Thin Kurf vs Standard Kurf

[Doug Donnell]

My standard kurf table saw blade has finally dulled to the point I can not safely (or convienently) ignore it any longer. I want to get another blade before I send this one to get it sharpened. I have a PowerMatic PM64 contractor saw with a 1.5 HP motor.

My question, why would I buy anything other than a thin kurf blade? It would seem to be all advantage and no disadvantage? I have never really had a problem with the standard kurf but I assume the saw will have an easier time with the narrower blade.

Given that I hope to sharpen the standard blade, is there any reason to buy a spare standard again, or add the thin kurf to the collection (will I ever need or want the standard again anyway?).

Guess I am just looking for everyone's experience.

Doug

[Joe Chritz]

1/8" kerf blades are easier to account for the thickness for things like ripping off cuts. They tend to be stiffer, heat up slower and often have more material for resharpening. Zero clearance inserts won't interchange from one to the other.

A top line blade from a quality manufacturer really would make little difference either way. I have several blades and like to keep all the kerf thickness the same. I use regular kerf but that is because I found a steal of a deal on a couple of Freud Fushion blades and they happened to be full kerf and I bought the others to match.

Joe

[Ruperto Mendiones]

As with all things in tools, it depends on what you are trying to do. re small boxes and precise joinery: yesterday my ww instructor, Tony Fortner [Cerritos college] said he tried to do a finger joint using a thin kerf blade. Flutter of the blade spoiled the accuracy. He said he had not yet tried a blade stiffener. As for me, I'd be happy if I can achieve a 1/8" finger joint.

Ruperto

[Kent A Bathurst]

One thing that would prevent me from getting a thin kerf is that the rip fence lense would be out of calibration when switching between the 2 blade thicknesses. Don't want to fool with that - I change blades often - different blades for different purposes. If you only had 2 blades, and were switching only because one needed to be sharpened, then the recalibration wouldn't happen all that often.

[David Kumm]

If your saw feels bogged down a fair part of the time, try the thin kerf, but buy a good one. There is a tradeoff so a poor one will magnify the problems. I use a forrest on my little bosch portable and it is great. The big saws are all full kerf. Your rip fence will only be off if the saw is left tilting and the arbor is on the left. I think you may find it good for your saw. Dave

[Don Morris]

I had thin and regular kerfs for a while on my left tilt Grizz 1023TS. After going through the hassle of recalibrating, I gave up and went with only the regular 1/8" kerf in my shop. No ZCI changes, no recalibrating. it's just simpler. With my Forrest blades, I've never had problems, and the wood loss is too minimal to measure. When I used thin kerfs, I kind of remember putting a stiffener on and they prevented raising the blade very high before hitting the ZCI.

[scott spencer]

Which kerf width to choose depends a lot of your saw, the material being cut, and your preference. There are legitimate pros and cons with both kerfs. I’ve used both and had excellent results from both...it's important to use high quality blades for either, but even more so for thin kerf (TK). Both kerf widths will work but a full kerf blade is typically 33% wider than it’s TK counterpart and requires more power to spin....the difference in power will be especially noticeable during thick ripping. It can really reduce wear and tear on a motor < 3hp. With big motors there's less incentive to choose TK unless the wood savings are significant.

Full kerf blades tend to be more stable than TK blades, but a high quality TK blade that's been properly tensioned will perform surprisingly well on a properly tuned saw that has low runout. The manufacturers have improved them a lot over the years, and several magazines have featured articles within the past couple of years about the cut quality of TK vs full kerf...they've typically found no discernible difference when comparing like models in both kerf widths. For most cuts, you really shouldn’t need a stabilizer with a good thin kerf blade that’s running on a saw with low runout. There are times when a stabilizer may help with thick rips in stiff grain woods like mesquite, but I’ve seen many occasions where there was no difference at all with or without a stabilizer. I typically don’t recommend getting a blade stabilizer unless the need for one becomes apparent…odds are good it won’t.

It's important that your blade width is compatible with the width of your splitter. Running a blade that's thinner than the splitter knife can cause the wood to hang up on the splitter, which can be dangerous.

As mentioned, switching kerf widths on left tilt saws like the PM64a can result in skewing of the zero reference on the tape measure. I used to calibrate my saw for full kerf blades, and use a dado shim with my TK blades to account for the thickness difference. You could also make a minor adjustment to the cursor, or just use blades with the same kerf width.

[Bill White]

I used a full kerf combo (Freud) blade for most work. A thin kerf blade does better on my G0444Z for ripping. I always measure for finish cuts rather than rely on the scale even though I have it set accurately. Just habit I guess.
Bill

[Chip Lindley]

I had great luck using standard kerf blades on my old personally-refurbished Rockwell Model 10 CS. (1.5hp / 15A-7.5A motor) I had even better results when I switched the saw over to 230V. It ran like a champ until the day I sold it, cutting 8/4 white oak without complaint.

When you give your CS motor every electrical advantage, standard kerf blades RULE! Thin kerf blades may tend to flex and bind during deep cuts in thick hardwood--especially blades not intended specifically for ripping--like 50T combo blades.

[Bill Huber]

I am in the full kerf group.

I have a Jet contractors saw and I use noting but full kerf blades. I had a thin kerf at one time and sold it in a very short time. The problems I had was stability, it just was not as stable as the fill kerf and would not cut as straight of a like when ripping 4/4 hardwood. It would kind of flutter at different times on a long rip cut and leave a little like dip in the edged of the board.

With a sharp full kerf blade on my Jet, 1.5 hp, I have cut 8/4 maple with no problem. Now you can not go 40 miles an hour and do have to slow the feed rate down but it cut it just fine.

On a small saw it is very important to keep the blade clean and sharp.

[Neil Bosdet]

I too, am on the full kerf team. I have both and use both. I don't have specific issues with thin kerf blades (no specific problems) but I find I get consistently better cuts from a full kerf blade.

[Howard Acheson]

If you are happy with the blade you have, why not just buy a second one? Just rotate them as you get them sharpened.

If however, you are looking to upgrade or get a function specific blade tell us what type of cutting you do and what kind of materials.

[Alan Lightstone]

My Sawstop contractor saw came with blade stabilizers and I just assumed that you should always use one, so I always have.

I use thin-kerf blades, but good ones, and have been happy.

Should I not be using the stabilizers for most cuts? If so, when should they be used>

[scott spencer]

My Sawstop contractor saw came with blade stabilizers and I just assumed that you should always use one, so I always have.

I use thin-kerf blades, but good ones, and have been happy.

Should I not be using the stabilizers for most cuts? If so, when should they be used>

If you've already got them, the primary drawback I can think of is loss of cutting height. If you've got the type that are used in pairs, then your zero tape reference has accounted for the thickness, so you should them unless you reset your cursor. The main drawback before purchase is the possibility of an unnecessary expense.

[Nathan Callender]

I vote for full kerf as well - a 1.5hp saw should have no problems getting through hard, think material with a full kerf, sharp blade if you fee it appropriately. Mine doesn't.

I bought the idea that TK blades were the bomb until I cut hard maple - it would push the blade all over, not getting a straight cut. It caused lots of burning, and it really didn't get the saw any more power. I finally bought a cheaper freud full kerf combo and it's been a decent blade. The key, with anything really, is to have a sharp blade. That matters a whole lot more than how thick the kerf is.

[Ray Newman]

I cut my woodworking "eye teeth" with full kerf blades and have never felt the need to change. But as is true with any blade, keeping it sharp and free from pitch, as well as the the proper power supply, feed rate, etc., will help the blade perform better.

Over the years, I found that it is wise to have duplicate rip and cross cut blades on hand. That way, the blade does not become that dull before you need to send it out for sharpening. And if it does require sharpening, you will have the proper blade to continmuie or complete the task.

[Joe Angrisani]

Full kerf. As some have said, switching to a thin kerf blade changes your fence measurement calibration and requires a little adjustment. But the main problem in my mind is that any jigs you've made will no longer work accurately with the thin kerf blade.

[Gary McNair]

I had a combination of fat & thin in the past, with my older Delta Contractors saw (1.5HP) and was given to believe the thin kerf blades took less HP since the material removed was smaller, rip deeper/longer, etc.? After I got my new Powermatic 66(3 HP), I set the new throat guide plate for the thin kerf and never looked back. I use the Wixey digital fence readout and it's a snap to zero the fence for all blade changes including Dado where I use the Powermatic supplied throat plates.

[Bruce Wrenn]

Go over to Cripe Distributing's web site and order a couple of the Delta 35-7657's for $17 each. These are full kerf, 40 tooth ATB, general purpose blades. Shipping will be around $6.00 per blade. I keep one of these on my saw most of the time.

[glenn bradley]

I have a 1-3/4HP saw and run TK blades except for one special purpose 1/8" blade. Not all Full kerf blades are 1/8" and not all thin kerf blades are 3/32". As a matter of fact the variation is pretty wide (within the differences we are discussing). If you have had success with full kerf blades I would not change. I assume all your jigs and so forth are geared to full kerf and the move to a TK blade, regardless of the actual dimension, would create a reasonable difference in "fit".

As Scott pointed out, quality TK blades on a well tuned machine require no special consideration and only present the advantages they are designed for in my use. If I had a 3HP saw I would probably migrate to full kerf blades instead of taking another trip to the sharpening shop with my TK's.

[Larry Edgerton]

In the shop on my big saws [5-7.5hp] I run full kerf. The reason being is that with power feed a TK will sometimes wander, and that means any gain is lost. I don't want to hand feed to save a tiny bit of wood that will probably not be of any use to me anyway, and if the blade does its dance as TK often do, I have actually lost wood.

On the job site with a comparable saw to yours, I run a TK for lack of power reasons. Sometimes I run a thin 7 1/4" or 8" TK blade to give me a mechanical advantage as well as the thin kerf. Its basically a gear reduction when you do this and works well for ripping 2x material. I run Freud saw stiffners on all 10"saws, but keep the stock ones around in case I need a deep cut. The Minimax came with huge stiffeners from the factory, and those ones on the contractor saws are a joke, so I would replace them.

[Rich Engelhardt]

Sometimes I run a thin 7 1/4" or 8" TK blade to give me a mechanical advantage as well as the thin kerf. Its basically a gear reduction when you do this and works well for ripping 2x material
Hmmm....I never thought of it that way.

Thanks for that tip/idea!

I've been using a 10" B&D Piranna for "rough" 2x ripping, only because I picked it up @ WalMart for some rediculously low price - $5.00 or something on closeout.

[Larry Edgerton]

Hmmm....I never thought of it that way.

Thanks for that tip/idea!

I've been using a 10" B&D Piranna for "rough" 2x ripping, only because I picked it up @ WalMart for some rediculously low price - $5.00 or something on closeout.

I have a 12" Pirana that I run on my Minimax with the power feed for roughing out stock. They allow a fast feed, but no one around here will sharpen them with the same tooth profile. For what I use them for they last a long time though.

[Tom Walz]

Kerf can vary anywhere from 0.050" (cutting window blind slats) to an inch or so (4 foot diamter saw blades for cutting aluminum billets.)

Different retail "thin kerf" saw blades may have different kerfs depending on brand.

[Lee Schierer]

I run a thin kerf rip blade on my 1-1/2 Hp craftsman saw and get excellent results. FOr cross cuts I always use full Kerf blades. I run Freud Industrial blades exclusively and am happy with the cut quality and most of all the price.

[Steve Griffin]

I vote for BOTH.

I prefer thin kerf for rough ripping and rough crosscutting. Faster cutting, less mess to clean up, easier on the saw etc etc.

But, for final cutting wood to size for fine work, full kerf for sure.

-Steve

[Doug Donnell]

Thanks everyone for the replies. I think I will get a spare general purpose full kurf and get my original sharpened. I will have less chance of having to rebuild crosscut sleds and jigs, plus most of my work has been fine with the full kurf blade. An interesting note regarding the measurement scale, while I spent a great deal of time getting it calibrated, I find I never use it for final setup. I have always heard it is best to use a single tape measure for all measurements, and I have given some strong consideration to buying a few of those adjustable story stick clamps and doing more direct measurement.

Most of what I cut is sheet stock and 4 quarter, I think the thickest I have cut was 8 quarter walnut and I recall no particular bogging of the saw. It sounds like a thin kurf is a good choice in some circumstances but I probably will not benefit enough to deal with the jig issues.

Doug

[Mike Schuch]

I have never worried about thin vs thick kurf. I buy what ever I can get a good deal on. I guess the three 14" Freud Ultimate cut off blades I have for my radial arm saw are all thick kurf. When I scored them on e-bay for $25 each new I really didn't care what the kurf was. 10" blades are much harder to score a deal on because everyone uses them. Even 12" blades are hard to find a deal on with the abundance of 12" miter saws.

[Von Bickley]

My vote goes to the full kerf blade.....

[Harvey Pascoe]

Well, I just have to throw my 2 cents in here. I use TK almost exclusively, but as you can see, the consensus is: use the blade that is right for the job. TK for heavy timbers is not the best choice. I actually use 1/16" kerf in Matsushita 7-1/4" blades with or w/o stabilizer depending on the need for a finish cut or not, ripping up to 1" just fine. And that tiny blade goes thru wood like a hot knife thru butter. And they are cheap, $16.00. My general purpose blade is the WWII at 3/32nd kerf, but then I don't cut oak or maple, I work with mostly exotics so turning $$$ wood into dust is the most important consideration.

I have at least 6 different type of blades that I use regularly, and I"ve already worn out the threads on one arbor. The TS is probably more versatile than you realize.