First Saw Stop, now we have Saw Drop.

[Dave Lehnert]

Popular woodworking just sent out an e-mail about a new device that Woodworking tool manufactures have been working on called Saw Drop. A device that drops the blade below the table WITHOUT blade damage. It also can tell the difference between wet wood and flesh.

Don't think I'm allowed to post a link to Pop Wood blog but do a search there for
Saw Drop.

EDIT (Chris): Here is the link provided by Brodie below in post #16: http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/...Woodworking%29 (http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/SawStop+Might+Meet+A+Competitor+SawDrop.aspx?utm_s ource=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PopularWoodworking+%28Popular +Woodworking%29)

[Chris Padilla]

Folks,

Do not start a debate on Saw Stop and Gass' methods. We've about had it with the topic. Go search for it if you want to read the bashing...it is the same thing over and over again. Any posts referring to this will be deleted.

[Bob Landel]

Sorry Chris, I wasn't involved in any previous debate over SawStop. However I remember reading a couple of negative statements in the past.

[david brum]

Those are fascinating articles. Thanks for posting.

[JohnT Fitzgerald]

Interesting. Also very interesting that it's coming from a group of 'member companies' of the Power Tool Institute. Looks like they've been busy!

I think the 'reaction system' itself will be the subject of significant disputes. Assuming something comes to market based on this, it will be interesting to see what competitive advantage they will see due to the lack of damage to the blade.

[Daniel Berlin]

Interesting. Also very interesting that it's coming from a group of 'member companies' of the Power Tool Institute. Looks like they've been busy!


With how quickly they are acquiring each other, i imagine it will only be one company soon :)

[Matt Meiser]

Awesome to hear there is competition coming.

[David Hostetler]

It would be nice to have a viable alternative to the SawStop technology. The non destructive safety feature would be a huge advancement over SawStop if it works well...

[Dave Lehnert]

I have not read through everything yet but wonder if the system reacts as fast as Sawstop?

[David Weaver]

If it's triggered by an explosion, I don't see how it could be much slower unless the charge was not substantial enough.

[Jim Rimmer]

I posted something recently about Whirlwind which is a guard that detects when you touch and stops the blade in 1/8 sec. with no damage. The good news in all of this is there is research going on and alternatives will be available and possibly retrofits.

[Neil Brooks]

My thought.

What would be most helpful to ME, as a safety measure, is a spring-loaded, articulated arm, with a silicon-filled "hand" at the end.

Whenever I turn on my table saw, the hand would simply SLAP me, RIGHT across the face.

Pretty sure that ... given THAT ... I'd always be adequately careful, and adequately alert.

Now ... if you'll excuse me ... I'm going to lobby the government to make that mandatory in all of your work shops :D

[Clarence Miller]

I too am glad to see that competition is doing as it should, forcing companies to get better (case being, can you even buy a B&W tv anymore?) Another fun fact to consider it there are 20 times as many stair related injuries than there are tablesaw injuries. I ain't using the elevator because I've gotten old and fat and get out of breath when I climb stairs, it's for safety.
Please take this as it was intended as a light hearted comment of personal choices.

[Dan Hintz]

Julian,

Links are perfectly valid in many cases. The links that are not allowed include those that promote a website owned by you, promote products you have a vested interest in, links to other forums, etc. Dave would have been within the rules to post a link, but he erred on the side of caution.

The idea being you're not allowing others to profit off of the high ranking Sawmill Creek receives in the search engines. Some members continue to ignore the TOS and put links to their own sites in forum posts and their signature.

[Matt Day]

I can't seem to find any articles about the Saw Drop. I searched Google for "popular woodworking saw drop" and didn't get anything. Lil help?

[Brodie Brickey]

I can't seem to find any articles about the Saw Drop. I searched Google for "popular woodworking saw drop" and didn't get anything. Lil help?

Here's the link. http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/SawStop+Might+Meet+A+Competitor+SawDrop.aspx?utm_s ource=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PopularWoodworking+%28Popular +Woodworking%29

[Matt Day]

Thanks Brodie

[Brian Kent]

Thank you for the link.

[Chip Lindley]

One has to wonder about the effects on the CI arbor and trunnion castings of any saw whose blade is dropped below the table in the twinkling of an eye. A broken arbor casting costs far more than a ruined blade.

I am doubtful that either "Stop" or "Drop" technologies will be retrofitting existing tablesaws. So, it's business as usual with my beloved old PM66.

[Van Huskey]

One has to wonder about the effects on the CI arbor and trunnion castings of any saw whose blade is dropped below the table in the twinkling of an eye. A broken arbor casting costs far more than a ruined blade.

I am doubtful that either "Stop" or "Drop" technologies will be retrofitting existing tablesaws. So, it's business as usual with my beloved old PM66.

SS has the dropping figured out regarding the arbor and trunnion so it is doable, but the look of the trunnion and its complexity will change.

Although I could be wrong my guess is the best retrofit would be something like the Whirlwind concept connected to a VFD and 3 phase motor with near 100% braking torque, this would likely be cost prohibitive but it could work reasonably well.

[mreza Salav]

Haven't looked at all the details of the patent but:
Based on the quick look I did I won't be surprised if it is claimed it has "borrowed" some of the
ideas of the SS to detect a contact with a conductive material. I am sure SS has tried to cover
every aspect of this in their patent. It will be a war of lawyers then.

[Alan Schaffter]

Haven't looked at all the details of the patent but:
Based on the quick look I did I won't be surprised if it is claimed it has "borrowed" some of the
ideas of the SS to detect a contact with a conductive material. I am sure SS has tried to cover
every aspect of this in their patent. It will be a war of lawyers then.

But what happens if a claim of restricting free trade, etc., etc. is made and Uncle Sam gets involved like with air bags in cars?

[Van Huskey]

But what happens if a claim of restricting free trade, etc., etc. is made and Uncle Sam gets involved like with air bags in cars?

That is the 900# gorilla in the room.

[Clarence Miller]

In one of the side bar blogs I see that the idea of needing a table saw license has been kicked around. This is the first I have heard of this. How much is it going to cost to get then renew your license. This is the part that concerns me most. I don't care if you like SawStop or don't, no government body should be able to mandate or regulate what kind of tools I use in my shop. Chemicals I can agree somewhat but not tools.
BTW has anybody done a comprehensive study on the how the number of table saw accidents rank against band saws, router tables, jointers, circular saws, and miter saws. I would also mention RAS but they are nowhere near as prevalent as they had been before SCMS came on the scene. I'd be curious to see a side by side on that.

[Van Huskey]

In one of the side bar blogs I see that the idea of needing a table saw license has been kicked around. This is the first I have heard of this. How much is it going to cost to get then renew your license. This is the part that concerns me most. I don't care if you like SawStop or don't, no government body should be able to mandate or regulate what kind of tools I use in my shop. Chemicals I can agree somewhat but not tools.
BTW has anybody done a comprehensive study on the how the number of table saw accidents rank against band saws, router tables, jointers, circular saws, and miter saws. I would also mention RAS but they are nowhere near as prevalent as they had been before SCMS came on the scene. I'd be curious to see a side by side on that.

I think that was the bloggers hypothetical not from somewhere else, the idea being making sure users know what they are doing may reduce accidents more than other means.

I don't think you need to worry about license requirements for TS, it ain't gonna happen for non-commercial shops. For non-commercial concerns the government usually deals with this on an availability level not a licensing level.

[Peter Quinn]

I like Neil's silicone slapper idea personally. Its got humor on its side. Could you call it Saw Slap? Which could lead to Jaw Drop. Would the folks at Saw Jaw sue the folks at Saw slap, and will the name Saw Drop survive the patent process? Perhaps the saw slap could work like those blast gates that sense power draw and open automatically? Just step up to any machine and it slaps you awake. Maybe a hat format would be more effective so it follows you to each tool. A good THWACK to get you focused on the fact that you are about to engage a razor sharp carbide wheel of death with a rather strong induction or universal motor. It amazes me that you could be thinking about anything other than self preservation when standing in front of a wood working machine cutting something as hard as a tree, but it does happen. And I know from years of restaurant work that dropping a knife on the ground will let you know who has experience and who is a noob. The experienced chef takes a quick step away from ANY falling razor, pulling his hands back as he does and covers his privates, while the noob instinctively reaches for ANY falling object even though it might slice through his hand completely. A lot of table saw accidents happen when a piece of wood starts to kick back and a persons hands follow the now out of control chunk of wood into the blade. Bad instincts, and no time to think about the decision, so instinct is all you have to work with. If it were quick enough the Saw Slap might help there too?

If the saw slap senses the THWACK hasn't worked, perhaps the hand can be programmed to reach behind and search for the head should that be necessary? That might stop me from making that last cut on a complex part 1" too short on one end.....:rolleyes:

Seriously, it would be a great thing if this all ends with table saws that universally sense flesh in contact with carbide for what ever reason and stop amputations from happening. I'm excited to hear that there might be some alternatives to the saw stop technology. It would be better if these systems were affordable, and real nice if they could be put on a job site saw that doesn't require a boom truck to get to the job site.

[Rick Fisher]

Sounds perfect.. Someone invents something, patent laws force others to invent something better, or at least different.. That is competition at its best..

Its now Saw Stops turn to unleash something even better again..

End of the day.. it will could cause the price of the Sawstop to come down..

Sure, Gass will be upset.. probably file lawsuits, but in the end, he will have competition, just as he should..

[hank dekeyser]

Ho-Hum, I agree with CHris. SS and or any thing similar is getting to be old hat. When a new product is available to the public, then it might be worth discussion. Regardless, my position will remain the same -Don't have, don't want, don't care. If my fingers are meant to be cut off, it will happen one way or another. Yes I know that sounds stupid and ignorant, but I see it like everything else - whats meant to be , will be - when my time is up, game over.

I went on a quest about the lawsuite and stuff awhile back - this was "in the works" then and will be for some time. I'd be willing to bet SS will buy this technology and shelf it.

[Clarence Miller]

I doubt if I will lose any sleep over licensing shop equipment, it just shocked me that anyone even considered it.

I am however going to try to find a side by side comparison for injuries by power tools.

[Phil Thien]

It is interesting that the very act of trying to have safer saws legislated may have doomed him.

[Chip Lindley]

...I see that the idea of needing a table saw license has been kicked around...

BTW has anybody done a comprehensive study on the how the number of table saw accidents rank against band saws, router tables, jointers, circular saws, and miter saws. I would also mention RAS but they are nowhere near as prevalent as they had been before SCMS came on the scene. I'd be curious to see a side by side on that.

Before the first Tablesaw License is issued, I want to see a Chainsaw License. Those can be used as a deadly weapon! Anybody that has seen Texas Chainsaw Massacre knows that!

I believe it is ridiculous to assume that the TS is any more dangerous than other tools that Clarence lists above. I, too, would like to see how statistics of injuries caused by other tools stack up to the severely-maligned TS! IMO, the poor tablesaw is the squeaky wheel that gets the grease because of the efforts of SawStop and because of a well-publicized injury settlement. A SkilSaw blade can cut the femoral artery and cause a fatal bleedout in a matter of minutes! Tablesaw finger injuries are rarely if ever, fatal!

[fRED mCnEILL]

"(case being, can you even buy a B&W tv anymore?)"
Gee, I never thought there was anything inherently dangerous about a b&w TV.

[John Coloccia]

re: patents
Patents are worthless until they are challenged and defended. You should see some of the ridiculous patents out there. Holding a patent and successfully defending your patent in court are two entirely different things!

[mreza Salav]

re: patents
Patents are worthless until they are challenged and defended. You should see some of the ridiculous patents out there. Holding a patent and successfully defending your patent in court are two entirely different things!

That is true John; challenges to patents are usually coming when there is money to be made out of if.
I only made a "guess" based on the similarity of the overall method; of course the devil is in the details...

[Alan Schaffter]

That is true John; challenges to patents are usually coming when there is money to be made out of if.
I only made a "guess" based on the similarity of the overall method; of course the devil is in the details...

In a lot of instances companies will forego patents in favor of security when possible and just keeping ahead of the competition. When a patent issues, detailed info about the invention is made public! That allows a competitor to more quickly develop a copy that is just different enough to avoid infringement.

I'll change John's statement- patents are only as good as the amount of money and lawyers you are willing to devote to defend them.

[John Coloccia]

In a lot of instances companies will forego patents in favor of security when possible and just keeping ahead of the competition. When a patent issues, detailed info about the invention is made public! That allows a competitor to more quickly develop a copy that is just different enough to avoid infringement.

I'll change John's statement- patents are only as good as the amount of money and lawyers you are willing to devote to defend them.

This is very true. The good ideas we patented. The great ideas we kept in the safe :)

[BOB OLINGER]

Competition is great and I support it. However, what's the cost of a blade to a finger or two?

[David Weaver]

Before the first Tablesaw License is issued, I want to see a Chainsaw License. Those can be used as a deadly weapon! Anybody that has seen Texas Chainsaw Massacre knows that!

I believe it is ridiculous to assume that the TS is any more dangerous than other tools that Clarence lists above. I, too, would like to see how statistics of injuries caused by other tools stack up to the severely-maligned TS! IMO, the poor tablesaw is the squeaky wheel that gets the grease because of the efforts of SawStop and because of a well-publicized injury settlement. A SkilSaw blade can cut the femoral artery and cause a fatal bleedout in a matter of minutes! Tablesaw finger injuries are rarely if ever, fatal!

Isn't there a requirement in the UK to have a license or to have taken a class to use a chainsaw?

I don't know many people who have gotten their hands in power tools, but I know two people who killed themselves with a chainsaw, and my grandfather almost managed to - by not wearing chaps (70 or 80 stitches across the leg, and he was in the woods again before the stitches were out). No, i don't have a fear of chainsaws, just mentioning it.

[Brian D Anderson]

So it's finally coming out. I've posted a couple times about my friend who worked at the design firm where this patent came from. I recognize a name on that patent (not my friend)

If you're interested, here are the members of the power tool institute.

STANLEY BLACK & DECKER (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/black.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif BOSCH POWER TOOLS (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/bosch.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif DELTA | PORTER-CABLE (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/delta.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif DEWALT (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/dewalt.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif DREMEL (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/dremel.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif HILTI, INC. (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/hilti.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif HITACHI KOKI, U.S.A., LTD (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/hitachi.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif MAKITA USA, INC. (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/makita.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif METABO CORPORATION (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/metabo.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif MILWAUKEE ELECTRIC TOOL CORPORATION (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/milwauk.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif ROBERT BOSCH TOOL CORP. (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/robertbosch.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif ROTOZIP POWER TOOLS (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/roto.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif RYOBI TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/ryobi.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif SKIL POWER TOOLS (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/skil.asp) http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_includes/images/arrow.gif TECHTRONIC INDUSTRIES CO., LTD. (http://www.powertoolinstitute.com/pti_pages/members/technronicIndustries.asp)
And to those who asked, my friend told me that it fires quicker than the sawstop.

-Brian

[Chip Lindley]

...The good ideas we patented. The great ideas we kept in the safe :)

OR BOUGHT UP! The auto industry and oil consortiums have surely kept every modern solution off the market that gets 80 MPG in your big SUV! They have the MONEY to do that. Po' folk's don't!

[Bob Turkovich]

OR BOUGHT UP! The auto industry and oil consortiums have surely kept every modern solution off the market that gets 80 MPG in your big SUV! They have the MONEY to do that. Po' folk's don't!

Chip,

I can't tell if your comment is "tongue-in-cheek" or not. For the record, before I retired 2 years ago I was in a position as an engineering manager at Chrysler (including Air, Fuel & Emissions components) where I clearly would have known if there was collusion between the auto industry and big oil. I saw zero evidence of any such agreements. In fact, personal compensation for management was tied into meeting/exceeding fuel economy targets.

Hopefully, this doesn't side track this thread. I just wanted to set this story straight (as it has come up before....).

[Tom Cornish]

It has been a while since I've seen one of those 100MPG carburator ads in the back of Popular Mechanics...

[Curt Harms]

It is interesting that the very act of trying to have safer saws legislated may have doomed him.

Poetic justice :D. Re "table saw license" I do wonder if requiring someone to demonstrate a minimal level of competence when using a "dangerous machine" would reduce the manufacturer's liability. "Da fool knew better than to do that. He demonstrated that he knew not to do that. He did it anyway. How is that our fault?"

[Mike Henderson]

This is very true. The good ideas we patented. The great ideas we kept in the safe :)
Great ideas rarely occur in isolation. For most areas with good economic potential, there are many people and companies working on the problem and it's very, very common for multiple people to come up with similar solutions.

And even if you could come up with some really unique solution, there are few products that can't be reverse engineered. So once you ship it, others will take it apart and duplicate it if its not protected. Things like the Coca Cola recipe are not contradictions of this. There are many similar colas but people buy the brand name, not because it's a unique taste, but because of marketing and advertising.

Just leaving it in the safe - not shipping it - is of little value. What good is it to invent something unless you profit by it. Eventually someone else will come up with the same or a similar solution. If you didn't pursue a patent it makes it tough to then claim prior art. Our patent system is geared to providing protection in return for the inventor disclosing it to the world so that others can learn from it.

Mike

[John Coloccia]

Great ideas rarely occur in isolation. For most areas with good economic potential, there are many people and companies working on the problem and it's very, very common for multiple people to come up with similar solutions.

And even if you could come up with some really unique solution, there are few products that can't be reverse engineered. So once you ship it, others will take it apart and duplicate it if its not protected. Things like the Coca Cola recipe are not contradictions of this. There are many similar colas but people buy the brand name, not because it's a unique taste, but because of marketing and advertising.

Just leaving it in the safe - not shipping it - is of little value. What good is it to invent something unless you profit by it. Eventually someone else will come up with the same or a similar solution. If you didn't pursue a patent it makes it tough to then claim prior art. Our patent system is geared to providing protection in return for the inventor disclosing it to the world so that others can learn from it.

Mike

Because I may be working an R&D project, but not yet ready to go to market. Why would I tell the whole world what I did, and give them years to assimilate all of my hard work, when I could simply go to market with my product & patent at the same time?

In my field, you'd be surprised just how many times we don't come up with the same solutions, and even more surprised how many times we end up solving problems we didn't even know existed.

Generally speaking, many of the companies I've worked for/with would patent ideas they didn't really care all that much about. Maybe a process idea, or something like that. The really hot stuff was done behind closed doors and unveiled only when it was ready. Different companies do things different ways.

[Alan Schaffter]

I'm sure many products go through extended development with many revisions. Filing a patent too early can limit your protection and be expensive. Generally, you can not revise a patent. You can correct it if there are errors, but if, and only if, you have made significant revisions to the product, then you are allowed to submit a new application- that can get expensive. Also, the heart of a patent is the "claims" which are written in a special archaic patent language. Applications are typically written to cover every minute patentable feature, which the USPTO rules on. As I understand it, SawStop filed numerous smaller patents on various features, rather than attempting to file on the saw as a whole.

My recent experience supports the statement- "how many times we end up solving problems we didn't even know existed." The product I'm working on has definitely benefited from extended development and not being rushed to market.

[Mike Henderson]

Because I may be working an R&D project, but not yet ready to go to market. Why would I tell the whole world what I did, and give them years to assimilate all of my hard work, when I could simply go to market with my product & patent at the same time?
Absolutely. We did the same thing. I misunderstood what you were trying to say.

Mike

[Van Huskey]

Just leaving it in the safe - not shipping it - is of little value.

Mike

Actually, that can be of HUGE value. There are many industries that "live" off incremental change, one highly visible one is the auto industry. First I don't believe the 100 mpg carb conspiracy theories BUT if I went to Toyota tomorrow with a complete engine (one that could be mass produced) which say produced 200hp and 175 pound feet of torque and it was dependable and reliable enough and had no unusual quirks (just acted like a modern car engine), cost to produce was within 10% of the current engine AND gets 100 mpg in a 3,600 family sedan I will bet you it would NOT be in the 2013 Camry. What will be in the 2013 Camry is just enough of my invention to give the Camry a sizable fuel efficiency advantage over the competition and they will continue to roll it out incrementally to keep the competitive advantage over the competition as long as possible. An established brand doesn't have to pull a miracle to sell product they just want to make sure they are just enough better than the other options and keep this up for as long as possible.

Now I know in my example I actually used the idea not completely locked away. Let me change it a little to keep it locked away. Lets say a company has a competitive advantage already possibly one that is hard to reverse engineer or just based on their "name" if a new idea that revolutionizes their market comes along they might well buy it and shelve it IF that solution would be easily reverse engineered and they could potentially loose their advantage and possibly a significant market share. They can always pull out the "big gun" if they are loosing market share and need a "hail Mary". There are lots of shelved great ideas but they are shelved because there is profit in shelving them.

[Mike Henderson]

Actually, that can be of HUGE value. There are many industries that "live" off incremental change, one highly visible one is the auto industry. First I don't believe the 100 mpg carb conspiracy theories BUT if I went to Toyota tomorrow with a complete engine (one that could be mass produced) which say produced 200hp and 175 pound feet of torque and it was dependable and reliable enough and had no unusual quirks (just acted like a modern car engine), cost to produce was within 10% of the current engine AND gets 100 mpg in a 3,600 family sedan I will bet you it would NOT be in the 2013 Camry. What will be in the 2013 Camry is just enough of my invention to give the Camry a sizable fuel efficiency advantage over the competition and they will continue to roll it out incrementally to keep the competitive advantage over the competition as long as possible. An established brand doesn't have to pull a miracle to sell product they just want to make sure they are just enough better than the other options and keep this up for as long as possible.

Now I know in my example I actually used the idea not completely locked away. Let me change it a little to keep it locked away. Lets say a company has a competitive advantage already possibly one that is hard to reverse engineer or just based on their "name" if a new idea that revolutionizes their market comes along they might well buy it and shelve it IF that solution would be easily reverse engineered and they could potentially loose their advantage and possibly a significant market share. They can always pull out the "big gun" if they are loosing market share and need a "hail Mary". There are lots of shelved great ideas but they are shelved because there is profit in shelving them.
There are few things that are really GREAT (profitable) and that no one else is working on. If you come up with a wonderful idea, you really have to move to market quickly or you'll find that someone else has beat you to market and gained first mover advantage.

Wonderful new products seem to appear in multiple companies at about the same time because we all have the same information, tools, and bright people. I know that in the companies I worked for, we'd always move to exploit any good idea that was developed inside the company.

Much more of a problem is getting management to understand the potential for a new product so that you can get funding to bring it to market. I know of a couple of really killer products that got away from a company because the management people just didn't see how big the potential was. [example: AT&T didn't pursue cellular phones, even though they invented it, because their analysis was that only a very limited number of people would need a portable phone. They based their analysis on previous mobile phones and how many were used.]

Mike

[Bob Turkovich]

;)
Actually, that can be of HUGE value. There are many industries that "live" off incremental change, one highly visible one is the auto industry. First I don't believe the 100 mpg carb conspiracy theories BUT if I went to Toyota tomorrow with a complete engine (one that could be mass produced) which say produced 200hp and 175 pound feet of torque and it was dependable and reliable enough and had no unusual quirks (just acted like a modern car engine), cost to produce was within 10% of the current engine AND gets 100 mpg in a 3,600 family sedan I will bet you it would NOT be in the 2013 Camry. What will be in the 2013 Camry is just enough of my invention to give the Camry a sizable fuel efficiency advantage over the competition and they will continue to roll it out incrementally to keep the competitive advantage over the competition as long as possible. An established brand doesn't have to pull a miracle to sell product they just want to make sure they are just enough better than the other options and keep this up for as long as possible.

Now I know in my example I actually used the idea not completely locked away. Let me change it a little to keep it locked away. Lets say a company has a competitive advantage already possibly one that is hard to reverse engineer or just based on their "name" if a new idea that revolutionizes their market comes along they might well buy it and shelve it IF that solution would be easily reverse engineered and they could potentially loose their advantage and possibly a significant market share. They can always pull out the "big gun" if they are loosing market share and need a "hail Mary". There are lots of shelved great ideas but they are shelved because there is profit in shelving them.

Van,

I understand the gist of your position but do not believe your auto industry example applies. Can you cite an example where that occurred? While I cannot speak on experience with Japanese OEM's, I had a significant amount of experience with Japanese suppliers (as well as European and, of course, American/Canadian) and they all preferred to slam dunk their competition whenever possible - even when they were already the leaders - as opposed to metering out success. There is too much risk in having your competition leap frog over you when they reverse engineer the product. I would not doubt, however, that there are other commodities where this game may be played.

By the way, in your engine criteria you left out vehicle packaging (there are some highly efficient engine designs out there that just won't package into a personal/commercial vehicle), emissions certification (ditto) and meeting government recycling requirements (and a few others I've willingly forgotten). ;)

[Van Huskey]

;)

Van,

I understand the gist of your position but do not believe your auto industry example applies. Can you cite an example where that occurred? While I cannot speak on experience with Japanese OEM's, I had a significant amount of experience with Japanese suppliers (as well as European and, of course, American/Canadian) and they all preferred to slam dunk their competition whenever possible - even when they were already the leaders - as opposed to metering out success. There is too much risk in having your competition leap frog over you when they reverse engineer the product. I would not doubt, however, that there are other commodities where this game may be played.

By the way, in your engine criteria you left out vehicle packaging (there are some highly efficient engine designs out there that just won't package into a personal/commercial vehicle), emissions certification (ditto) and meeting government recycling requirements (and a few others I've willingly forgotten). ;)

First, it was merely a hypothetical as a veil around facts that I could talk about but I may not. But, I assure everyone that it does not have anything to do with automobile mileage. Second, I did not bother to add all the caveats regarding the actual packaging, etc too much detail for a post in this thread. Whether a company makes the decision to slam dunk the competition or kill it with a thousand cuts just depends on long term profit projections, nothing more. Well, except a small closely held company that might think with the heart instead of the head.

[Alan Schaffter]

Another aspect of some great patented designs- they do exactly what designed to do, but for any number of reasons can not be manufactured economically and so never see the light of day. The dollar, most often, is the deciding factor. The subject of the original post was taking a big chance and fighting the paradigm that safety doesn't sell.

[Bob Turkovich]

First, it was merely a hypothetical as a veil around facts that I could talk about but I may not. But, I assure everyone that it does not have anything to do with automobile mileage. Second, I did not bother to add all the caveats regarding the actual packaging, etc too much detail for a post in this thread. Whether a company makes the decision to slam dunk the competition or kill it with a thousand cuts just depends on long term profit projections, nothing more. Well, except a small closely held company that might think with the heart instead of the head.

Van,

My added engine content comment was intended to be "tongue-in-cheek", nothing more (since I used to be involved in those type of decisions as part of my job - particularly the packaging and emissions part). No offense intended.

Back to your original premise: I think most publically owned companies would take the approach to try to maximize profit immediately - not to meter it out over a longer time period. Doesn't the "time value of money" philosophy rule here - that it's usually better in the long run to take the money now and wisely invest it rather than taking the money later? Doesn't that philosophy apply regardless if you're the industry leader or not?