufacturers to license his patent from him.

I have no problem with someone getting rich on their idea, even a great idea such as this one.

If the government mandates this change, it should also invalidate his pattent that is really the only way to be fair to the other manufacturers.


-jeremy

AGreed. I own one, Love it, and yes I have tripped it ... worked like a charm. Didn't ruin my blade, got the teeth fixed for under $40 (a $125 Matsushita).

HOWEVER, I believe that Gass is insisting on an unusually high percentage per saw (royalty?) and he's got patents out the wazoo. The industry is, predictably, acting just as childish by refusing to license it anywhere ... wonder who's going to be first to crack? Laguna? a Festool mega table saw made of plastic and titanium? I believe in profit (I work for a mega-corp) but cripes man make it accessible.

What is funny is that I am even more careful now NOT because i fear the blade but I'm so cheap that i know that if I even slightly touch the blade it'll cost me at least $100! Go figger ... LIke Hank I've cut / shot / sliced / smashed myself more times than I can count ...

[Rich Aldrich]

I had the same question. The guy invents a safer product, tries to collaborate with existing saw manufacturers (who blow him off), and so he produces his own proprietary saw, does well (while reducing injuries to users), and now everyone seems to want to dis the guy. I would say that he is a entrepreneur that many could take a lesson from. Unscrupulous.....sheeze.....



y

He seeems to want to now use the courts to shove it down everyones throat. You can say it is to promote his product, but using the legal system in this manner bothers me. In my opinion, it is a bit unethics. However, if I was in his shoes, I may do something similar.

I remember reading the articles in Wood Magazine about this design and how it would raise the price of tablesaws $150 to $200. Why are his cabinet saws selling for way more than this difference?

[John TenEyck]

How long is a patent good for, 15 years????. My guess after the patent runs out you will see the safety feature added to many other saws.

Patent life changed a few years ago. It's now 20 years.

[Peter Quinn]

This isn't a country where we care a lot about safety frankly. Not for its own sake anyway. Follow the money and you get the real story. I have a shop full of machines capable of eating a finger, hand, every thing below the wrist. Nobody is in a big hurry it seems to add flesh sensing technology to any of these. Ever look at the statistics on skill saw injuries? Can you imagine a $750 skill saw that weights 68# but has flesh sensing technology? I'd say that requiring each TS purchaser take a basic safety course and pass a safety test would probably eliminate better than 50% of the accidents right off the bat without installing any brakes. Prohibiting the sale of these rinky dink job site and low end contractor models would probably drop another 25%, because there is some scary stuff spinning a blade for sale out there.

Instead of designing brakes to keep your bologna from getting scars, maybe they could push for a real innovation that keeps the users hands far from danger but still allows the function we require from a "variety saw". I can imagine a small sliding saw with an integral power feeder (not an option but built in like a straight line rip saw), a tall fence that keeps your hand from being close to the blade during cuts where the blade is close to the fence, good dust collection (because who wants to die early of lung cancer with a perfectly good set of fingers?). Oh, and it has to cost less than $400 so they can sell it at Wallmart. Not likely to happen. An American cabinet saw is such a crude instrument relative to a euro slider on most levels including safety, but nobody is beating the drum to require those become the norm? And they have been around much longer. Go figure?

The thing that drives the safety discussion in Europe is labor. If you are going to PAY somebody to do work, then the tools you provide them to do that work had better be safe. So you get sliders, breaking motors, serious shaper fences, built in stock feeders, riving knives, etc. Here? Seems the lawyers are driving this discussion, not organized labor. So you get machines that allow you to do stupid things but minimize the injury when you do rather than machines that minimize the risk to begin with. Grandpa used to say keep your hands out of the blade and you wont get cut. Maybe he was on to something? Nothing wrong with the brake mind you, but its hardly the only or IMO the best way to deal with the problem.

[Chuck Tringo]

All the injuries are just Darwinism and natural selection at work...the problem with this country is that we try to coddle people along and don't let them be held accountable for their own mistakes, its always someone else's fault and there is always someone to sue.

[Bruce Wrenn]

I'm waiting for someone to lose a finger on a Sawstop. Then Gass better hire a bunch of lawyers, as his advertising says this can't happen, but eventually it will. Everything fails sometime. It's like seeing an acident report (motor vehicle) that says occpants weren't wearing a seat belt. Were they and seat belt latch failed instead? I know I've had more than one seat belt pop loose, even after it clicked in place, or at least it sounded like it did.

[Ole Anderson]

Hoping Grizzly will be the first to buy the technology and bring out a $1500 cabinet saw that is affordable. Comparing SawStop to Powermatic and Delta premium saws is appropriate, but there are a lot of very good less expensive versions out there. So for me the choices are SawStop at $3000 or a $1300 Grizzly, Jet or the like thankfully now required to have the riving knife.

[John Lifer]

In what way is he "unscupulous" ?

In my opinion, it is a good description, he's working hard to MANDATE everyone to purchase HIS invention. He also knows time is ticking and patent is only good for so long.
See Fein and all the new triangle sanders that have appeared in the past couple of years....
Technology is good, will solve many TS related injuries, but at what cost.

[Ole Anderson]

And on the topic of digits lost to table saws, how many new saw users learn from the DIY channel, where I have yet to see them use a guard on a table saw even when they are ripping, which is the usual use of the saw on the home improvement shows. They even have newbies using a table saw without a guard, when they already have demonstrated that they don't even know how to use a drill. Maybe they ought to start there, policing themselves knowing that they are really teaching America how to tackle a kitchen or bath remodel. I see plenty of safety glasses, dust masks and the like, but no saw guard, go figure. And the same can be said for the woodworking teachers like David Marks. They often show warnings, but never show a guard on the saw, even when they are doing a simple rip operation that really doesn't need the visual clarity of not having a fence. The message is that if you are a real saw user, you don't need no stinking blade guard. Personally, I use mine 90% of the time, and half of the reason is just so I have a splitter to reduce the dreaded kickback.

[Kevin Groenke]

Fascinating discussion as always.

On a related note, I recently posted a question (and got a prompt reply) to a post on DeWalt's support webpage re: DeWalt's plans to incorporate a similar mechanism on their tablesaws (including Unisaw).

Subject SawStop Customer By Web Form This feedback is about:
http://support.dewalt.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4611

SawStop has been on the market for 5+ years and have a strong reputation for performance, reliability, durability and safety. When is Delta going to step up to the plate with a similar commitment to consumer safety?

Response Via Email (Jeff Xxxxx)02/01/2011 11:54 AM

At this time Delta has no plans to incorporate the SawStop technology on our table saws or Unisaws.

Thank you for allowing us the opportunity to serve you. If your question remains unresolved or if you require additional information please update this incident.

Sincerely,

Jeff Xxxxx

01/30/2011 04:30 PM

So, for the foreseeable future, SawStop is likely the only option if you want a tablesaw that (probably) won't take off a finger if it happens to get into the blade.

-kg

[Josh Reet]

I hate sawstop for all the frivolous lawsuits that have came out since the technology was released. Somewhere along the way, people stopped being held accountable for their actions and society shifted that blame onto others. Anyone using power tools knows that there is a risk involved with unsafe behavior. Using their logic, I should be able to sue GM, Ford, or any other car maker for rear ending someone or running a red light and t boning someone because my car doesn't have "smart stop" technology like Mercedes does. Idiotic reasoning.

I can't wait until sawstop has a failure and someone loses a finger or hand because they get complacent with the saw. After all, if it is electronic, there will be a failure. Simple as that.

You can't wait for someone to lose a hand? Classy.

I get that you don't like the SawStop guy. But try to drag the debate out of the gutter. Hoping for another person to lose a hand just so SawStop ends up in court is lame.

[Mark Blatter]

We had a SS in my last shop and it was nice machine. Went off once due to cutting a piece of styrofoam that had a thin metal layer nobody noticed. From having used one repeatedly, I would replace my own TS if I could afford it. Yes, the blade is toast and I believe the cost to replace all the parts, plus the CO2 catridge is more $69.

Also, many schools that I know have replaced all of their table saws with SS just because it makes the most sense....plus they don't want the law suites from kids losing fingers.

I am tired of the government mandating everything for us. I firmly believe in buying what I want to buy, learning how to use, than taking responsibility for what I do from there.

[Caleb Larru]

You can't wait for someone to lose a hand? Classy.

I get that you don't like the SawStop guy. But try to drag the debate out of the gutter. Hoping for another person to lose a hand just so SawStop ends up in court is lame.

I wonder how many hands and fingers the sawstop guy has wished upon to get his patent on every saw in the US.

[Chip Lindley]

Ahh, the Lawsuit! SawStop's inventor/CEO could not have gotten better advertising if he bought a 1-minute TV ad during Super Bowl halftime. Most press coverage presents SawStop as the Savior of the Tablesaw World, and TS manufacturers as the greedy Villain. Suffice it to say, the issue is not that simple. Factor in inexperienced, undertrained, unsupervised individuals, using abused or misaligned equipment. I will stop there.

Public pressure has already seen replacement of perfectly good, top-of-the-line 10" tablesaws in school shops and commercial shops with the SawStop. Better to be safe than sorry! Right? Soon enough, insurance companies will jump on the bandwagon, penalizing those not using the SS technology.

I just recently got a great bargain on a gently-used 1988 PM66 because an Omaha NE school district implimented new SawStops in school shops. Yea! SawStop! Friends of the school district are happy; I'm Happy! That PM66 may one day become unusable (insurance-wise or OSHA-wise) IF I were to add employees to a small business cabinet shop--who knows! But, as long as I work alone, my gold Powermatic stands head and shoulders above a black SawStop.

[Mike Henderson]

Patent life changed a few years ago. It's now 20 years.
I believe the current law in the US is that the term of a patent is 20 years from the earliest application filed with the PTO. It takes quite a while for a patent to issue - three years is not uncommon - so the economic life is 20 years minus the time it took to issue. So for many patents you can collect on them for about 17 years. Note: you can't collect before the patent issues.

And one thing you can't do is make an agreement with someone that you'll license your patent to them, but they'll have to keep paying you even after the patent term expires. The law does not allow agreements of that sort.

Mike

[Joe Jensen]

I dont think our table saws will become worthless, but they certainly will be worth less as the flesh eating technology improves and the costs go down. The owner of Saw Stop is an unscupulous business man. Though, I must admit, he makes money at it. He is like an activist pushing his product during a lawsuit. If he is truly concerned in saving fingers, he would not have taken out so many patents so as to make the technology available to him alone.
I have seen many SawStop demonstrations on video and it looks to me that the demo hot dog is moving much slower than most people push a piece of wood through a table saw. Keep in mind that at a slightly faster working speed, you finger will be going through the blade a little faster. Only one tooth on your blade has to travel about 1/2" or so to remove your finger. Does the SawStop work that fast? Can someone here run a hot dog through their SawStop at a normal working speed and post the results?

Wood Magazine did a series of tests of the SawStop brake with hot dogs and they posted the videos. In several, they whipped the hot dog as fast as they could down onto the blade. There was a nick where the tooth dug into the hot dog, but the blade drops below the table so fast that it can't cut the dog.

I just tried the bookmark to the videos and they are no longer at that link..joe

[Bryan Wellman]

But, as long as I work alone, my gold Powermatic stands head and shoulders above a black SawStop.

You got something against black saws?? NOW we're opening up a can of worms!! LOL

[John M. Johnson]

I wish this was not true, but alas I fear that it is. This (David Marks) is where I started from and I have the greatest respect for splitter, paws and guards. I have this self imposed policy of, "If you cannot do it on an Euro saw, don't do it."

The worst part for me is that 1/2 of me want to give into the fear factor and trade in my PM66.



And on the topic of digits lost to table saws, how many new saw users learn from the DIY channel, where I have yet to see them use a guard on a table saw even when they are ripping, which is the usual use of the saw on the home improvement shows. They even have newbies using a table saw without a guard, when they already have demonstrated that they don't even know how to use a drill. Maybe they ought to start there, policing themselves knowing that they are really teaching America how to tackle a kitchen or bath remodel. I see plenty of safety glasses, dust masks and the like, but no saw guard, go figure. And the same can be said for the woodworking teachers like David Marks. They often show warnings, but never show a guard on the saw, even when they are doing a simple rip operation that really doesn't need the visual clarity of not having a fence. The message is that if you are a real saw user, you don't need no stinking blade guard. Personally, I use mine 90% of the time, and half of the reason is just so I have a splitter to reduce the dreaded kickback.

[Rich Engelhardt]

As a smoker (for the next 11 days anyhow) and a gun owner, all I have to say is:

"Welcome to my world"...

It's one where people that have no clue, no experience with and no desire to listen to facts or reason will make the rules you will be forced to abide by.


P.S. - That sound you hear is your ox being gored....

Sorry - don't mean to seem so jaded about it, but, it's not like his is the first time some collection of people trying to justify their paychecks have made some horrible decisions.


Next on their agenda will be the blitz that informs us all that:
"It's for your own safety"...

[Dan Hintz]

Are these all new replies in this thread, or is this the old thread pulled from the editing pile? I ask because all of the replies are showing from 1 day ago, but the text appears very familiar...

[John Coloccia]

I, for one, hope this means we'll see more woodworking articles in USA Today.

[Rich Engelhardt]

Dan,
The thread itself just started. The article in USA is recent (yesterday?).
The whole "topic" itself - a mandated safety - has moved beyond the lawsuit and is now in the realm of the CPSC and other **consumer watchdogs**...

[Brian Vaughn]

Like many of the others have said, I admire the man for coming up with the Sawstop technology, however I think he's scum for trying to make it mandated. In cases like this, where it is for the "public good" (Isn't that what he's arguing?) then any patents should become null and void, since it's obviously much more important to protect the public than to make money.

In all seriousness, yes, I would lie to have a sawstop, but I'd also like to have a PM66, or something better than my dinky little delta, but that's what I could afford at the time, and is pretty well the maximum I can fit in my shop right now. It's not ideal, but I'm always safe with it, never had so much as a nick from a table saw, power saw, or router (I hurt myself far more often with kitchen implements than anything) and I think anyone else can be just as safe, if they have the proper respect for their tools.

Personally, I'm just tired of having the government try to tell us how to live, and trying to protect us at every turn. If I want to drive around without a seatbelt, I should be able to. I know the consequences that could happen, but I'm an adult and I get to make that choice. The same goes for smoking, putting salt on your food, or anything else that only affects you, and not others. It's when it crosses the line over to hurting someone else (Like drinking and driving) that they should be able to have some influence. <end rant>

If people want the technology, it's available for purchase. And Mr. Sawstop is more than welcome to make a retrofit kit for all the tablesaws out there. Hey, it could be a new income source for him. But mandating it for all manufaturers is a money grab, pure and simple.

[Curt Harms]

It's going to be a long time before any mandatory regulations are passed, implemented, and enforced. It's an interesting discussion for folks who like to think about public safety and policy, but most of us probably won't be affected by this drastically during our lifetimes. The first places that would actually see/feel the effects would be schools and production environments (where the saws are purchased and provided by employers or other large entities).

Enjoy your saw and keep making sawdust, regardless of which saw you have.

It seems like that would be the most receptive market, Inexperienced or semiskilled users. I'll bet insurance carriers view this technology as cheap at twice the price.

[Rod Sheridan]

This isn't a country where we care a lot about safety frankly. Not for its own sake anyway. Follow the money and you get the real story. I have a shop full of machines capable of eating a finger, hand, every thing below the wrist. Nobody is in a big hurry it seems to add flesh sensing technology to any of these. Ever look at the statistics on skill saw injuries? Can you imagine a $750 skill saw that weights 68# but has flesh sensing technology? I'd say that requiring each TS purchaser take a basic safety course and pass a safety test would probably eliminate better than 50% of the accidents right off the bat without installing any brakes. Prohibiting the sale of these rinky dink job site and low end contractor models would probably drop another 25%, because there is some scary stuff spinning a blade for sale out there.

Instead of designing brakes to keep your bologna from getting scars, maybe they could push for a real innovation that keeps the users hands far from danger but still allows the function we require from a "variety saw". I can imagine a small sliding saw with an integral power feeder (not an option but built in like a straight line rip saw), a tall fence that keeps your hand from being close to the blade during cuts where the blade is close to the fence, good dust collection (because who wants to die early of lung cancer with a perfectly good set of fingers?). Oh, and it has to cost less than $400 so they can sell it at Wallmart. Not likely to happen. An American cabinet saw is such a crude instrument relative to a euro slider on most levels including safety, but nobody is beating the drum to require those become the norm? And they have been around much longer. Go figure?

The thing that drives the safety discussion in Europe is labor. If you are going to PAY somebody to do work, then the tools you provide them to do that work had better be safe. So you get sliders, breaking motors, serious shaper fences, built in stock feeders, riving knives, etc. Here? Seems the lawyers are driving this discussion, not organized labor. So you get machines that allow you to do stupid things but minimize the injury when you do rather than machines that minimize the risk to begin with. Grandpa used to say keep your hands out of the blade and you wont get cut. Maybe he was on to something? Nothing wrong with the brake mind you, but its hardly the only or IMO the best way to deal with the problem.

Excellent post Peter, I'm in agreement except for the " in this country" part.

Being Canadian I see this attitude here also, many people view safety as an inconvenience as opposed to the primary consideration.

Many accidents are the result of poor work practices and training such as using the wrong machine for the task, removing guards and protective devices, and incorrect operating procedures.

In North America we view the table saw as a do all machine, and it can do a lot of operations, however the only operation it's capable of doing safely as supplied by the manufacturer is making a through cut. The design of the saw guard prevents you from using it for non through cuts, unless you spend significant amounts of money to refit an overarm guard.

Hands up anyone who has removed a guard to make a dado, groove or rebate? I'm guessing everyone reading this post now has a hand in the air, hopefully with all original digits intact.

That's the difference between Europe and North America, my FIL who is an English trained cabinet maker was incredulous when he saw a co-worker in Canada remove the table saw guard to make rebates. He had been taught that the spindle molder is the correct machine for the task as it has the guards and safety features to do that operation safely.

Obviously using an overarm guard would also be safe, removing the guard isn't safe.

The TV shows, the magazines such as Fine Woodworking that show peple operating saws without guards, and any other persons who provide advice to remove guards to allow machines to do tasks that aren't safe, well they're just irresponsible and unprofessional.

I think that's the problem, we view wood working as something anyone can do, which is true, however to do it properly and safely requires training, and understanding of the possible risks.

That's what missing in North America for many wood workers, proper training.

My wife made a comment about this a couple of years ago that really struck home. I was looking at Felder products and had received a DVD from Felder where an office desk was constructed using a CF741 combination machine. Diann commented on how many times Felder stressed safety and using the correct guards, and their wood worker changed guard types for different operations, in contrast to Norm et al, who show us that no guards are the correct choice.

The SS technology is the only real advance in table saw technology that I can think of in decades. Euro saws had become much safer decades ago through design, it would be hard to tell a 1940 cabinet saw from a 2011 saw based upon safety improvements.

As my dad often said "If you're not smart enough to solve your own problems, someone else will". That's the issue with safety, if we as a group can't solve our problem
legislation will.

Regards, Rod.

[Neil Brooks]

The same goes for smoking, putting salt on your food, or anything else that only affects you, and not others. It's when it crosses the line over to hurting someone else (Like drinking and driving) that they should be able to have some influence. <end rant>

I'm not sure that people generally take the time to understand that there are "ripples in the pond" to nearly ANY of these actions that they describe as "only affecting [me]."

Seat belts, helmets, and smoking are classic examples.

Who pays your hospital bills ?

Got insurance ? What number do the actuaries factor in for the % of the population who doesn't wear seat belts, does smoke, and won't wear a helmet, and how much do MY rates go up, as a result ?

I've got my issues with Goss's approach to "marketing" his technology, but I have additional issues with the premise that "X" is only affecting me. It stifles debate, and colors some arguments that desperately need to be had, in this (and other) country.

It rarely is.

[Rob Sack]

I wonder how many hands and fingers the sawstop guy has wished upon to get his patent on every saw in the US.

Unbelievable. What makes anybody think Gass sat around and wished for a magnitude of injuries? He came up with a revolutionary idea. He tried to sell it to machinery manufacturers and they "blew him off." So he started his own company utilizing this revolutionary safety feature. He produced a table saw that by many accounts, is a quality piece of equipment, at a price that is not that much more than the competition. And now he is the boogeyman. Starting a machinery manufacturing company cannot be cheap. The start-up costs have to be enormous, not to mention the research and development costs. These costs have to be factored into the price of the machinery. Listen, this is still a "free county." If you want to roll the dice with your hands and fingers, knock yourselves out. But having been a professional woodworker for over 30 years, I deeply respect my equipment and I consider myself to be usually cautious. But there have been lapses, and although I still have all my fingers, there have been collisions with "moving metal objects" and guess what, they won every time. Frankly, I wish all my tools had some form of this new technology, but I will settle for a Sawstop table saw.

[David Hostetler]

In what way is he "unscupulous" ?

He is using the courts and government regulators to boost his personal revenues instead of competing in an open marketplace.

[Caleb Larru]

Unbelievable. What makes anybody think Gass sat around and wished for a magnitude of injuries? He came up with a revolutionary idea. He tried to sell it to machinery manufacturers and they "blew him off." So he started his own company utilizing this revolutionary safety feature. He produced a table saw that by many accounts, is a quality piece of equipment, at a price that is not that much more than the competition. And now he is the boogeyman. Starting a machinery manufacturing company cannot be cheap. The start-up costs have to be enormous, not to mention the research and development costs. These costs have to be factored into the price of the machinery. Listen, this is still a "free county." If you want to roll the dice with your hands and fingers, knock yourselves out. But having been a professional woodworker for over 30 years, I deeply respect my equipment and I consider myself to be usually cautious. But there have been lapses, and although I still have all my fingers, there have been collisions with "moving metal objects" and guess what, they won every time. Frankly, I wish all my tools had some form of this new technology, but I will settle for a Sawstop table saw.

Again, what is the end game? Where does this end? Mercedes came up with some great technology in their vehicles called "Smart Stop" that allows for those lapses of judgment that you refer to. Why doesn't Mercedes petition the NHTSA to have their technology put on every vehicle? Because after all, we aren't talking about just fingers here, this is lives. On the flip side of that, if I go out and buy a Ford pickup, drive unsafe, run a red light and smash into someone, should I be able to sue Ford because they don't have this technology in their vehicles? Why was it any different for the guy that sued Ryobi for using a table saw in an unsafe manner?

Funny you mention this being a "free country", because it won't be if Gass has his way, at least not in the table saw world. My problem is not with the technology but with the idea that the whole premise of responsibility has shifted from a guy who operated the saw in an unsafe condition, to the maker of the saw. Somewhere along the way this country shifted from taking responsibility for their actions to putting the blame on someone else for not babysitting them.

[David Weaver]

Rob - how much did Gass try to sell it for. What was he looking for out of each machine? I'm sure he wasn't running around offering units at 10% over his cost out of the goodness of his heart.

I'm totally convinced you can't get ahead of the mechanism on a sawstop and hurt yourself.

I'm also 100% totally convinced I will never own one, i have zero interest in gass ever getting a nickel of my money. I'd rather spend $6 on an aluminum push stick, which until I sold my TS, worked extremely well. I understand the place for the finger-saving technology (if i had a business or a school, I would suck it up and get over my bias and get the saw so *other* people couldn't get their fingers in it). My shop isn't that place for any tools that are pushed by anyone who wants to use the government to make their market for them.

[Tom Cornish]

We had a SS in my last shop and it was nice machine. Went off once due to cutting a piece of styrofoam that had a thin metal layer nobody noticed. From having used one repeatedly, I would replace my own TS if I could afford it. Yes, the blade is toast and I believe the cost to replace all the parts, plus the CO2 catridge is more $69.



There's no CO2 cartridge - it's spring driven. The saw, other than the brake is undamaged and is designed to withstand being "fired". The blade may or may not be toast.

Is the detection perfect? No. Is it a lot better than nothing? Yes!

[David Prince]

If I were a school, I would buy one. If my kids were Joe Citizen, I would want them to be taught on a SS at a school if I am not there. This makes perfect sense to me.

If I were a business owner with employees, I would buy one. I could tell the employees to keep their fingers out of the blade, but I couldn't guarantee it.

I wouldn't want my children or an employee to be injured.

For my shop, I personally do not have a SS and don't plan to buy one. Reason: It is my personal choice and I DON'T SEE A NEED FOR IT FOR MY SHOP. If I put my finger in the blade it is my fault. (This isn't like the wearing seatbelt argument. The seatbelt laws were designed to protect everyone and you can even throw in the cost of insurance and cost to society and on and on. There are many variables that play into this. I agree with it and religiously wear my seatbelt.) (seatbelts are mandated because of the variables of other drivers, weather conditions, road conditions, mechanical issues, etc.)

I have never seen my tablesaw pull out on front of me or jump at my fingers or have too much to drink and swerve towards my fingers or blow a tire and roll or not get enough sleep and loose control of itself.

The tablesaw does what it does. If we lose a finger it is because our finger hit the blade. The blade doesn't normally jump out and hit our finger!

I for one will teach my children to keep their fingers out of the blade. I will also do everything in my power to keep my fingers out of the blade.

I don't agree with a business owner putting their nose into Government regulation when their intent is motivated by money. (they can say safety all they want, but if that was the truth, then the technology would be given away for a good of all)

[Brian Vaughn]

Well, you could argue that both ways. Several studies have proved that people who smoke actually cost less, over the course of their lifetime, due to dying younger and not having to be supported for their later years. Seat belts, well, I'll use another example. When Air bags were first installed in cars, they started to notice that there were a large number of people in cars that had airbag deployment that had severe leg injuries. As they studied further, they realized that previously, the people would not have survived, so those leg injuries wouldn't have mattered or had to be treated. Dead people are relatively cheap. Severely injured people are expensive. The same goes for helmets on motorcycles.

I know that everything has ripples, but let people make their own choices. If a local restaurant allowed smoking, I'd be okay with that. I wouldn't eat there, because I hate how I'd smell afterwards, but it should be their perogative who they want to cater to. No one is making people go there to eat.

Alright, I think I've wandered a bit off discussion topic at this point so I'll end it there ;)

[Mac Houtz]

carpenters, shipbuilders and joiners have been missing digits since the beginning of time. Those with the least amount of proper training, the dullest or worst tools, or the poorest judgment and hand eye coordination are missing the most.

I have a good friend whose father worked in a large shipyard in England during the last days of wooden cargo vessels. He was missing two toes thanks to a poorly swung adze while hewing out rough timbers. Do you think he should have sued for compensation because the handle was wet, or the edge was poorly ground, or the sun was in his eyes?
Every time you go into your shop, the most important safety device protecting you from all manner of harm is your brain. You could put "sawstop" technology on every power tool in the shop, and I guarantee you there's an idiot somewhere(probably quite a few actually) who can find a way to hurt himself with it.
Everytime this discussion comes up, I get this comical image in my head of some woodworker from the year 2500 coming back to our time or even further, and upon surveying our operations saying something like, "wait a minute, do you mean to tell me you actually have to use your hands?"

[Kent A Bathurst]

I am enjoying this thread. I think I will go back to the archived circa 2006 discussions on the SS technology and re-read them all...

I'll join you, Michael. I'll bring the beer, and you make the popcorn, and we'll just sit back and relive all the "best of" threads.

Kent

[Brian Kincaid]

Ditch the table saw all together and use a tool better suited and more safe for the operation at hand. I replaced all TS operations with tools in a smaller footprint for less than the cost of the cabinet saws discussed. #RUNS AWAY FROM THREAD#

:)
-Brian

[Mike Henderson]

These threads seem to aways divide into two camps.

Camp 1: I'm in favor of any technology or technique which will help protect me from a mistake, should I make one.

Camp 2: If I cut my fingers off, shame on me for making a mistake, and I'll live with the consequences.

I'm in the first camp.

Mike

[Chip Lindley]

Bryan, as one of my Army Drill Instuctors usta say, "I AM prejudiced, but I do NOT discriminate." I won't keep you from spending your money on a SawStop, should you choose.

[Dan Hintz]

These threads seem to aways divide into two camps.

Camp 1: I'm in favor of any technology or technique which will help protect me from a mistake, should I make one.

Camp 2: If I cut my fingers off, shame on me for making a mistake, and I'll live with the consequences.

I'm in the first camp.
I'm in Camp1... so long as it's not mandated by law simply because some guy wants to make money off of his patents.

And I'm also in Camp 2. I love technology that will help me... but shame on me for making a mistake anyway.

[David Cramer]

The guy came up with quite an innovative idea. No one can argue that.

Obviously, he's human and wants to be compensated for his new safety idea. Some don't like his approach, and that's fine. For me, I could care less.

Sidenote: I don't think a pro athlete should get paid millions and millions to play a game (and I know why they do), but I'm usually in the minority on that as well. Doctors impress me more than athletes and Mr. Gass impresses me more than most athletes as well.

I believe he's a patent attorney, but I am not positive (I think I read that a few years back).

If money were no object, who can honestly say that they wouldn't want that technology in their shop? I have young kids and I don't want to see them get hurt nor do I want to see anyone's child get hurt.

For me, money is an object.

I own a 2001 Delta Unisaw. I cut a lot of wood.

I've never had an injury yet I realize I am not special. If it can happen to you it can happen to me. How do I combat this?


Well.......my approach is to cut down the odds like I do with most things in life. There is a range around the blade that I WILL NOT enter for any reason whatsoever. I also use several ways to cut down on kickback.

I witnessed a terrible tablesaw accident years ago and it left a lasting impression on me, therefore I have the above approach.

By doing so I am still getting the same quality of cut from my tablesaw that I could get if the SS were in my shop, but without the braking mechanism.

I admire the man's genius and would definitely buy one if money were no object, or if it were priced more in my range, which it isn't.

One day, things will change. For now, I cut as safely as possible on my Delta Unisaw and stay in my safety zone.

My 2 cents:)

David

[David Weaver]

These threads seem to aways divide into two camps.

Camp 1: I'm in favor of any technology or technique which will help protect me from a mistake, should I make one.

Camp 2: If I cut my fingers off, shame on me for making a mistake, and I'll live with the consequences.

I'm in the first camp.

Mike

Camp 3: my fingers never get near the TS blade, I should never have to be in camp 2.

and don't forget Camp 4 - the slider folks! "you only need that on your tablesaw because cabinet tablesaws are an inferior design".

[Howard Acheson]

>>>> and he's got patents out the wazoo.

He is, after all, a patent attorny.

[George Bregar]

I'm in Camp1... so long as it's not mandated by law simply because some guy wants to make money off of his patents.

If someday it is mandated it will not simply be because some guy wants to make money off his patents. So you have nothing to worry about.

[John Sanford]

These threads seem to aways divide into two camps.

Camp 1: I'm in favor of any technology or technique which will help protect me from a mistake, should I make one.

Camp 2: If I cut my fingers off, shame on me for making a mistake, and I'll live with the consequences.

I'm in the first camp.

Mike

Ahh, but the problem here Mike isn't between Camp 1 and Camp 2. It's those mooks over in Camp 5 making the trouble. THEY are in favor of any technology, training, etc that will help protect ME from a mistake, should I make one, and dadgum, they're going to force ME to pay for it and use it, whether I want to or not.

The "public safety" argument can be used to justify cars that are speed limited to 15mph and built like tanks. (See "Demolition Man" starring Sylvester Stallone, Sandra Bullock and Dennis Rodman) Only licensed and trained individuals are allowed to woodwork, and such woodworking can only be done commercially, because "hobby" woodworking presents too much of a cost to society, etc. Heck, the only real "public safety" justification for mandating the use of seatbelts is that a seatbelt will help keep the driver behind the wheel and in control of his vehicle. All of the other reasons offered (rollovers, blowouts, falling asleep, etc) are risks to the vehicle occupants, not to the public at large. Once you lose control of the vehicle, a seatbelt does nothing to protect other folks, barring the statistically meaningless "he was thrown from the vehicle and as he pinwheeled through the air, he collided with and killed a pedestrian." From this standpoint, kickback prevention is a far more significant "public safety" concern than blade injuries, because kickback can harm someone who isn't even operating the saw. As a practical matter, not so with blade injuries.


As my dad often said "If you're not smart enough to solve your own problems, someone else will". That's the issue with safety, if we as a group can't solve our problem legislation will. And if I don't consider it to be MY problem, and I don't consider YOUR problem to be MY problem? That's pretty much what this comes down to... Smoking, skiing, skydiving, motorcycling, and hammering on one's own kneecap all present health risks. The difference is that for most of us, the smoking, skiing, skydiving and/or motorcycling all potentially present upsides that justify our participation in the activity, not so much hammering on the kneecap. The cost (i.e. risk) is outweighed by the benefit. If the risk mitigation reduces the benefit too much, as most people would agree speed limiting (via governing technology) all cars to 15mph would do, then we don't do the risk mitigation, even though it would make us safer. The rub is, who decides?

IF "safety is our #1 priority", then we will outlaw woodworking via any means other than CNC, which you will observe behind the safety of bulletproof glass in a room with separate air from the "shop". No tablesaws, bandsaws, drill presses, wide belt sanders. ahhhh.... the Galoots reign will be nigh!

Nope. No chisels, no handplanes, no adzes, axes, awls, augers, saws, scrapers, you can't even touch the wood without wearing kevlar mesh gloves to prevent splinters, and you have to be "trained and licensed" to pick up a piece of wood and move it from the lumber storage area to the CNC bed.

How many on this board are going to continue woodworking under those conditions? Pretty grim, eh? But you'll be SAFE. Nobody is pushing for 15mph cars, CNC only woodworking, mandatory yoga, etc. Why not? Because safety is not our #1 priority, and it will never be. It is a priority, which is weighed along with lots of other priorities.

Who's to say that my priorities for you are more legitimate than your priorities for you?

[Adam Shapiro]

The free market ideal is supposed to mean that technological advances should be offered to the public to make their own decision as to whether or not they wish to buy a product. That didn't happen in this case, a monopoly interfered and attempted to lock the SS technology out of the marketplace (because they were afraid of bigger lawsuits on their BORG special saws lacking the technology). Gass's response has been to try to break the monopoly buy building the saws himself and pressuring the monopolistic powers by supporting litigation and regulation. Some call that unscrupulous, I call it just desserts for the monopoly who conspired to keep new technology off the market. Keep in mind, the reason for the conspiracy was not that they didn't think consumers wanted the SS tech, but because they were afraid they'd be sued if they sold it.

What I always find it interesting in these threads is the number of commentators saying when the patent gets taken away for 'the public good' is when they'll buy the technology. Frankly, as a semi-capitalist, I'd love to buy a SS now, but the quality and cost of the SS is just too high. That's my choice, but I sure wish I had the option to spend $800 on a $500-$600 Grizzly or Ridgid with the SS technology. I'd jump at the chance.

[Bryan Wellman]

Bryan, as one of my Army Drill Instuctors usta say, "I AM prejudiced, but I do NOT discriminate." I won't keep you from spending your money on a SawStop, should you choose.

I actually have a marble topped Ridgid that I really like. My comment was more a play on words I guess. Trying to add a bit of levity in a somewhat redundant argument.

I feel that if anyone wants to spend the money on the technology...more power to them. Capitalism works. As far as the patent holder trying to backdoor the industry to comply with his technology.....standard operating procedures. Albeit, a bit shadey in my book. But that's America. Convince the right people of ANYTHING and the sky's the limit.

[Van Huskey]

I actually have a marble topped Ridgid that I really like.

Was that a prototype, before they switch to granite? :)

[Van Huskey]

(because they were afraid of bigger lawsuits on their BORG special saws lacking the technology).

This along with what the companies considered ludicrous licensing fees and full indemnification, if the numbers reported for the offers of licensing are correct they are indeed FAR outside normal business practices for this type of intellectual property and coupled with indemnification was enough for the manufacturers to not even consider the offer, even without the considering whether or not a dual level of safety would invite more litigation. Even if it was used as a "reason" multiple levels of safety are present across lines of many if not most consumer products, an excellent example is the automobile industry. I personally think the major factor was cost.

[shane lyall]

I looked (read drooled) at ss at woodcraft last time I was there. No only for the brake tech but it a nice saw. I don't own one and don't have plans to buy one. I think it's great to have the safety feature but DONT want it tamed down my throat. It's sad he is using the court system to sell saws. That reason alone will keep me from buying an otherwise top shelf tool. On the other hand I beleve ALL school shops should be using them. After all, students a just learning the craft.

Ive been woodworking for 20+ years. I got bit a few years ago but was lucky it was not to bad. It was MY falt and mine alone. Would a ss lessened the injury? Yes. Will I do it again? I sure hope not and I'm much safer around my saw now.

[Chuck Tringo]

The free market ideal is supposed to mean that technological advances should be offered to the public to make their own decision as to whether or not they wish to buy a product. That didn't happen in this case, a monopoly interfered and attempted to lock the SS technology out of the marketplace (because they were afraid of bigger lawsuits on their BORG special saws lacking the technology). Gass's response has been to try to break the monopoly buy building the saws himself and pressuring the monopolistic powers by supporting litigation and regulation. Some call that unscrupulous, I call it just desserts for the monopoly who conspired to keep new technology off the market. Keep in mind, the reason for the conspiracy was not that they didn't think consumers wanted the SS tech, but because they were afraid they'd be sued if they sold it.

What I always find it interesting in these threads is the number of commentators saying when the patent gets taken away for 'the public good' is when they'll buy the technology. Frankly, as a semi-capitalist, I'd love to buy a SS now, but the quality and cost of the SS is just too high. That's my choice, but I sure wish I had the option to spend $800 on a $500-$600 Grizzly or Ridgid with the SS technology. I'd jump at the chance.

A MONOPOLY refers to a single company that controls a market....a trust refers to a small amount of such companies working towards monopolistic control....last I checked there were about 10 or more different table saw makers and they were competing with each other...hardly a monopoly...for all to reject him it was likely that the dude was asking too much for the tech

[Van Huskey]

A MONOPOLY refers to a single company that controls a market....a trust refers to a small amount of such companies working towards monopolistic control....last I checked there were about 10 or more different table saw makers and they were competing with each other...hardly a monopoly...for all to reject him it was likely that the dude was asking too much for the tech

Although I agree, as I postulated, that money was the key reason, one can certainly argue the "monopoly" is the power tool manufacturers association (what ever the name is) which all of them are members of and has spear headed to resistance to regulation.

[Bryan Wellman]

Was that a prototype, before they switch to granite? :)

Oops. Typing faster than I was thinking. Been working around marble countertops all week at a home design center. LOL

[Norman Pyles]

So, which side is winning?

[Carl Hunsinger]

Definitely not a monopoly, but I'm convinced there was collusion in an attempt to make Gass go away. I am thoroughly enjoying the current situation where those who colluded against him are now getting their collective a$$es whipped in the cabinet saw market segment, by the very same guy that was supposed to just dry up and blow away. And talk about liability. Those guys had their chance to license the technology, and at least put it on some of their models. Now it's on none of them, and it may not even be available for license now that Gass has spent so much time and money developing the Sawstop brand. The lawsuits are now beginning, and the power tool industry collectively has their n**s in a vise. If this is mandated, it will turn out, in retrospect, to have been the right decision. There was the same resistance to seatbelts and airbags, but I wouldn't buy a car without them now.

Give the ol' vise handle another quarter turn for me, Steve...

Carl

[Rob Lindquist]

I've dealt with patents, infringements and lawsuits. I'm not a lawyer, just dealt with this at work. Patents barely hold any water and can easily be worked around from everything we've seen. Patents are for lawyers to make money. I doubt for one minute that any of the bigger saw companies couldn't develop technology such as SS and beat the patents easily. There is improvement on prior art, do it better, do it so the blade isn't ruined, costs less to reset, and you would probably have it beaten one way or another. I'm sure that a big saw company has an in house law team that is top notch. They probably already have it all worked out and in testing, at least various versions of it.

Of course this is all just my opinion, but I manufacture machinery now and can think of ways to stop the blade fairly easily and quickly. Don't fret, the other manufacturers will be fine no matter what happens.

That being said, I hope I never wish I had a SS (or equivelent)!

[Bill Edwards(2)]

If someone already brought this up, I'm sorry... after 3 pages, reading
every post pushes the limits of my attention span.

This could put the hurt to Gass' plans to pal around with Bill Gates.

http://www.whirlwindtool.com/

[Vic Damone]

In my opinion, it is a good description, he's working hard to MANDATE everyone to purchase HIS invention. He also knows time is ticking and patent is only good for so long.
See Fein and all the new triangle sanders that have appeared in the past couple of years....
Technology is good, will solve many TS related injuries, but at what cost.

Given five to ten amputations daily the cost of injury and lengthy disability can run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Some of your own dollars have gone to defray uninsured medical cost and supplemental income to those injured. Mandate? I wish, I'm tired of paying for all the entitled Barney's out there. I'd rather feed the unfortunate.

I know two very experienced woodworkers victims of table saw accidents who wished there were a blade break mandate prior to their misfortune. Both still making sawdust, both now enthusiastic owners of the black saw as am I.

A little background knowledge regarding Mr. Gass' history and development of his system might enlighten your outlook regarding this product. There were some substantial reasons for the industries reluctance to embrace Mr. Gass' system. Regardless of the reasonable system cost they simply didn't have to. Denied, Mr. Gass decided to design an innovative and extremely high quality top tier product.


Support ampsurf.com

[Brent Ring]

If I were a school, I would buy one. If my kids were Joe Citizen, I would want them to be taught on a SS at a school if I am not there. This makes perfect sense to me.

If I were a business owner with employees, I would buy one. I could tell the employees to keep their fingers out of the blade, but I couldn't guarantee it.

I wouldn't want my children or an employee to be injured.

For my shop, I personally do not have a SS and don't plan to buy one. Reason: It is my personal choice and I DON'T SEE A NEED FOR IT FOR MY SHOP. If I put my finger in the blade it is my fault. (This isn't like the wearing seatbelt argument. The seatbelt laws were designed to protect everyone and you can even throw in the cost of insurance and cost to society and on and on. There are many variables that play into this. I agree with it and religiously wear my seatbelt.) (seatbelts are mandated because of the variables of other drivers, weather conditions, road conditions, mechanical issues, etc.)

I have never seen my tablesaw pull out on front of me or jump at my fingers or have too much to drink and swerve towards my fingers or blow a tire and roll or not get enough sleep and loose control of itself.

The tablesaw does what it does. If we lose a finger it is because our finger hit the blade. The blade doesn't normally jump out and hit our finger!

I for one will teach my children to keep their fingers out of the blade. I will also do everything in my power to keep my fingers out of the blade.

I don't agree with a business owner putting their nose into Government regulation when their intent is motivated by money. (they can say safety all they want, but if that was the truth, then the technology would be given away for a good of all)

I agree with this completely - actually I have been in the market for a new saw and was 90% sold on Sawstop until I heard and saw video of the Hammer sliders. I have given consideration to to them, and was discussing it with my wife and when she heard that Mr. Gass was trying force legislation - she said "Buy the other one". Mr. Gass is 95% assured of losing my business.

[Van Huskey]

Well slap me with a "biskit" and call me gravy. Almost 2 days, 87 replies and no need for moderator intervention.

I am usually right when I predict a thread shutdown, however there is no record of my track record. :)

My crystal ball says any mandates in the workplace are still 10 years plus down the road and like the UL requirement for riving knives it will result in all saws in the market meeting that requirement, not because the have to but because it is economically easier to have one line of machines. One still has plenty of time to buy a standard cabinet saw if that's what you want or perish the thought buy a better built used saw. Choice is good, we have choice and I pretty much guarantee we will continue to have choices for table saws for the next 20 years anyway.

In the end it will all be simply sound and fury. The only question is who is the poor player who struts and frets his hour upon the stage.

[Peter Aeschliman]

There seems to be a moral argument going on here... I don't really see it that way.

It's business. This sort of stuff goes on all the time, and it's simply capitalists trying to make the most money they can. Gass did a good thing by making a safety mechanism that will save a lot of people from injuries. Conversely, if you want to get into the moral argument, you could say that the machinery companies who passed up his offer to include the technology in their saws were morally wrong.

You could say that Gass's attempt to make as much money as possible on his invention is morally wrong, but you could also say that about the industry groups who tried to bury his technology.

I don't waste my time on such thoughts. I'm just going to buy the best saw I can with the money I have set aside for it. I weighed my options and my personal level of risk aversion to injury, and I bought a SawStop.

If you chose to see it simply as business, the attempt to get the regulators to require similar safety technology is a business move.... just the same as the way that the competing manufacturers made the business decision to pass on a technology that has way outperformed (in sales) than they probably expected. Gass's approach could also backfire on him profoundly because (as others have hinted) I'm sure he hasn't designed the only technology that can save fingers. So if he were to achieve his goal of getting the legislation passed, he very well might awake sleeping giants as a result.

I hate to bring up the old airbag comparison, which has been used a million times in these sawstop threads. But do you guys not like the fact that airbags are required in cars now? Do you hate that it limits your ability to choose, or are you glad you're less likely to die in a car accident now?

[Brodie Brickey]

In cases like this, where it is for the "public good" (Isn't that what he's arguing?) then any patents should become null and void, since it's obviously much more important to protect the public than to make money.

^Tell that one to the pharmaceutical companies, let me know how far you get.

SawStop is a great product, well made, and uniquely designed. He should have the patents on it. Its not like any of the other companies will do anything with it no matter the price.

This is in great part caused by our litigious society and people's inability to recognize that they're responsible for their own safety. I have the 'right' to run across the Interstate Freeway, but I'd better have some serious scrambling skills or I'll loose my life. The driver who hits me may be charged with 'failure to avoid an object in the lane' or some other bogus law, but I'm still dead. Since no one will take responsibility for themselves we have to blame a corporation selling the product for it. It's all Ryobi's fault Jose shoved his hand into the saw blade, not Jose for being an idiot.(italics used for sarcasm)

Everything now is so safe. You'd think there weren't enough people in the world. Darwinism needs to come more to the forefront and assert itself. Some of the best learning experiences involve pain, an adrenaline rush, and quite possibly a trip to the hospital with the resounding thought repeating in your head "I'm never doing .... again."

I don't own an SS table saw. I'm tempted to hold out for a combination machine with the technology, but I doubt I'll see it here in the US so one may be in my future. Only time will tell.

[Dan Hintz]

^[I]Tell that one to the pharmaceutical companies, let me know how far you get.
There's an issue with your logic... the pharmas aren't forcing anyone to use Viagra for a good time. You can get a prescription, but there's no law forcing you to take it. Even with the drugs that can help the general public, the option to use them (or not) is still there.

[Brodie Brickey]

There's an issue with your logic... the pharmas aren't forcing anyone to use Viagra for a good time. You can get a prescription, but there's no law forcing you to take it. Even with the drugs that can help the general public, the option to use them (or not) is still there.

I was thinking of the vaccines that have been developed. When governments purchase large quantities to vaccinate their population, it may not cover everyone but there is a massive push for everyone to get it.

[mark r johnson]

These threads seem to aways divide into two camps.

Camp 1: I'm in favor of any technology or technique which will help protect me from a mistake, should I make one.

Camp 2: If I cut my fingers off, shame on me for making a mistake, and I'll live with the consequences.

I'm in the first camp.

Mike



Camp 3: Those that have a saw and hope they need a new one before it becomes a mistake.

[keith micinski]

Does anyone know if I can patent a push stick that is even safer then a saw stop and costs much less to produce? Then I am going to petition the government to mandate that the only pushstick that can be used is mine and that it must be used at all times with the saw.

[David Prince]

I hate to bring up the old airbag comparison, which has been used a million times in these sawstop threads. But do you guys not like the fact that airbags are required in cars now? Do you hate that it limits your ability to choose, or are you glad you're less likely to die in a car accident now?

To me there is no comparison here. The airbag will help keep me safe from the other incompetent drivers that pull out in front of me and endanger my life. The airbag is a cushion between me and thier poor driving behavior.

With the saw, it is just me and the saw. Nobody else! If my finger ends up in the blade I will blame myself! I want to have the choice when it is only me and my saw.

[Mike Barney Sr]

Just my 2 cents . . . . .

I have to admit I haven't read every reply to this thread and while I may be reiterating someone or not addressing an important point, I felt a need to offer my opinion. I was impressed by the SawStop video, just as I am impressed by airbag videos. I have no choice but to purchase a vehicle with airbags anymore, thanks to government intervention. And while some would and do say something needs to done to address table saw safety, I still believe it should be a personal choice. I for one am not willing to pay extra for the feature on my table saw, nor to pay for the replacement brake every time it is tiggered. I would not be triggering it; it seems to have a mind of its own according to many reports I have read. And I generally run wood through the table saw at a slightly greater rate than they did with the hot dog; cherry for one burns easily if you go too slow. I know where my blade is. My saw is kept tuned and adjusted. I know the characteristics of wood and its movement while cutting it.

I occasionally glue up thin panels for planing to 1/8" or so. I rip rough sawn 4/4 slats 1/4" wide. I have found the best way (for me) to cut these are without any push stick or implement but my hands. I do get my thumb (the tip of my thumbnail) within 1/8" from the blade momentarily and I have never even had a close call. While I am sure many of you would call that in itself a close call, I have always been in control of my thumb and the wood. I have a direct "feel" of the cutting action which is not possible with a push stick, which I have tried many, many times. I have had more mishaps with a push stick than without.

Has anyone seen the video from Tauton press about Sam Maloof? They show him cutting large pieces of walnut 12/4 or so on a bandsaw with the wood not fully resting on the table. It is a very unsafe way to cut it. But they say in the video that he has done it this way for years and has not found a better way to make the cuts he needs. And they also say never to try this at home. He is using the bandsaw in a way not sanctioned by safety rules but he has trained himself to do it without mishaps.

The more we rely on safety features, the less we rely on our brains. Safety starts in the brain of the operator, plain and simple. What we need to address is education, something the government scores poorly on. Instead of working on the issue of actually teaching they lower the bar for testing. The government intervenes in our lives by regulating and imposing rules.

Things didn't used to be like this. It is so easy to sue someone for something that is your own fault, like spilling hot coffee on yourself at McDonald's, remember? People used to take responsibility for their actions. Society is to blame for this.

And on the issue of the inventor being unscrupulous, look at the facts. He is the only one wth this technology. He goes to the government pushing this issue of safety. Is he creating a need? Maybe, maybe not. I won't debate that point. But he is trying to sell a technology of which he is the sole owner, set to reap all the profits thereof. Sounds fishy to me.

[ian maybury]

So by this measure chainsaws, cars, trucks, industrial machinery, meat slicers/choppers, knives, mincers - all sorts of potentially dangerous things will end up banned? By who? Says who? Since when does it require some sort of 'expert' to decide these things?

Surely the requirement for any safety programme is to get the information out there? Once that's done people voting with their feet is surely far more democratic than allowing vested interests masquerading as experts to call the shots????

ian

[Art Mulder]

This could put the hurt to Gass' plans to pal around with Bill Gates.

http://www.whirlwindtool.com/

I watched the videos. Looks promising, and I wish him well.

Just a few things I observed...

1- it seems that all the "flesh sensing" is in the blade guard. So guard use, and guard placement, are important

2- On the Makita saw he was demonstrating, it stops the blade in 1/8 of a second. That's fast, sure. But sawstop does it in 5 milliseconds. 1/8 of a second is 125 milliseconds, so that is 25 times slower. I've seen a sawstop demo where they whacked the blade with a hotdog and it barely cut the skin, with a 1/8 second stop time I don't think that would happen here. I'd like to see some FAST cuts on this whirlwind saw also.

3- on other pages he demos this on a Delta tablesaw, and now he said it stopped the blade in "about one second". That is very slow!

Competition is good, and not damaging the blade is also good. I hope he makes it to market, but he'll have to improve that stop time on cabinet saws.

[Kevin Groenke]

This could put the hurt to Gass' plans to pal around with Bill Gates.

http://www.whirlwindtool.com/

I don't think so.

The Whirlwind contraption doesn't do much that a conventional or overhead blade guard doesn't do. Ok, it stops the blade if the operator get's too close, but we all know that the VAST majority of injuries occur when bladeguards are removed. I don't think I've ever heard a tale of somebody getting injured after sliding a body part past/under a guard. The SawStop works when it's needed most - when there IS NO bladeguard.

We move our overhead bladeguards for narrow rips and other operations EVERY DAY. We use them when we can but we're making architectural models, so we can't use them all the time. We have developed tools and procedures to make narrow rip cuts and similar operations safely, but the SawStop gives us an added layer of safety in the event of mishap.

Whirlwind advertises that they can stop a blade in 1/8 of a second. That is a LONG time when things are going bad on a machine: it's also 25X longer than the 1/200th that it takes a SawStop to do it's thing.

-kg

[Victor Robinson]

Does everything really have to be so black-and-white? Could people not live with a "mandate" that requires flesh-sensing technology in saws at schools and production environments (where the users of the saw did not choose to buy it?)?

I really don't see why the argument HAS to be about changing tablesaws entirely. Why not just require certain saw buyers to buy flesh-sensing saws, and leave the hobbyists/individual woodworkers to do as they please in their own homes and shops? Seems like a win-win-win. Gass makes his fortune for inventing a new technology. Environments where people learn or work together on a saw they didn't choose to buy are kept as safe as possible, and the individual woodworker isn't forced to adopt any technology because of government mandate.

[george wilson]

It is a terrible shame that lawyers were ever allowed to advertise. I recall in the 60's the long debate that went on over it. Now they advertise. What do they advertise? Law suits. there are too many free loaders out there who think as soon as they have done something stupid,they have made their fortunes.

I am sick of seeing constant ads on T.V.,from some ambulance chasing lawyer group giving it to another manufacturer in the neck.

If every cave man who ever cut himself on a sharpened rock got to sue someone,how far would we have gotten? There are VERY few things in this World that are 100% safe. You can even poison yourself from drinking too much water9I believe I've heard.)

True,some things deserve a suit,but any idiot knows that power tools are dangerous.

[Jeremy Greiner]

I have the 'right' to run across the Interstate Freeway, but I'd better have some serious scrambling skills or I'll loose my life.
I'm pretty confident that there is a law that prevents this. It may not be a serious crime, but still illegal.

We have a lot of laws in place that are for the "greater good" and I see no issue with the government mandating such a safety device onto table saws, such as seatbelts and airbags. The problem is there is no fair way to do this. Either you invalidate the patent which isn't fair to the sawstop guys, or you keep the patent in place which isn't fair to everyone else.

Really such a mandates should only come once the patent has expired it's natural legal date (according to some searching should be in 2022).

-jeremy

[Rick Prosser]

...

We have a lot of laws in place that are for the "greater good" and I see no issue with the government mandating such a safety device onto table saws, such as seatbelts and airbags. The problem is there is no fair way to do this. Either you invalidate the patent which isn't fair to the sawstop guys, or you keep the patent in place which isn't fair to everyone else.

Really such a mandates should only come once the patent has expired it's natural legal date (according to some searching should be in 2022).

-jeremy

Just when I thought there would not be any "new" information in this thread, Jeremy brought up this aspect that I had not considered.
It makes some sense. I wonder if this was what happened with seat belts and air bags? Mandated after patents expired? If so, how many deaths could have been "potentially" averted if the mandate was sooner. You are right - there is no good answer.

BTW - I agree that belts and bags protect from others who run into you, but they also protect you if you - say - spill hot coffee in your lap and run off the road into a tree. Your distraction, your accident, and you were protected better. (response to earlier comment - not Jeremy)

I don't like government mandates in general, but I understand why they are sometimes necessary.

[Jim Sebring]

None of the big names in table saws wanted to license the technology when it was first offered. I think they now regret their bad decisions. i'm sure the folks at Ryobi wish they had that capability before they had to pony up big bucks to the guy who won the court decision.

[Van Huskey]

i'm sure the folks at Ryobi wish they had that capability before they had to pony up big bucks to the guy who won the court decision.

I seriously doubt it. Their business model would not support the technology, they sold universal motor driven saws which could not be adapted to SS tech. Even assuming they pay the entire verdict they still will probably been net to the good compared to not selling table saws.

[Alan Bienlein]

I don't think so.

The Whirlwind contraption doesn't do much that a conventional or overhead blade guard doesn't do. Ok, it stops the blade if the operator get's too close, but we all know that the VAST majority of injuries occur when bladeguards are removed. I don't think I've ever heard a tale of somebody getting injured after sliding a body part past/under a guard.
-kg

Well I hate to burst your bubble but I had to pick up the two fingers and one thumb that the guy cut off while ripping pieces of laminate on a tablesaw with the blade gaurd in place. I couldn't believe it myself but was there to witness it.

It's nice to see someone trying to develop another technology but I think there are some flaws with this new technology that the other technology doesn't have.

[Van Huskey]

Well I hate to burst your bubble but I had to pick up the two fingers and one thumb that the guy cut off while ripping pieces of laminate on a tablesaw with the blade gaurd in place. I couldn't believe it myself but was there to witness it.

It's nice to see someone trying to develop another technology but I think there are some flaws with this new technology that the other technology doesn't have.

He didn't say it NEVER happened with the guard on. I don't know the statistics and doubt there are any accurate ones but probably he correct. Seeing it happen does bring it home but it is still anecdotal.

[keith micinski]

To me the reason the airbag comparison doesn't hold weight is the fact that the air bag costs 1 percent of a modern car. This system costs more then the total cost of 70 or 80 percent of table saws sold. That maybe even a bit low. Most people thought I was crazy for spending 1200 on a grizzly saw. 99 percent of the world would never buy more then a 150 dollar ryobi. I don't care how much they reduce the cost of this in the future it is going to eliminate almost all table saw sales in America anyway.

By the way I think the Sawstop idea is a completely ridiculous waste of money. If anyone was actually worried about cutting a finger off then they could easily grab a push stick and this would actually be safer and free. The biggest problem I have with all of the "Sawstop" people is that they keep assuming that it is a guarantee that it is going to work and never fail. This is false. They have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on the shuttle and they couldnt even make it flawless. The only way to never have an amputation is to never have your finger come in contact with the blade. Outside of not using a table saw at all the only way I know how to never have your finger in contact with the blade is to use a push stick.

[Glenn Vaughn]

By the way I think the Sawstop idea is a completely ridiculous waste of money.

I disagree with this sttement. I have a SawStop contractor that I purchased after a friend had an accident with my Ruobi BT3000. He was cutting a bevel on a threshold and the wood got sucked into the zero clearance plate slot. His had hit the blade - luckily the wood jammed and he only got a 2" long cut about 1/4" deep. The hospital bill was $1800.00. This friend has been doing construction work for years and was usually very cautious. The cut he was doing could not be done with the guard on and a push stick was out of the question. The error was the zero clearance plate - the blade slot was too wide for the piece of wood at the edge.

As for mandated safety features; I remember the controversy over helmets for motorcycles and the argument. The main justification was to reduce the everity of head injuries and the associated costs to the public to support someone with severe brain damage. The same hustification was used for seat belts and air bags. Reduce the severity of injury and reduce the cost of treatment - everyone pays a part of the insurance costs in their premuims. Costs beyond what insurance pays quite often are passed on to everyone else.

Hospitals pass the cost of treating those who cannot pay to those that can pay. Doctors pass the cost of malpractice insurance to their paitents (usually paid for by insurance companies that pass the costs on as premiums to everyone with a policy). In actuality insurance companies pay nothing out of pocket - the policy holders pay for everything.

While lawyers are not totally blameless for the number of lawsuits we see, much of the blame has to be laid on the greedy people that see any misfortune as an opportunity to get rich. Also to blame are the huge awards awarded by juries, wuite often way out of line with reality.

[Brian Penning]

Like seatbelts, smoking, motorcycle helmets, etc., I believe you should have the choice not to use the safety features.
However, your insurance (gov't or private) shouldn't cover the injury/injuries if it's proven they weren't used.
So, yeah, it's your choice.

[keith micinski]

This friend has been doing construction work for years and was usually very cautious. The cut he was doing could not be done with the guard on and a push stick was out of the question. The error was the zero clearance plate - the blade slot was too wide for the piece of wood at the edge.


I have two problems with this statement. One there is no such thing as a cut that can't be done with some form of a push stick or push pad. Two how cautious could he be if he was trying to do a cut with the wrong throat insert in and not using a push stick? To me that is the epitome of not cautious. I probably overstated it when I said it was ridiculous. I agree that it is safer then not having the brake. That having been said, personally I would rather not have a saw with the break and I think that is the main point of most of the posters in this thread, everyone should have a choice.

[Bob Lang]

About one table saw accident in five occurs with the guard in place. There's a new article on the Popular Woodworking Editor's Blog that details the accident statistics that CPSC uses.

Bob Lang

[daniel lane]

I, for one, hope this means we'll see more woodworking articles in USA Today.

I can't even begin to communicate how amused this post made me. :)

What's the keyboard shortcut for "thumbs up"? John needs at least 62.




daniel

[daniel lane]

Having read this full thread, I'll chuck my 50% of 1/50th of a dollar into the pot:

1. Ima holdin' on to my old flesh-eater, once the gummint mandates SS tech, it will be worth twice as much as it is now on the black market.
2. Ref. author of USA Today article: Didn't San Francisco recently ban happy meals? Isn't there an analogy worth drawing, just pointing out the government mandates "for the good of the consumer"?



daniel

[Peter Aeschliman]

By the way I think the Sawstop idea is a completely ridiculous waste of money. If anyone was actually worried about cutting a finger off then they could easily grab a push stick and this would actually be safer and free.

People cut their fingers off when using push sticks too... Sure, they reduce the risk, but they don't eliminate it. For example, kickback can cause you to completely lose control of your push stick and send your hand right into the blade. With a high powered saw, you wouldn't have time to react.


The biggest problem I have with all of the "Sawstop" people is that they keep assuming that it is a guarantee that it is going to work and never fail. This is false. They have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on the shuttle and they couldnt even make it flawless. The only way to never have an amputation is to never have your finger come in contact with the blade. Outside of not using a table saw at all the only way I know how to never have your finger in contact with the blade is to use a push stick.

You're speaking in extremes and frankly it's a weak argument. Let's say a SS fails to activate 1 out of 100 times, and that one guy cuts his finger off. Terrible thing, no doubt. But that means you have 99 people who still have their fingers. Are you trying to say that just because it failed once, that the whole technology is worthless? That's illogical.

And granted, there hasn't been a single public story of the mechanism failing. Not saying there won't be some day, but in the meantime there are lots of guys out there whose fingers have been saved...

[Don Morris]

They "estimate" Ten fingers a day? Wow, that seems like a lot. I could "estimate" 25 or 50. I guess it's coming. Don't like the Govt making all my decisions for me. But I do understand the concept of the guy in a busy shop being pushed into a blade by someone behind him accidentally tripping and forcing his hand into the blade.

[Kent A Bathurst]

Well, well, well.......

116 posts on a SS thread, with only one intervention by the Mod Squad - and you know they've been on this one like snow on Lake Shore Drive. A man coulda made a lot of money on the "over/under till lock" bet after the initial post.

Who'd'a thunk this topic could have stayed this civil for this long? The species may be evolving after all. :D :D

Keep up the good attitude, people. I find the topic itself boring, but the group dynamics interesting.

[Van Huskey]

Well, well, well.......

Who'd'a thunk this topic could have stayed this civil for this long? The species may be evolving after all. :D :D



I thought that too, until I realized every time I open this thread Ken and Bruce appear behind me and they appear, in my peripheral vision at least, to be holding tasers. Strangely, this realization was comforting since for days I couldn't figure out why I was waking up with my head on the keyboard with drool running down my face. Oh really, its just me? They say they only "visit" me and everyone else has indeed evolved. :)

[Kevin Groenke]

About one table saw accident in five occurs with the guard in place. There's a new article on the Popular Woodworking Editor's Blog that details the accident statistics that CPSC uses.

Bob Lang

Interesting article, thank you Bob. It would be very interesting to see the source data that the CSPC provided you.

http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/

To add some clarifying text that the CSPC may have left out...

"it was REPORTED that the blade guard was in use in 22% if the incidents in which injury occurred"

I have no doubt that injuries occur with a bladeguard in place, but 22% seems very high. Perhaps some survey respondents (possibly supervisors or plant managers) were not completely honest about the details of an incident? How many bladeguards get dug out of a dusty corner only after an injury occurs (and before the insurance/OSHA visit)?

At the very least, I would suspect an injury with a bladeguard in place would be a contusion from impact with kickback rather than a more serious laceration from contact with a spinning blade.

-kg

[Kent A Bathurst]

I thought that too, until I realized every time I open this thread Ken and Bruce appear behind me and they appear, in my peripheral vision at least, to be holding tasers. Strangely, this realization was comforting since for days I couldn't figure out why I was waking up with my head on the keyboard with drool running down my face. Oh really, its just me? They say they only "visit" me and everyone else has indeed evolved. :)


Van - You already knew that there is a forum function that sends alerts to Ken, Bruce, and Chris whenever you or I sign on. Probably even beeps their blackberry and wakes them up at night.:p:p

[George Bregar]

Interesting article, thank you Bob. It would be very interesting to see the source data that the CSPC provided you.

http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/

To add some clarifying text that the CSPC left out...

"it was REPORTED that the blade guard was in use in 22% if the incidents in which injury occurred"

I have no doubt that injuries occur with a bladeguard in place, but 22% seems very high. Perhaps some survey respondents (possibly supervisors or plant managers) were not completely honest about the details of an incident. How many bladeguards get dug out of a dusty corner only after an injury occurs (and before the insurance/OSHA visit)?

At the very least, I would suspect an injury with a bladeguard in place would be a contusion from impact with kickback rather than a laceration from contact with a spinning blade.

-kgIf you read closer you would find that "95% of table saw accidents happen in the home" so no "supervisor" involved to distort the numbers. If every one of the "non home" injuries that had a blade guard were lies, the total still would be 17%.

As far as your "suspicion" of the extent of these injuries "83% of injuries involved contact with the blade, and 94% of injuries were to fingers." so had nothing to do with kickback or contusions. Now of the 17% that could have been kickback...if ALL were "blade guard in place" that still leads 5% that weren't kickback but blade accidents. Pretty hard to imagine though that no "non-blade guard" users ever suffer kickback injuries.

The bottom line is that cut injuries do happen with blade guards in use with table saws. Now although we are woodworkers, and enthusiastic hobbyists (enough to be active on a forum) millions of saws are purchased by non-hobbyists...maybe not Uni's etc but all those POS "contractor" and benchtop saws. Look on CL and you see them all the time "Used for one project". I would guess that's were most (but not all) of the injuries occur. And I guarantee that someone somewhere has tried to remove a small piece of cutoff that has got caught under a guard near the blade and "ooops".

These Saw Stop arguments are dumb. It's safer. You have to be an idiot to think otherwise. Everything else is "less safe" to the degree of quality of guard system, how often it's put to use, and safe practices in general. Should the technology be mandated? I don't think so, at least for personal us, but that's a different debate.

[Bob Lang]

Accidents with the blade guard in place surprised me too, but the numbers from CPSC (which are publicly available) are in line with a survey we at Popular Woodworking took about a year ago from readers of our blog. In many cases, an accident occurs because the saw operator isn't paying attention to where the hands are in relation to the blade, or continues pushing wood into the saw when distracted. If a piece of wood can go under the guard to be cut, so can a finger or hand. Another common type of accident is when the board being cut becomes jammed or stuck while being cut. Pushing harder is a natural response, and there are two bad things that happen in these circumstances. The first is that the wood comes free of the obstruction and moves through the saw faster than expected, the hand doing the pushing goes along and into the path of the blade. The second is that the hand slips off the stuck wood and moves forward and into the blade. In any of these scenarios, the guard isn't much help as it is designed to allow things to enter from the front. Thinking that the blade guard makes an accident impossible to happen is a lot like thinking wearing a seat belt will keep you from driving your car into a tree. The safety devices mitigate damage if an accident occurs, but they don't prevent accidents.

I think a lot of woodworkers have a false sense of security about table saw blade guards, and devices like push sticks. Many kick back accidents occur because the wood isn't entirely under the operator's control all the way through the cut. I would also like to stress that the reason CPSC is involved is that the vast majority of table saw accidents occur to amateur users in their homes. OHSA regulations cover the workplace, and for every professional woodworker who loses a finger, there are 19 hobbyists getting hurt. We need to learn how to safely use our saws, and what to do when the unexpected happens.

Bob Lang

[Rick Prosser]

I was with you up until this point:


... You have to be an idiot to think otherwise...

[Sean Nagle]

If I had to replace my 17 year-old Unisaw today, it will be with a slider, not a SS.

[Scott Gibbons]

As a smoker (for the next 11 days anyhow) and a gun owner, all I have to say is:

"Welcome to my world"...

It's one where people that have no clue, no experience with and no desire to listen to facts or reason will make the rules you will be forced to abide by.


P.S. - That sound you hear is your ox being gored....

Sorry - don't mean to seem so jaded about it, but, it's not like his is the first time some collection of people trying to justify their paychecks have made some horrible decisions.


Next on their agenda will be the blitz that informs us all that:
"It's for your own safety"...


Amen Brother.

[Rod Sheridan]

That's the first post I've read that ranges through the literary styles of "slap me with a biskit" through the great English bard.

I'm not sure whether you deserve an A+ or a time out in the corner.:D

Amusing it was...........Regards, Rod.

[phil harold]

I have seen many SawStop demonstrations on video and it looks to me that the demo hot dog is moving much slower than most people push a piece of wood through a table saw. Keep in mind that at a slightly faster working speed, you finger will be going through the blade a little faster. Only one tooth on your blade has to travel about 1/2" or so to remove your finger. Does the SawStop work that fast? Can someone here run a hot dog through their SawStop at a normal working speed and post the results?

There is problems with their demonstrations wet hot dog or finger...
Some one need to throw a turkey leg into the blade

what happens when you cut wet wood (pressure treated)

and remember even if there is a saw stop on every saw there will still be injuries

You cant fix stupid

[Brian Vaughn]

The more we rely on safety features, the less we rely on our brains. Safety starts in the brain of the operator, plain and simple. What we need to address is education, something the government scores poorly on. Instead of working on the issue of actually teaching they lower the bar for testing. The government intervenes in our lives by regulating and imposing rules.


I gotta agree with Mike here, seeing as I work in a highly regulated industrial environment. I saw the progression as more and more safety rules were implemented. As more and more, all the cautions, all the warnings, things that should have been inherently known by the workers had to start being written into working procedures, and more and more, saw them turning off their brains because they quit thinking, and just counted on the procedure to keep them safe. When a healthy respect of a tool is maintained, it's fine to have additional safety features (Assuming it's a choice). But when a safety feature takes the place of training and safe practices, it's an accident waiting to happen. For me, the knowledge that if I slip, if I lose control, that I could be severely injured, keeps me on high alert any time that tool is spinning. That's what's missing. People need to realize that just like the fact that a car is effectively a 2-ton guided missile (Another healthy respect that's fading), that very sharp thing spinning very fast will cut through your soft flesh much faster than that hard wood.

Once that respect is instilled, most accidents take care of themselves. (I said most. It is called an accident, after all)

[Brian Vaughn]

On another related note, those safety procedures that were getting mandated previously eventually led to buying box cutters where the blade retracted as soon as you stopped cutting, and specially made scissors and other cutting tools. Just to accomplish simple iterations. When you treat 50 year old men like kindergardeners, don't be surprised when they act like one and stick their finger in the shiny spinny thing "Because no one said not to"....

[Sean Nagle]

Interesting that you bring up box cutters and scissors. All my personal injuries in the shop have been from hand tools. Well, there was that one kick-back incident which bruised my hip pretty badly and cut my thumb and finger because it was sharp 1/4 melamine. No SS would have prevented that one.

[Dave Anderson NH]

So far this thread has evolved in a wonderful and respectful manner. Yes, the Mod staff has been watching this one like a pack of hungry wolves, or a flock of vultures if you prefer.:D Van is right and I wouldn't have given odds that it would last more than a day at the most. As for the taser, the answer is no, we are now equipped with more advanced technology and we ain't tellin'. ;)

Please keep up the good work folks. It is enjoyable to see a controversial topic produce divergent opinions and still generate light and not heat. Carry on!!

[keith micinski]

People cut their fingers off when using push sticks too... Sure, they reduce the risk, but they don't eliminate it. For example, kickback can cause you to completely lose control of your push stick and send your hand right into the blade. With a high powered saw, you wouldn't have time to react.



You're speaking in extremes and frankly it's a weak argument. Let's say a SS fails to activate 1 out of 100 times, and that one guy cuts his finger off. Terrible thing, no doubt. But that means you have 99 people who still have their fingers. Are you trying to say that just because it failed once, that the whole technology is worthless? That's illogical.

And granted, there hasn't been a single public story of the mechanism failing. Not saying there won't be some day, but in the meantime there are lots of guys out there whose fingers have been saved...

This is either the most ridiculous thing I have ever read or I am completely ridiculous. I would love to here one story in the history of the world where someone was using a push stick and somehow they got SUCKED INTO the saw especially involving KICKBACK, again KICKBACK. If someone chimes in that there cousins neighbor did this exact thing I guess I wont be surprised though.


I don't think the whole technology is worthless and never even implied it, it is actually pretty good. I stated a simple fact. Most, not all, but most Sawstop people assume that getting a Sawstop means that it is a guarantee that they wont get a finger cut off. This is false, that's all I was saying nothing more. I guess at the end of the day, and it has been said multiple times in this thread, complacency is the only dangerous thing in the shop and no amount of technology will eliminate that. Some will actually even contribute to it.

[John Coloccia]

I stated a simple fact. Most, not all, but most Sawstop people assume that getting a Sawstop means that it is a guarantee that they wont get a finger cut off.

Where did you find this fact?

The ONLY fact in any of this that is really relevant is that as far as anyone can tell, there has yet to be a major injury on a SawStop. Maybe there has been and I'm ignorant of it, and if so I'll stand corrected, but that's the fact as far as I know. To be clear, this isn't to say that there will never be one, but all the same that's pretty remarkable. Any claim that the technology is somehow making things less safe seems to be verifiably wrong.

If someone concocted a automotive technology that reduced the serious injury rate to zero, does anyone really think that there wouldn't be a massive push by all involved to require this on all new vehicles? Would that be a bad idea? I don't know. If it added $10,000 to the cost of every vehicle sold? What about $200 but in return you knew you were making someone you hated rich in the process?

Personally, I like having my choice, but you have to look at this from a standpoint of what I can only assume are well meaning public servants. If they do something, they anger the people they're trying to protect. If they do nothing, they anger the people who chop things off (plus face a very unfriendly press who just LOVE to trump up righteous indignation). Not sure what else can be said about this without crossing the line into politics. It is what it is.

The whole thing just sort of makes me wish PM, Delta, General et al would just get together, buy out SawStop, license the patents for public use, and be done with it already before this thing blows up in everyone's face.

[Van Huskey]

... the most ridiculous thing I have ever read...complacency is the only dangerous thing in the shop...


One can even be hyper-vigilant and be killed sitting on the toilet. Complacency is a significant danger in the shop (as in life) but far from the only danger. I could give examples but it is akin to naming the grains of sand on the beach.

Let me say I am not a SS owner and spent SS money on my cabinet saw while the SS was available and proven. One thing I will not argue about the SS is that it makes a shop safer, period. The amount of extra safety margin it adds is debatable and varies from shop to shop. The fact that nobody has ever gotten a finger cut off with a SS does not mean it can't or won't happen. Just like some of the modern passive safety features in cars that don't prevent you from getting in trouble but they help reduce the severity of the outcome if you do. The European machines have more active safety built in and if ever the twain shall meet one will have an even safer saw.

I spent much of my life as a rock and alpine climber (see avatar) and have had climbing partners who were hyper safety conscious and partners that were very laissez-faire I have made phone calls to wives and attended funerals for both types. Though it is true the environment in our shops is much more controlled than 8000 meters up in the Himalayas or on a runout groundfall 5.12 pitch in New River Gorge but life is still life and every safety measure can help. Even obtusely mocking another mans risk-benefit analysis is just wrong.

The SS argument has threads of machismo, economics, politics and even morals blended in along with the ever present defense of ones buying decisions for spice. This all makes it difficult to keep a internet arms length discussion civil, even when everyone is practical, clearheaded and respectful otherwise.

In the end this thread is a discussion about mandating SS technology. My opinion about that is quite complex and can't be effectively summarized with enough brevity to keep anyone's attention on a forum long enough to explain. But it is simple, I am for it and against it.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

I argued this with Gass here on this very forum before he manufactured his first saw.

Here's my take on it.

I applaud Gass for his invention and applauded him UNTIL he approached the CPSC and petitioned them to make it mandatory. I argued it with him here on this forum. He is/was iMHO getting retribution because the big established manufacturers of woodworking tools turned him down when he approached them to buy his invention.

IMHO...his ego was injured and he was getting revenge.

I know from experience what "poor" is.

A mandated requirement could place the cost of a table saw out of reach for those with limited incomes. Those lower cost saws could allow some skilled person with little or no income to earn a living and possibly start a self-supporting business.

If Gass is/was so interested in consumer safety, why put a by-pass on his device? The answers....Money and market share...he realized if he couldn't cut wet wood, his product wouldn't sell. Does the by-pass mode make the saw safer? Hardly.

Stop the demonizing of those who prefer to have a choice. I could just as easily demonize those who believe it should be mandatory.

There is no reasonable argument that SS doesn't make the t/s safer......but making it mandatory? What's next? Outlaw all bandsaws.....hand drills, drill presses, jointers, dedicated mortisers, sanders and any other tool that has a potential to cause injury? You might say my argument is outlandish and ridiculous, by the same token I suggest making it mandatory on all new tablesaws is just as ridiculous.

You cannot outlaw stupidity or carelessness or calousness or casualness....can't be done. Where will the same crowd be when somebody cuts their finger off when the saw's safety device fails.......or it's in the by-pass mode?

Unless the LOML TELLS me I have to buy SS, I won't. I refuse to support Gass in his hunt to seek revenge from those who turned him down. You can bet every dollar you have that I try to thoroughly plan each cut on my tablesaw and pay attention everytime I turn it on. I always use the blade guard UNLESS I am using my dado blade. I pray I never have an accident with my table saw because I will report it here and take the heat.

If Sharon suggests I buy a SS I will ignore her.:D If Mrs. Fitzgerald tells me I have to buy one, me and my Honda Pilot will head to the WoodCraft in Spokane.:o

I find Gass' petition devious and disingenuous.

[John Coloccia]

Stop the demonizing of those who prefer to have a choice. I could just as easily demonize those who believe it should be mandatory.


Admittedly I haven't re-read the entire thread, but I re-read a lot of it, and I can't find even a hint of this going on. Most SS owners as far as I can tell prefer choice as well. The personal attacks are historically, and consistently anti-sawstop, usually in the form of accusing owners of somehow being lesser woodworkers.

It seems like there's so much pent up and misdirected anger that many don't even bother to read or attempt to understand what anyone is saying anymore. People just glance at a post, read a couple of words, and then just go with what they think it should have said.

I find Gass and his tactics to be repugnant as well, but he has what I want so I pinch my nose and bear it. Perhaps we should be less upset at his exploiting the system, and more upset at the system that allows for exploits.

[Neil Brooks]

I rarely see it argued that the SS isn't a GOOD saw.

Whether or not you think it's AS good as a Uni or a PM is a pretty personal decision.

Whether or not you approve of Gass's "approach" or "tactics" tends to speak to one's politics ... even if only a little.

And I've never seen a single SS thread where anybody's mind was changed about these couple of issues.

And I don't expect this one to do anything differently :)

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Neal... I agree with you...these threads never change anyone's mind about the matter. I don't know that I can agree with your statment about political views, however. I hold views on a lot of things that don't necessarily align with any one political philosophy. I find most matters too complex to be over simplified by categorizing it as all in one flavor.....It's not red......not blue.....but it's there

[Ken Fitzgerald]

John,

When people start making comments about the public costs of treating those who are injured by not having SS, it is, IMHO, an indirect attempt to demonize those who either can't afford SS or choose to not buy SS.

When there is an attempt to imply a certain moral high ground by choosing SS. Enough.

IMHO, there is no moral high ground as this isn't question about morality.

It's possible my perception of some posts are wrong about implications of morality or demonizaiton but it's just as possible my perceptions could be right.

I respect the right of everyone to have their opinion and reasons to buy or NOT buy SS.

[Van Huskey]

And I've never seen a single SS thread where anybody's mind was changed about these couple of issues.


I can tell you there have been a lot of people change their minds over threads like this over the years SS has been around.

My personal odyssey while reading threads on forums over the years:

1. interesting idea, over priced, probably isn't fully sorted nor effective and probably attached to an inferior saw
2. wow this actually seems to be proving itself and the saw (ICS at the time) seems really well made
3. (sees ICS for the first time)
4. (uses and ICS for the first time, a friends)
5. directed to SS hotdog video by a forum thread and now believes SS is a great saw with a non-gimmick tech and my next saw will be an ICS
6. directed by forum threads to SS corporate agenda, opinion sours
7. further threads leading to more facts regarding SS's agenda and rerunning my personal risk-benefit analysis has me buying a PM2000 w/riving knife but sans brake


I think the key is most if not all who post in these threads have made their minds up, for what ever reason, however this is a small sampling of the ones that actually read the thread and are potentially influenced by them. Though there are fewer and fewer people who have not made up their minds there are still some on the fence reading this and other threads and being influenced.

[Neil Brooks]

Okay. Very fair, Van.

What I was trying to focus on is less the saw, itself -- what I interpret your post as pointing to -- and more the discussions about Gass's tactics, the concept of a potential mandate, the arguments about whether probability or idiocy plays a larger role in woodworking accidents.

See what I mean ?

In the broadest sense -- admittedly, TOO broad, by definition -- I think there are two things: the saw, and everything around the saw and its marketing.

I've focused more of MY attention on the saw, but don't take anything away from those who have strong opinions about "the other stuff."

It's that latter category that I was pointing out, and that ... I'd guess ... results in few people changing their minds.

I could still be wrong, though. Wouldn't surprise me a bit ;)

[Rob Steffeck]

When there is an attempt to imply a certain moral high ground by choosing SS. Enough.

This sums up my feelings perfectly. When I bought my cabinet saw last year, I was deciding between a General, Unisaw, and SS. I decided on General. One the replies from a SS person was: "Congrats. But I hope you don't regret your decision."

Maybe I took that comment wrong, but it certainly seemed to me that it meant I had made a mistake in my choice.

[Rod Sheridan]

Van, I read most of the online paper where Mr. Gas petioned them to make active sensing technology a requirement for saws.

What surprised me was how many people who are hobby users had finger amputations compared to OSHA governed shops.

The counter argument from the machine manufacturers was that training and safety procedures were enough to prevent accidents, however a 10 year analysis of the data showed that accidents statistics were consistent.

I believe both sides of the argument are true.

The flesh sensing technology is a significant improvement in saw safety.

The use of proper guards and training of operators significantly reduces injuries.

The problem is, only in industry is training common. So central to the ability to work safely, that labour codes in general define a competent person as one who has sufficient training to understand the hazards involved.

I think that's where it comes apart, yes the table saws are safe as designed, when operated by a competent person. The flesh sensing technology adds another layer to the protection, a secondary back up system for times when the primary protection fails. (Guards and training).

The issue is, how do we train people?

I'm not picking on Norm, however I as a hobby user watch Norm use a saw, I learn that guards aren't required for skilled operators.

However this is exactly the reverse of what the safety statistics show us, that shops which comply with OSHA regulations have very few accidents with the saw.

So, I recently bought a Euro slider, certainly not in the Ryobi saw cost bracket, my saw came with a manual that indicated that I can't perform any operation where the guard is removed, and that for some operations I need an overarm guard.

OK, fair enough at $10,000 I'm probably not a new saw user.

How about the $200 saw at the home center? Does it come with a DVD showing people how to use the saw safely? Probably not, however that would be a $10 cost that could really improve safety.

So, how as experienced wood workers could we improve safety?

That's the question, because if we can't do it, someone will do it for us.............Rod.

[Sean Nagle]

I'm not picking on Norm, however I as a hobby user watch Norm use a saw, I learn that guards aren't required for skilled operators.

Rod, good point about training. I'll ask others where they learned to operate the tablesaw. After all, it's not quite obvious. I'll admit that I learned to operate a tablesaw from watching Norm. In the later shows Norm did demonstrate a consistent and competent technique at the tablesaw (earlier shows had some real hair-raising footage if I recall). There were relatively few times where I cringed watching him in the later shows though.

In contrast, I saw a video of Dr. Gass operating a tablesaw. His technique was atrocious. Good thing he invented the device he did, he needed it ;)

[keith micinski]

Where did you find this fact?

The ONLY fact in any of this that is really relevant is that as far as anyone can tell, there has yet to be a major injury on a SawStop. Maybe there has been and I'm ignorant of it, and if so I'll stand corrected, but that's the fact as far as I know. To be clear, this isn't to say that there will never be one, but all the same that's pretty remarkable. Any claim that the technology is somehow making things less safe seems to be verifiably wrong.

John you just made my point for me. I didn't argue that there have been failures. My statement is " Most people believe that getting a Sawstop means that you aren't going to cut your finger off." I might be wrong on the "most" part but I doubt it, one thing I am not wrong on is that owning a Sawstop does not mean you WON'T ever cut your finger off. If you disagree with this statement as a fact then this is there rare case where you are completely wrong. It lessens the risk significantly but does not eliminate it completely. I also never once said that Technology makes something less safe. I said technology can contribute to complacency. I admit that I overstated complacency being the only risk in a shop. What I should have said was "to me complacency is the most dangerous thing in a shop." This is my opinion and up for debate obviously. I do know Osha has found accidents in the work place happen to 40-64 year old people more often then 40-18. The reason they give and the reason that makes sense is not lack of training, its complacency. I'd be willing to bet most people would have guessed that statistic to be the other way around.

By the way if someone wants to own a Sawstop because they are safer table saws then the competitors I have no problem with that. I agree that Sawstop saws are more safe then the other saws. What they aren't though is SAFE. All power tools are inherently unsafe by nature and throwing technology at them does not make them 100% fool proof. This FACT seems to get lost in all of the discussion. I guess this was my main point from the beginning and probably all I should have put in my post to start with.

[John Coloccia]

The ONLY fact in any of this that is really relevant is that as far as anyone can tell, there has yet to be a major injury on a SawStop. Maybe there has been and I'm ignorant of it, and if so I'll stand corrected, but that's the fact as far as I know. To be clear, this isn't to say that there will never be one, but all the same that's pretty remarkable. Any claim that the technology is somehow making things less safe seems to be verifiably wrong.


John you just made my point for me. I didn't argue that there have been failures. My statement is " Most people believe that getting a Sawstop means that you aren't going to cut your finger off." I might be wrong on the "most" part but I doubt it, one thing I am not wrong on is that owning a Sawstop does not mean you WON'T ever cut your finger off. If you disagree with this statement as a fact then this is there rare case where you are completely wrong. It lessens the risk significantly but does not eliminate it completely. I also never once said that Technology makes something less safe. I said technology can contribute to complacency. I admit that I overstated complacency being the only risk in a shop. What I should have said was "to me complacency is the most dangerous thing in a shop." This is my opinion and up for debate obviously. I do know Osha has found accidents in the work place happen to 40-64 year old people more often then 40-18. The reason they give and the reason that makes sense is not lack of training its complacency. I'd be willing to bet most people would have guessed that statistic to be the other way around.

I wish I had an icon for "scratching my head in confuzzlement". :confused:

If anyone can find a statement anywhere saying or implying that they feel the SS lends absolute protection, I will eat crow and conceded that at least SOME people think that.

[Chris Padilla]

Van - You already knew that there is a forum function that sends alerts to Ken, Bruce, and Chris whenever you or I sign on. Probably even beeps their blackberry and wakes them up at night.:p:p

Not true, not true!!!

[keith micinski]

I wish I had an icon for "scratching my head in confuzzlement". :confused:

If anyone can find a statement anywhere saying or implying that they feel the SS lends absolute protection, I will eat crow and conceded that at least SOME people think that.

Funnily enough I feel exactly the same about your reply. It sounds like you agree with me then that Sawstop doesn't provide a 100% assurance. Now that we both agree I suppose we can move on.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Not true, not true!!!

Don't tell either of them that those aren't tasers Chris.

[John Coloccia]

Funnily enough I feel exactly the same about your reply. It sounds like you agree with me then that Sawstop doesn't provide a 100% assurance. Now that we both agree I suppose we can move on.

I DO agree with you, Keith.

[Chris Padilla]

This is either the most ridiculous thing I have ever read or I am completely ridiculous. I would love to here one story in the history of the world where someone was using a push stick and somehow they got SUCKED INTO the saw especially involving KICKBACK, again KICKBACK.

It seems to me you are assuming that the kickback itself (i.e. wood being flung at you at a very high velocity) prevents one from moving forward into the blade? I've been hit by kickback twice in my life and both times I was hit on top of the right shoulder. That is a good 10" or so above the top of the table. I can imagine pushing some wood through the blade with a push stick, kickback happens (either hits me or doesn't) but I'm still moving forward and even faster because the wood is no longer there. Push stick or not, I'm likely headed near a deadly spinning blade.

[Van Huskey]

Don't tell either of them that those aren't tasers Chris.

Ken, I am much more worried about what they might be than if I knew they were "just" tasers. I shake ever time I hit "post reply" wondering what type of new excruciating pain awaits me. The fear of the unknown and all that. Uh oh, am I discussing moderation in an open forum, no not the pain again, I promise I will take my blue pill and the yellow one too.

[Chris Padilla]

Funnily enough I feel exactly the same about your reply. It sounds like you agree with me then that Sawstop doesn't provide a 100% assurance. Now that we both agree I suppose we can move on.


I DO agree with you, Keith.

Only Sith Lords speak in absolutes.... :D

[Van Huskey]

I DO agree with you, Keith.

I DON'T agree with you John, just on principle. I dunno about what though, lemme think... oh yeah I say white compound works better than green on a WS3000 buffing wheel! :)

[John Coloccia]

I DON'T agree with you John, just on principle. I dunno about what though, lemme think... oh yeah I say white compound works better than green on a WS3000 buffing wheel! :)

Shoot. Now I gotta go out and buy another Worksharp so I can have a dedicated "white compound buff" mounted all the time.

I'm rapidly turning into the Van Huskey of sharpening equipment.

[Peter Aeschliman]

Funnily enough I feel exactly the same about your reply. It sounds like you agree with me then that Sawstop doesn't provide a 100% assurance. Now that we both agree I suppose we can move on.

I don't find this distinction important. What's the difference between 99% assurance and 100% assurance? Who cares?

I interpreted your post as saying "since it doesn't provide 100% assurance, it's a total waste of money." I'll quote your post:


By the way I think the Sawstop idea is a completely ridiculous waste of money. If anyone was actually worried about cutting a finger off then they could easily grab a push stick and this would actually be safer and free. The biggest problem I have with all of the "Sawstop" people is that they keep assuming that it is a guarantee that it is going to work and never fail. This is false. They have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on the shuttle and they couldnt even make it flawless. The only way to never have an amputation is to never have your finger come in contact with the blade. Outside of not using a table saw at all the only way I know how to never have your finger in contact with the blade is to use a push stick.

You said you think it's a complete waste of money, and in the same paragraph, supported your leading statement by implying "sawstop people" assuming that their saw will provide 100% assurance... I don't htink anybody said that a sawstop will absolutely positively never cut a finger off. That does not make the technology a complete waste of money.

[John Sanford]

To sum up:


We know that the SawStop technology results in a significantly safer saw.
How much safer depends on the work practices of the user.
We know that the SawStop technology significantly increases the cost of a tablesaw.
We know that different folks have different cost/benefit criteria that they use when evaluating the SawStop.


None of those postulates are seriously being debated. So why all the sturm and drang?

Because the following statement by Ken is 100% wrong.


IMHO, there is no moral high ground as this isn't question about morality

The moral question underlying the SawStop brouhaha is one that underlies much of our political argument in America today.

In SawStop terms, "who's finger is it that's being saved?"

If it's my finger, then I'm the only one who has the right to make the decision whether or not to go with the SawStop.

If it's not my finger, then the decision rightly belongs to others.

That's a profoundly moral question, and on the surface it seems like a no brainer. "How can it not be my finger?" That goes back to responsibility, another moral concept. Pretty much all of us are committed to the idea that rights and responsibilities are linked, but which has priority? Some folks operate from the position (frequently subconsciously) that responsbilities follow rights, ergo, it's my finger, if I choose to not use a SawStop and lop off a finger, so sad, my bad, my responsibility to deal with the consequences. Others, again generally subconsciously, operate in the opposite direction. If you lop off a finger because you chose to skip on the SawStop, we have the responsibility of dealing with the consequences, therefore we have a right to what you do with your finger, i.e., it's no longer your finger, it's our finger.

Arguments in the past between devotees of the Unisaw and fans of the PM66 never acquired the sort of contentiousness that the SawStop has inspired, and it's because no matter how hard they might try, it's hard to gin up a moral component in the tussle between Delta Gray and Mustard. With the SawStop, it was possible, but difficult to avoid at first. Once the move came to mandate the technology, it became impossible, because underlying the mandate is the "our finger" paradigm.

It's one of the great moral (and political questions), playing out in micro in workshops, tool showrooms, bureaucracies, courtrooms, and emergency rooms across the country.
That's what the argument about the mandate is about, and it's the mandate, and the "public safety" and "public costs" angles that have people riled up.

Note that neither tigers nor bees have these arguments, and not simply because they don't have tablesaws. But for us humans, where we organize our society on the spectrum between radical individualism and hivelike collectivism is a matter of significant import, precisely because we aren't tigers, nor bees, but rather an oft perplexing, frequently irrational, sometimes maddening, paradoxical and wondrous almagamen of the two.

See, the SawStop can cut through more than just wood. While it may not cut a finger, it does manage to cut a fairly clean kerf through late nite philosophical/moral/political questions. Which side is the offcut, I'll leave that to y'all. :p

[Neil Brooks]

John,

That's one particular area where I think there IS a lot of over-simplification.

A serious TS injury is a health care cost. Actuarial folk include that cost when they calculate premiums.

So, to the extent that there ARE TS injuries, we're all paying for them.

I consider that a 'fact.'

The whole "So THEN what ..." I consider to be an opinion, subject to myriad viewpoints and endless debate ;)

[keith micinski]

I don't find this distinction important. What's the difference between 99% assurance and 100% assurance? Who cares?
Probably the 1% with a missing finger

You said you think it's a complete waste of money, and in the same paragraph, supported your leading statement by implying "sawstop people" assuming that their saw will provide 100% assurance... I don't htink anybody said that a sawstop will absolutely positively never cut a finger off. That does not make the technology a complete waste of money.

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I think it is a complete waste of money because a push stick is free and is safer in my mind.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

John.... the moment this thread goes political it's history...and I won't have to be the one that pulls it.

If it's about morality and morality alone why did Gass put a "BYPASS" mode on the saw. It's monetary...he wanted to sell saws....it's about egos....so he could show the big boys who turned him down that it could be done....and he knew if it couldn't cut wet wood it wouldn't sell.

If he was so interested in the safety of the woodworker he could have provided the patent for all manufacturers to use gratis....but of course the argument comes up he deserved to make some money for his efforts and thus it becomes monetary not morality.

Obscene over-the-top arguments do not convert the masses but instead inflame them and frankly often that is the desire of those who use those arguments. They just want to see how big a flame they can produce. Some enjoy watching the fire.

Everybody can choose to buy SS or not. It's not a moral issue.

Sorry John......you are not my moral authority.

[Brian Kent]

Now my moral test question is this. If someday I can afford a Sawstop, should I sell my current cabinet saw and let someone else cut off his and/or her fingers?

[Brett Clark]

Has anybody ever checked to see if these threads go on longer in the winter versus summer? I don't think I would've gotten past page three if it was warm enough in my shop to do anything but freeze.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

It's not like we haven't heard all of this before......well.....maybe not this year but it's only February 9th.

[Van Huskey]

Now my moral test question is this. If someday I can afford a Sawstop, should I sell my current cabinet saw and let someone else cut off his and/or her fingers?

I think it was here that someone agonized over that very issue. I see it like selling a used car, rarely have I ever sold a car that the replacement was not objectively safer. Many of the tools I have sold have had fewer safety features than the one I replaced them with. It might be immoral not to sell a person the saw, they may NEED it to FEED their family (not that they are on a cast iron diet, you know what I mean) and couldn't afford a SS. So children starving or daddy taking a risk at an over aggressive finger nail clipping.

[Van Huskey]

It's not like we haven't heard all of this before......well.....maybe not this year but it's only February 9th.

There are no new stories, they have all been written, usually by William Shakespeare, if you own the Riverside Shakespeare you never need to read another book or watch a movie, just have someone randomly change the names, change horses to cars and swords to guns. I would say given your opinion you might consider this story Hamlet.


"And then it started like a guilty thing
Upon a fearful summons."

[Peter Aeschliman]

Probably the 1% with a missing finger

ha ha, okay you got me there! lol

;)

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Correct me....if I'm wrong.........

with the "bypass" capability....doesn't that give the operator the choice of having SS or not having SS?


Geee....Gass agrees with me as long as I buy his saw!

I think we ought to petition the CPSC to force Gass to recall all of his saws....and change all future saws removing the "Bypass" mode as one could get injured in that mode....seems like the moral thing to do. And to make sure that the consumer doesn't fail to perform the modification properly, let SS pay for the shipping...the change and the return.......

[Joe Pack]

No trick photography, normal speed...the hotdog is moving at the speed I would cut a piece of 3/4" plywood. I know this because, if I had not chickened out, I could have been the guy doing the cut demo two years ago at Woodwerks in Columbus, OH. I stood right beside the guy who did the demo and watched it with my own eyes. If anything, he moved the 3/4 ply faster than I might have. The the skin of the hotdog was nicked and just barely into the meat. The cut was the width of the sawblade, about 1/16" deep. I have scraped myself pushing a screwdriver into my hand (I know, dumb move, but we all do it once) and made more of a cut than was made on this hotdog.

No relationship with SawStop except being a VERY satisfied owner. Even disregarding the safety aspect of the SawStop, this saw (the 3hp cabinet version) is outstanding in every way. My only complaint is that it holds too much stuff on the top. I have to move a ton of "put it away tomorrow" stuff every time I need to make a cut!

I won't get into the unscrupulous business part because I have no basis to comment, but I do know that SawStop offers something that no other saw offers for only a small premium over similar quality saws. My fingers are worth the few extra dollars. Money well spent in my humble opinion.

[Glenn Vaughn]

It sounds like the popular assumption is that Gass developed the brake because he wanted to make lots of money. The truth of the matter is quite a bit different. If Gass is to be believed (and I have no reason to doubt what he says) the motivation for developing something to make a table saw came from an from his father catching his hand in his table saw. Gass spent 5 or 6 years developing and perfecting the brake system. He tried to interest saw manufacturers in it to no avail. I have no idea how much money he had invested in the development but am sure it was more than most of us could come up with. His next step, and one that has angered many woodworkers, was to try to force the manufacturers to use the technology by approaching the CPSC. In retrospect this was a mistake on his part - but it was an understandable mistake.

His final step was to build and sell a table saw using the brake. For this he deserves kudo's. He could have produced a low or mid quality saw with the brake and it would have sold. Instead he has produced high quality saws.

As for the bypass mode; there are some things that cannot be done with the brake system armed; things that are sometimes desirable to do. Disarming the system requires a concious effort and should alert the user that the safety net is gone. This no different than removing the guard for a non-through cut - except that the saw will rearm itself the next time it is turned on and the guard will not re-install itself.

I chose the SS because I wanted the additional safety provided by the brake. I know I can still get injured by the saw but also know that the likelyhood of losing fingers is a much more remote possibility. Would I try to force everyone to buy one? Absolutely not. Would I advocate purchasing the saw? Absolutely.

Making the decision to not purchase the SS is an individuals right. I do feel that if the decision to not purchase it is made simply because Gass went to the CPSC is kind of like cutting your noe off to spite your face.

[Van Huskey]

Hamlet has something else in common with this thread or vice versa. In Hamlet a Ghost (Hamlet's father) is always around popping in and out of each act. We have our own ghost watching this thread. Hi ghost! I can't see you but I know you are there....

[peter night]

With the saw, it is just me and the saw. Nobody else! If my finger ends up in the blade I will blame myself! I want to have the choice when it is only me and my saw.

I would agree you should be able to smoke a joint/drink a 6 pack/... while cutting on your table saw. And drive minus the airbag and seatbelt to save $50 if you want to.

The issue becomes a cause for the greater good due to that crazy law that requires hospitals to treat people, and not kick them out to bleed to death. Minus that one law, peoples personal choices (or thriftiness if you prefer) would be theirs to decide. When the numbers get big enough (10 amputations a day?) - math starts to overcome free choice. There are other choices though, like forcing saw vendors to pay a "cigarette" tax to balance the system out. Hard hats, and another 1000 or so safety devices became mandatory many years ago based on the math, not someones arbitrary decision on how to make someone really sweat with a plastic helmut in 100 degree weather...

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Glenn.....choosing to not buy a SS is just as a concious decision as placing the SS in the Bypass mode.

I fail to see how it's my right to choose but I'm cutting my nose to spite my face if I do it because I don't agree with the CPSC petition of the inventor of SS.

Folks......let's keep politics out of it......

[Mike Henderson]

Glenn.....choosing to not buy a SS is just as a concious decision as placing the SS in the Bypass mode.

I fail to see how it's my right to choose but I'm cutting my nose to spite my face if I do it because I don't agree with the CPSC petition of the inventor of SS.

Folks......let's keep politics out of it......

There are situations where you might hold your nose, but you use a device because it has great value to you. I don't share your feelings about Mr. Gass but if I did I'd still buy the SawStop because it's my hand that might be mangled. So maybe the proverb should be "Cutting off your hand to spite your face."

Mike

[John Sanford]

John,

That's one particular area where I think there IS a lot of over-simplification.

A serious TS injury is a health care cost. Actuarial folk include that cost when they calculate premiums.

So, to the extent that there ARE TS injuries, we're all paying for them.
No, we aren't all paying for them. People who have insurance pay for them. Said people could go with insurance that excludes table saw injuries. For a lot of reasons they don't, one of the biggest being that while Sammy Skier may think excluding tablesaws is a great idea, he's not willing to risk that they might exclude skiing next. So when he buys insurance, Sammy Skier voluntarily assumes a modes amount of risk on behalf of Wally Woodworker, who is doing the same for Sammy Skier. That's what insurance is all about.


John.... the moment this thread goes political it's history...and I won't have to be the one that pulls it. Clearly not true. This thread went political the instant the the subject of whether or not the government should mandate the technology came up. It has not gone partisan, but since politics is about "what should government do", it seems as though the it's been political from the git-go.


If it's about morality and morality alone why did Gass put a "BYPASS" mode on the saw. You misunderstand my point. I'm not saying Gass's actions are about morality. I'm advancing the proposition that the argument between woodworkers over his actions, and over the mandate, is fundamentally a moral one.


Obscene over-the-top arguments do not convert the masses but instead inflame them and frankly often that is the desire of those who use those arguments. They just want to see how big a flame they can produce. Some enjoy watching the fire. :rolleyes:


Everybody can choose to buy SS or not. It's not a moral issue.
Whether or not we can choose not to buy the technology is ...


Sorry John......you are not my moral authority
I don't claim to be, nor would I want to be....

[Jeff Dorlan]

Well, I have to agree with Van on one point, and one point only...holy Moderator self-control! I guess they've all been worn down. Usually any SS discussion is like treated like a protest in Tiananmen Square. People freak out and it is shut down immediately. Welcome back freedom of speech (for now)...

Anyway...Hey, if you don't like having a superior saw combined with digit-saving technology, so be it. You might have a perfect track record for all your days in the shop. God bless you. I hope you do. We all do. If, however, you appreciate the insurance afforded you by SS, cool. Thank God we live in a country and time when this is available. For now it is still America (sort of, anyway), and just like you shouldn't be able to sue over coffee that is too hot, or burgers that taste too beefy...nor should you be able to sue because you cut your own finger off on any tool, and neither should the government force me to use a saw with this technology.

But for people to get all torqued up about this side issue, and then to spite their own safety for political/moral reasons...well, that is just stupid. You can ride your Harley without a helmet and knock your head into a tree. You can rip some oak and some of your hand too. It is all yours for the choosing. Just don't get all preachy about someone else who choses to avoid those situations for themselves. It is not a morally superior position, nor is the opposite. It is just an alternative. So, if you don't like SS, fine. If you do, that is a sound decision too.

We're all woodworking enthusiasts. Most of us are Americans. Who cares about the minor nonsense. Let's agree to disagree on SS and keep on building.

[Carl Hunsinger]

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I think it is a complete waste of money because a push stick is free and is safer in my mind.

How can a push stick be safer than a SawStop? The whole concept is, you have the SawStop technology watching your back, WHILE you use the guard, riving knife, and push stick. In my opinion, only a fool would forgo conventional safety practices because a microprocessor is manning the kill switch. And I think that the type of people that would buy the SawStop care very much about safety, and would not skip the conventional safety paraphernalia.

Carl

[Pat Barry]

I find it incredible that some folks here can actually be upset that the inventor of this device is actually trying to make money with it. Come on people this is precisely the way the whole patent process is intended to work. No doubt, there will be companies trying to work around the patent, steal the idea, and make money on their own at the original inventors expense. We should be on the side of the inventor. Now if Delta or some other saw company wants to jump on the bandwagon and LICENSE the technology and pay royalties to the inventor wonderful - all will be right in the world in my opinion. If you appreciate the technology then go to your favorite saw manufacturer and demand that they offer the safety feature themselves - don't take your frustrations out on the inventor.

[Kent A Bathurst]

Don't tell either of them that those aren't tasers Chris.

Van's is a taser. Turns out mine was just my ungrounded PVC dust plumbing. :p :p

[Keith Outten]

"Thou Shalt Be Friendly"

Lets keep the posts in this thread friendly folks. Name calling and personal attacks are not acceptable here...ever.
.

[John Coloccia]

"Thou Shalt Be Friendly"

Lets keep the posts in this thread friendly folks. Name calling and personal attacks are not acceptable here...ever.
.

But Keith, you don't understand...

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

[Van Huskey]

Well, I have to agree with Van on one point, and one point only...holy Moderator self-control!

Well, that's one more than my wife does!

[Karl Brogger]

it was only a matter of time before the safety nannies decided that a tablesaw with out a brake was not suitable for the poor dumb general public. Being a small industry it probably won't cost much in lobby-ing to persuade a few that won't really pay attention anyway to sign something like this into law or sneak it in with another bill, forcing some out of business, and others into trouble.

[Larry Edgerton]

I can tell you there have been a lot of people change their minds over threads like this over the years SS has been around.

My personal odyssey while reading threads on forums over the years:

1. interesting idea, over priced, probably isn't fully sorted nor effective and probably attached to an inferior saw
2. wow this actually seems to be proving itself and the saw (ICS at the time) seems really well made
3. (sees ICS for the first time)
4. (uses and ICS for the first time, a friends)
5. directed to SS hotdog video by a forum thread and now believes SS is a great saw with a non-gimmick tech and my next saw will be an ICS
6. directed by forum threads to SS corporate agenda, opinion sours
7. further threads leading to more facts regarding SS's agenda and rerunning my personal risk-benefit analysis has me buying a PM2000 w/riving knife but sans brake


I think the key is most if not all who post in these threads have made their minds up, for what ever reason, however this is a small sampling of the ones that actually read the thread and are potentially influenced by them. Though there are fewer and fewer people who have not made up their minds there are still some on the fence reading this and other threads and being influenced.

My line of thinking ran in the same vein with the exception of #4, I have never used a SawStop. His attempt to make my three existing tablesaws illegal in my situation as a business owner made me decide that he will never get a penny of my money.

I would not mind having one saw around with this sort of feature for those times when I have to do some odd cut that can not be done with 100 percent safe practices. The realities of staying in business, especially in these tough times dictates that I don't spend an hour building a jig to make one cut. Most of the people on here are hobbiests, or people with a retirement making a few bucks, and they have different criteria. If someone feels that they need such a tool, by all means, have at it. But don't try to tell me I have to get rid of tools that were very hard for me to save and pay for, or close up shop.

I have a finger missing as well, which I paid for, thank you, and I do not have a problem with the idea. I do have a problem with the implimentation of the idea, the cost of a firing is far too high, and of course the attempt at using legislation to force me to buy a product. I don't use hardware store blades, and I can not afford to be replacing them every time that something sets off the brake, let alone the cost of the brake itself.

I do think that this firestorm will in the end be a good thing. It will force the other manufacturers to develop a system of their own, and it will surely be better. There is too much cost involved in this one. Sure if you do actually make a mistake the cost is small compared to the loss of flesh. But the cost of misfires would make me lose money, and I and most small businesses like mine are just hanging on by a thread just now. More government intervention is not what we need, that is what brought us here in the first place.

I don't see any reason that the brake could not be seperate from the blade for example. Use a pinned arbor/blade and put the brake on a seperate disc on the other end of the arbor. Make it so the brake can easily and cheaply be reset, maybe some inexpensive plastic inserts that can be boughtt by the bagfull and are easy to change in the shop/jobsite? That way it could be back up and running in minutes. Many small companys have only one saw. Not as much money to be made this way, but it is more likely to be used. I know myself well, and I know that after a couple of misfires that the system would be perminently bypassed, as I can't afford downtime or the cost of the blades and brake.

I get a chuckle out of the whole moral argument.....

Larry

[mreza Salav]

A couple of observations:

- It is interesting that some people get upset that someone is trying to make money of patents he has and they will be forced to pay for it.
Next time you buy any equipment try to find the several patents that are on it. Be sure that someone is making money out of those patents.
Needless to say, if you want to buy any car, you are paying for many similar safety equipments that are *forced* upon you and someone is making money out of them.

- The argument of having a choice and not being to forced to pay for something is not one way. If your *choice* of not using a safer saw eventually costs the society
(and other people who have nothing to do with it) then you are forcing those other people to pay for *your* desire to have a choice here. You don't leave in isolation,
and you cannot say "if I make a mistake I am responsible for it" but be sure that other people are also suffering because of that *mistake*; immediate family members,
people who are affected because you miss work days, and any trip to hospital is paid somehow by somebody; the cost of these "10 fingers a day" are mostly paid by insurance
company and they recoup the cost from everybody (not just those 10 people missing a digit or two). I am sure the cost of "10 fingers a day" is hundreds of millions
(if not the $2B figure in the article). By the same token, you cannot build a house that does not satisfy the many safety codes forced upon by the government even if you
say "if the roof falls on me or it burns down, I'm the only responsible person". So at the end of the day it's money that speaks how things should be dealt with.

[Larry Edgerton]

People that think they know better than me how I should live my life scare me.............

[Keith Christopher]

You know I find it interesting that everyone is up in arms about this, and it presents a solution to what is a real problem. To me the argument that 'I haven't lost a finger and I've been woodworking for a zillion years.' find someone who has recently lost some digits and they will be comforted by those words. the CPSC makes sure that products are safe, no lead paint or small childrens heads don't get hung up in cribs. Face it the government mandates these things in all aspects of your life. If there is a product which makes your work safer and at a small cost (blade +brake) then I am ok with it. Of course all the ranting of "I have to turn in my old saw and buy a new one to meet regulation" probably only if you own a WW business, as a hobbiest, you're free to 'shoot yourself in the foot' if you desire. The lack of adoption of a braking system is the reason why Mr. Gass is seemingly the only one with a product out there. If this is mandated, he will not be the only cowboy in the rodeo as this will spur competition. And that spells better varied choices. It's a good thing. I don't hear too many complaints about rivving knives and their saws.

I bet the reason is more people worry about kickback _vs_ body/blade contact. Feeling that kickback is out of their control while not coming into contact with the blade is under theirs. Which is most likely the reason to the aversion to sawstop like technology.

and for all you conspiracy folks out there, I do no own a saw stop, I have a DW-746 and I don't have any holdings or associations with SawStop or Mr. Gass.

I just think a good idea is a good idea and if he can make a buck or two off of it, this is America dang it.

[Chris Padilla]

I bet the reason is more people worry about kickback _vs_ body/blade contact. Feeling that kickback is out of their control while not coming into contact with the blade is under theirs. Which is most likely the reason to the aversion to sawstop like technology.

Well, kickback can send one's hands into the blade, too.

[Sean Nagle]

The car safety analogy isn't quite the same. If there were patents on safety equipment on cars, they have long since expired, so the cost to the consumer is set by the market through competition among manufacturers, even though there are government mandates for the safety devices.

The SawStop is still protected by some 50 patents [at least that's what I recall reading]. The whole idea of granting a patent is to give the inventor a limited-time monopoly in the marketplace to sell that product at a price that's pretty much what the market will bear. If the SawStop technology were mandated, what would prevent Dr. Gass from charging $10,000 or $100,000 per saw for licensing the technology? Dr. Gass could pretty much establish a monopoly on tablesaws not just tablesaws with flesh-sensing brake technology.

[Larry Edgerton]

Well, kickback can send one's hands into the blade, too.

That is how I lost mine, and ironically, I was distracted by a backup beeper.

[Chris Padilla]

If the SawStop technology were mandated, what would prevent Dr. Gass from charging $10,000 or $100,000 per saw for licensing the technology? Dr. Gass could pretty much establish a monopoly on tablesaws not just tablesaws with flesh-sensing brake technology.

The market still dictates. No one would purchase a saw if it cost that much and the used TS market would be a flury! I'm sure older saws would be exempted from this anyway.

Frankly, I don't think this technology will get mandated or perhaps it will AFTER the expiration of the patent. This stuff take a long time to happen.

[Sean Nagle]

Chris, what I should have stated is that Dr. Gass can price the licensing such that Delta, Powermatic and Grizzly would not be able to manufacture a tablesaw competitively. Now with the competition out of the way, Dr. Gass can exercise his patent-granted monopoly to charge what the market will bear for the SawStop.

A secondary market would be quite robust, but wouldn't be an option for a non-private entity such as a business since that's really the only place where a mandate would be enforceable. Of course the home and hobbyist tablesaw user would be relegated to buying the older tabelsaws. But then this is the crowd that seems to be having the most injuries with conventional tablesaws.

[Dan Hintz]

The market still dictates. No one would purchase a saw if it cost that much...
Isn't that the point?

Let's imagine for a moment a ruling is passed that all table saws manufactured from this point forward must include flesh-sensing technology. Let's also assume that SS has locked out all others from designing competing technologies due to his large patent portfolio. SS decides a brake unit license is $10k. If you want a table saw, now your only choices are purchased used (and that market can't last forever) or spend $10k+. No way around it because it's mandated.

Sure, a somewhat similar argument can be made about electronics... if you want a cell phone these days, you can almost guarantee it will have a GPS receiver in it. But how that came to be wasn't through mandate, it was via overwhelming request... so many people wanted the functionality, it was almost cheaper for a company to put the technology into all of their phone families than just a few. Even if you don't want GPS, you're paying an extra dollar or two for it regardless, subsidizing the majority that do. But that's market economics, not mandate/law... and to me, at least, how it comes to be is very important.

The huge difference is GPS is not required, and a manufacturer can skip it if it's financially worthwhile, which could very easily become the case if a patent holder were to come out of the woodworks and suddenly try to claim a major chunk of their pie. Think that doesn't happen? Think again. LG is suing Sony for patent infringement on 8 separate counts, to the point where it has requested a stop to shipments of PS3 game systems until the case is resolved (not going to happen, I know, but there's nothing to say the next case doesn't turn out differently). Some obscure company decided to sue IBM (first) over some patented IP in UNIX... once IBM bent to their will, they started going after other companies.

The point? What used to be considered free was suddenly costing a license fee... and nothing says that license fee cannot be anything the patent holder wishes it to be. That's always shaky ground to be on. So someone steps up and asks the government to step in and force the fees to be reasonable. Why? If it wasn't mandated in the first place, there would be no reason for the government to step in at all. And we come back full circle...

[Chris Padilla]

Are there good examples where the gov't allowed/help create such a potential monopoly? I hear all about them breaking 'em up....

[Dan Hintz]

Are there good examples where the gov't allowed/help create such a potential monopoly? I hear all about them breaking 'em up....
That makes the assumption the right hand knows what the left hand is doing... and with the government, that's rarely the case. It's so much easier to solve on problem at a time, no matter how many new problems doing so creates. Let's mandate the idea first, then we'll worry about the monopoly just created. ;)

[Mike Henderson]

Sure, a somewhat similar argument can be made about electronics... if you want a cell phone these days, you can almost guarantee it will have a GPS receiver in it. But how that came to be wasn't through mandate, it was via overwhelming request... so many people wanted the functionality, it was almost cheaper for a company to put the technology into all of their phone families than just a few. Even if you don't want GPS, you're paying an extra dollar or two for it regardless, subsidizing the majority that do. But that's market economics, not mandate/law... and to me, at least, how it comes to be is very important.


I think it was mandated due to the requirement that a location be transmitted with a 911 call on a cell phone. There were other technologies, such as triangulation on cell towers, but the GPS solution was better.

The cellular companies are prohibited from activating a phone unless it has 911 location capability. So if you have an old phone without location capability, you can't get it activated. If you have an old phone and it's been continually in use (activated), you can continue to use it.

Mike

[Carl Hunsinger]

I argued this with Gass here on this very forum before he manufactured his first saw.

If Gass is/was so interested in consumer safety, why put a by-pass on his device? The answers....Money and market share...he realized if he couldn't cut wet wood, his product wouldn't sell. Does the by-pass mode make the saw safer? Hardly.
.

I think ultimately the bypass mode DOES make the SawStop safer. If the bypass mode was not available, I would never have bought a SawStop. Instead, I might have ended up with a 1949 Unisaw. I suspect that alot of other SawStop owners might have made similar decisions if they could not cut wet wood or other conductive materials. Having the SawStop active and vigilent on 99% of all cuts is definitely safer than cutting them all on a 1949 Unisaw.

Any time safety devices adversely affect the capabilities or convenience of the device, they are more likely to be disabled and not used. When that happens, they provide no safety at all.

But also the bypass mode allows me to rip hot dogs all day long if I want to, as long as I am willing to accept the additional risk. And the splatter. And that funky smell in the dust collector...


Carl

[Brian Vaughn]

Pat, the issue is not that he wants to make money with it. I'm all for that, it's what America is all about. The issue is the he is trying to have the government require that all table saw manufacturers put his technology in all tablesaws, which means they will all be forced to pay whatever royalty he chooses to price it at. Personally, I want the choice as to whether I want to pay the extra $600 for the feature or not. I don't want it forced on me. It's an undehanded way to make money. It's like inventing the non-chokable hotdog via some proprietary process, and then asking the government to force all hotdog makers to pay you to use your "safe hotdog technology". After all, think of the children!

[Dan Hintz]

I think it was mandated due to...
True enough now (so probably a bad example to use)... but hopefully my point was made that before it was mandated, most cell phone families were already including GPS as a matter of consumer desire.

[John Sanford]

I think ultimately the bypass mode DOES make the SawStop safer. If the bypass mode was not available, I would never have bought a SawStop. Instead, I might have ended up with a 1949 Unisaw. I suspect that alot of other SawStop owners might have made similar decisions if they could not cut wet wood or other conductive materials. Having the SawStop active and vigilent on 99% of all cuts is definitely safer than cutting them all on a 1949 Unisaw.

Any time safety devices adversely affect the capabilities or convenience of the device, they are more likely to be disabled and not used. When that happens, they provide no safety at all. Exhibit #1 - Crappy blade guards that most users remove and never put back on to the saw.


But also the bypass mode allows me to rip hot dogs all day long if I want to, as long as I am willing to accept the additional risk. And the splatter. And that funky smell in the dust collector...
Think man, think. BYPASS the dust collector also! No more hot dog pieces parts ( that's a scary thought, pieces parts of pieces parts! :eek: ) in the DC system, happy ants/roaches keeping the interior of your TS clean, what a wonderful world! ;)

[Dirk Lewis]

Planer-Stop
Jointer-Stop
Bandsaw-Stop
Lathe-Stop
Random-Orbital-Sander-Stop
Cyclone-Stop

did I miss any?

:o

[Dan Hintz]

did I miss any?
Work-Stop ?

[Michael Weber]

Just STOP!