SawStop vs Non SS Table saws poll....Accidents and accidental firings

[John Coloccia]

So my curiosity has gotten the better of me. What I want to know is how the SMC community is fairing with western table saw technology. No motive...just curiosity, so I decided to simply poll it because I don't think anyone ever has. I'm considering kickback injuries as well, not just lacerations on the blade

So what say you?

The poll is multiple choice. Choose any and all that apply to you, or that applied to you in the past (for example, I chose "Non SS owner: no injuries" and "SS Owner: brake never fired and no injuries").

Oh...and the poll is anonymous.

[James Baker SD]

I just voted "non SS, injured". It was years ago with a C-man contractor's saw and I was being very stupid.

[Rick Potter]

Voted non-SS..injured. It was a three week bruise from a kickback....just before I bought my Beis splitter.:rolleyes:

Rick Potter

[david brum]

I have a Shark Guard on my cabinet saw. I've never had a kickback since installing it.

[Prashun Patel]

My gosh! I did not realize the rate of non-SS injuries would be so high! 4/23 ?!

[Alan Bienlein]

No injuries to date and have been doing wood working professionally since 1982. I'm also a non SS owner but if I ever upgrade it will be a SS.

[Jim Foster]

Not to be a pain, but the questions asked won't provide much if any meaningful data that can be correlated, and can create false conclusions.

[John Coloccia]

Not to be a pain, but the questions asked won't provide much if any meaningful data that can be correlated, and can create false conclusions.

Thanks for the heads up. You're free to start your own poll with whatever questions you wish. I choose to ask these.

[Prashun Patel]

I think this is worth discussion. There's only one stat that seems to jump out at me: Of the non-SS owners, about 1 in 7 people have had an accident. Is that particular fact refutable? (I'm not trying to infer how an SS changes the game in any way).

[Ron Natalie]

My table saw accidents have been with it NOT running.

[Matt Day]

My table saw accidents have been with it NOT running.

Cut while changing the blade? Bruise from bumping your hip? Straining your back from moving it?

[John Coloccia]

I think this is worth discussion. There's only one stat that seems to jump out at me: Of the non-SS owners, about 1 in 7 people have had an accident. Is that particular fact refutable? (I'm not trying to infer how an SS changes the game in any way).


What I find interesting (albeit it's not perfect because there's some overlap in two of my options, and the sample is tiny) is that the save rate on the SS appears to be far lower than the injury rate on non-SS saws. It's off a bit because there can be overlap between SS Owner - Accidental Firing and SS Owner-Save, but that will only be significant if the number of saves starts to climb. Also, the SS hasn't been around for 50 years either, so that will throw things off as well. I think you would ideally like an injury/save rate per 100 hours, or something like that, but in lieu of that I just kept it simple and with the understanding that it's just a poll, not a statistical analysis :)

[Sean Hughto]

Just because I don't have a SawStop, doesn't mean I don't use safety equipment, of course. Splitter, Brett Guard, push stick, feather block, etc.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3186/2932258486_3ef7935bbf_b.jpg

[Art Mulder]

I think this is worth discussion. There's only one stat that seems to jump out at me: Of the non-SS owners, about 1 in 7 people have had an accident. Is that particular fact refutable?

Same fact jumps out at me...

[Harvey Melvin Richards]

I think you actually have to use it before you can get hurt. That's one very clean shop.


Just because I don't have a SawStop, doesn't mean I don't use safety equipment, of course. Splitter, Brett Guard, push stick, feather block, etc.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3186/2932258486_3ef7935bbf_b.jpg

[Neil Brooks]

At some point, anybody else who's interested can -- as I've been -- browse some of the CPSC's data on this subject.

I find it pretty interesting, but ... then ... I'm kind of a quant, at heart:

LINK (http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia11/brief/tablesaw.pdf)

LINK (http://www.cpsc.gov/library/foia/foia11/os/statsaws.pdf)

Be safe !

[Sean Hughto]

Just a shopvac. I ran it before this pic is all. My shop is unfortunately about ten cabinet and shelf projects away from any sort of order. You know that saying - a place for everythign and everyhting in its place - well I'm severely challenged in the place for everything part, and therefore ... lots of relative mess.

[Jerry Cappeller]

Have had the ICS Sawstop since about a year after they came out. Would have liked something smaller like they have now (mine takes up a good portion of a two car garage and even on the HTC mobile base it is a major pain to move around). I have had no accidents or accidental set offs of the system. Mine saw even had an accident as we were getting it off the trailer (unhitched) when a neighbor who was excited about seeing the saw (he lost a few fingers to a dado blade on a Delta about a year earlier) jumped on the trailer and walked towards the saw. Well you can imagine what happened...trailer popped a wheelie and the saw flipped over and landed on its top in the driveway. After righting it and being pissed over the couple of scratches on the cast iron top I got it assembled and everything was dead on accurate and has stayed that way. It is one tuff, well built piece of machinery.

[Steve Meliza]

As pointed out earlier, this poll will general some interesting numbers to look at, but statistically you cannot draw any meaningful conclusions between SS and non-SS as some have already tried to do. Someone voting could have injured themselves 4 times in the past 20 years on a conventional saw then a week ago got a SS and has not used it for any significant time. They would vote as a non-SS owner that has been injured and a SS owner not injured, which hides both the multiple injuries and length of SS ownership.

I'm not criticizing the choice of poll options, just cautioning against trying to read too much from the numbers.

[Steve Wurster]

My table saw accidents have been with it NOT running.

I voted 'non-SS owner, no injuries', but I forgot that I was once injured by my saw when it was not running. I had crouched under a wing to pick up something and when I stood up the corner of the CI wing scraped my back. Nothing too serious (nice scratch), but it hurt like hell! My wife wondered later why I screamed the F-bomb at one point.

I came close to injury lately but a SS wouldn't have helped me on this one. Was doing tenons flat on the TS and when I brought the piece back to the miter gauge to flip it over I didn't move it out of the way of the dado set enough: it caught slightly. Thankfully I use a big push block when doing this to ensure the piece stays down over the blade, so that helped me control the piece. The piece really just sped up since I was already pushing down on it. My hands were actually way away from it (left side of piece; blade was on right side), but without the push block the piece might have jumped up and over the miter gauge and hit me.

[Eric DeSilva]

I voted non-SS, no injury. But honestly, clicking that button made me feel like I should knock on wood afterwards.

The one oddity here--and I may be wrong about this--is that the SS doesn't prevent kickback, right? So for an apples-to-apples comparison, we really need to eliminate kickback-related injuries (the bruises; blade-related injuries from kickback seem fair game)? The reason I ask is because I saw a lot of people talking about kickback bruises.

[John Coloccia]

I voted non-SS, no injury. But honestly, clicking that button made me feel like I should knock on wood afterwards.

The one oddity here--and I may be wrong about this--is that the SS doesn't prevent kickback, right? So for an apples-to-apples comparison, we really need to eliminate kickback-related injuries (the bruises; blade-related injuries from kickback seem fair game)? The reason I ask is because I saw a lot of people talking about kickback bruises.

I specifically want to know about kickback too. This isn't a poll about braking technology. It's a poll about injuries, misfires, saves and what do people own.

[Mike Henderson]

Sawstop owner, no injuries of any kind. I had a cheap portable saw and had an injury from a kickback on that one. Of course, that saw didn't have a riving knife either.

After I got rid of the portable saw, I got a Craftsman saw and didn't have any injuries but was always concerned about whether I'd make a mistake and cut off a finger. That's why I bought the SawStop - for the peace of mind that I wouldn't cut off a finger or mangle my hand. And so far, I haven't.

Mike

[mreza Salav]

Had a kick back on my previous (non-SS) saw, didn't have a riving knife. Have had an accidental brake fire on my SS but no injuries.

One thing I just posted in another thread that could have been added to this poll (or at least I am interested to know):

Most of those who have had accidental brake fire (me included) have had it because of a mistake.
I wonder what is the rate of people who have accidental brake fire on a SS vs. the rate of people who have a serious accident (finger cut) on a non-SS.
Both are caused mostly by a moment of not being careful enough or paying enough attention. In one you pay a much higher price than the other.

I tend to think the number of brake fire accidents is higher but I bet there aren't many who have had TWO or more accidental brake fires
(typically one is enough to make you extra cautious with every cut). On the other hand, I also bet that all people want to be in the first camp (accidental brake fire vs. finger cut!).

[Kyle Iwamoto]

I have to say that the SS DOES have anti-kickback devices, the riving knife, and the pawls in the guard. It also has a motor load sensor that senses if the blade is getting pinched, and shuts the saw down before it tosses the wood back at you. DAMHIKT

[John Lifer]

Meaningless survey. So far injuries listed have been kickback related. SS doesn't prevent that any better than any rival cabinet saw with guards and splitter in place. Blade cut is the only injury anyone should list in order to be comparable survey.

[Jerome Hanby]

Meaningless survey. So far injuries listed have been kickback related. SS doesn't prevent that any better than any rival cabinet saw with guards and splitter in place. Blade cut is the only injury anyone should list in order to be comparable survey.

I agree that the survey is meaningless in that all surveys are meaningless, but I don't think your reason is valid. The Saw Stop is sold as the cure for table saw accidents and bringing to light that there is a whole other category of accidents that it doesn't handle any better than other "modern" saws isn't a bad thing.

[John Coloccia]

Meaningless survey. So far injuries listed have been kickback related. SS doesn't prevent that any better than any rival cabinet saw with guards and splitter in place. Blade cut is the only injury anyone should list in order to be comparable survey.

My goal isn't to compare technologies. If you wish to do that, start your own poll. I like mine precisely as is.

This isn't a SS debate thread. If it turns into that I will delete it myself or ask the mods to shut it down and delete it. There is no "goal" or motive other than curiosity about exactly and precisely the poll questions, and I specifically included kickbacks in the injury criteria.

[Don Jarvie]

To echo what Steve said above that its just a poll and any real conclusions can't be determined due to the amount of people answering the poll, you need more people. If every TS owner on the Creek answered then the numbers might show so decent comparable numbers.

My biggest issue is cost. If I told my wife I was spending 3200.00 on a saw to keep me from cutting off my fingers she would tell me to stop WWing and that would solve the problem. If I made money from my shop that supported the house it would be different, but no money coming in.

[Chris Tsutsui]

This poll doesn't cover near misses. haha

Reduce your "near misses" to zero and you'll be on a path to zero injury.

[Mike Shields]

For some of the various reasons stated by other posters, I replaced my Delta saw with a slider.

[mreza Salav]

Pretty interesting numbers already. I really like to find out the answer to the following two:

- Has anybody (not just SMC members) seen/heard a kickback while operating a table saw (any kind) WITH a properly installed/aligned riving knife?

- Has anybody heard a Sawstop fail to fire when it should i.e. serious injury resulting from contact with blade? I know this possibility is non-zero but would like to know if there has been any so far.

Does anybody know how one can get any source of data for the above two questions?

[Brian Kent]

I may have to change my answer. I voted "non-SS owner: no injuries" because I was thinking about blade injuries. I have experienced 2 severe kickbacks, both when I used a $99 Ryobi saw without the splitter or pawls. The sides flexed and the fence folded in half on the second one. I have had no kickbacks while using a splitter.

[Richard Wagner]

Pretty interesting numbers already. I really like to find out the answer to the following two:

- Has anybody (not just SMC members) seen/heard a kickback while operating a table saw (any kind) WITH a properly installed/aligned riving knife?

- Has anybody heard a Sawstop fail to fire when it should i.e. serious injury resulting from contact with blade? I know this possibility is non-zero but would like to know if there has been any so far.

Does anybody know how one can get any source of data for the above two questions?

It has been awhile but I have experienced kickbacks. A couple of them could have been serious had I been standing somewhere other than where I was. However, the question included a riving knife caveat. I was not using a riving knife; in other words, I was not employing all appropriate safety precautions. I have had no kickbacks while using my upper saw guard which includes a riving knife with pawls.

The data that I have seen on these incidents has all come from what I considered a biased source; the absence of false firing data and data showing the effectiveness of a simple riving knife is to be expected.

[ian maybury]

It's hard to know how representative the poll numbers might be, but taken at face value there's a disturbingly high level of false firings for a technology that is being pushed as the basis for a national standard. Presuming that these saws need a new cartridge every time that'd suggest it'd be pretty close to a license to print money...

ian

[Mike Henderson]

It's hard to know how representative the poll numbers might be, but taken at face value there's a disturbingly high level of false firings for a technology that is being pushed as the basis for a national standard. Presuming that these saws need a new cartridge every time that'd suggest it'd be pretty close to a license to print money...

ian
It's interesting how different people see different things in statistics. I was struck by the high rate of injuries in the non-sawstop group. As of the statistics right now, approximately 17% of the non-sawstop owners have had an injury from their saws (18 injuries, 88 non-injuries for a total of 106 reporting. 18/106 is about 17%). In my opinion, that's a pretty high injury rate.

Note that as of now, there were no injuries reported from the SawStop group, even though there were reports of false firings. While a false firing has a cost, injury also has a cost, sometimes a high cost.

Mike

[David Kumm]

Although it wasn't intended as such it looks to becoming a referendum on the SS. Non blade injuries should at least be segregated as SS has no real advantage there. The percentage of kickback to blade injuries is probably relevant however. Dave

[Peter Aeschliman]

Case in point: the scar on my forehead from a kickback injury on my sawstop... which of course was my fault. I'm currently the only person who voted with an injury on my SS.

Sorry to pile on here, but while I do enjoy this conversation, I also don't think you can use this data for anything.

You would need to normalize this data based on the number of SS and non-SS saws in use today. Obviously you're going to have higher numbers for all stats in the non-ss categories because there are more far more non-ss tablesaws in use than SS tablesaws. You'd need some kind of per capita measure.

Or maybe you would only survey people who have bought a brand new saw since SS hit the market. Likewise, some saws have riving knives, blade guards, anti-kickback pawls, etc, and others don't. You can't compare a ryobi benchtop saw to a euro slider or SS, etc.

But like I said, interesting conversation!

[John Coloccia]

Although it wasn't intended as such it looks to becoming a referendum on the SS. Non blade injuries should at least be segregated as SS has no real advantage there. The percentage of kickback to blade injuries is probably relevant however. Dave



Sorry to pile on here, but while I do enjoy this conversation, I also don't think you can use this data for anything.


It's a simple poll, with kickbacks included intentionally. It's not a comparison of SS technology.

What would I use the data for, Peter? It's just a poll. Too many people are trying to make it more than it is for the purposes of explaining why it's not.

How'd the kickback happen anyway, Peter? I think I remember you posting about that.

[Ron Natalie]

I think the riving knife will get rid of some of the major board launching back at the user type situations, but it's still possible with smaller pieces to get them jammed up before the knife.

[Kelly Colin Mark]

It's interesting how different people see different things in statistics. I was struck by the high rate of injuries in the non-sawstop group.

There are several interpretations of this observation, all, some or none of which may contribute.

1. Sawstop technology is relatively new, so SS owners are by inherently limited as to the years running the saws. However, I'm sure there are users who have used their conventional saws for decades longer than SS users possibly could.

2. Sawstop saws are expensive compared to the wide population of saws available for sale. While I think the magnitude of this premium is vastly overstated, and while the SS is by all accounts an excellent saw even forgetting about the braking, a buyer who opts to pay this premium is likely to be doing so for safety reasons. Hence, there is self-selection for safety consciousness among SS users.

3. Related to 2. above, someone willing to pay for a premium saw is more likely to be an experienced or committed woodworker than someone who is satisfied with a less expensive machine that is presumably at least somewhat less well made. It would be interesting to see what accident rates look like in, for instance, buyers of new General 650s.

4. There is probably a correlation between Sawstop ownership and level of income. The latter is correlated to education level.

5. Sawstop owners may be less inclined to report injuries. I doubt this effect could be very strong in an essentially anonymous survey, but as someone trained as a psychologist, I know this much: people are funny.

A rigorous study would select a sample of users with varying levels experience and saws, and conduct a longitudinal survey of accident rates. No, I didn't expect this survey to do so. But I am sure someone HAS done it.

[Peter Aeschliman]

It's a simple poll, with kickbacks included intentionally. It's not a comparison of SS technology.

What would I use the data for, Peter? It's just a poll. Too many people are trying to make it more than it is for the purposes of explaining why it's not.

Not trying to dis your thread! But as an analyst by trade, I'm uncomfortable with peoples' attempts to infer injury rates from this data. This poll doesn't provide the data one needs to properly do so, even for rough purposes.

I should have said "I also don't think you can use this data to draw any conclusions." Obviously none of us are going to DO anything with this poll data, but it shouldn't have any influence on one's perception of the value of the safety mechanism either way.


How'd the kickback happen anyway, Peter? I think I remember you posting about that.

Assuming you don't have issues with blood and gore, have a look at the thread I created. You posted in another thread that you had a guy come into your store high on pain meds with a bloody head... that could've been me, except my doctor just told me to take Advil!


http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?170208-Kickback-Hurts!-(WARNING!-GORY-PICTURES!!)&highlight=

[Mike Henderson]

There are several interpretations of this observation, all, some or none of which may contribute.

1. Sawstop technology is relatively new, so SS owners are by inherently limited as to the years running the saws. However, I'm sure there are users who have used their conventional saws for decades longer than SS users possibly could.

2. Sawstop saws are expensive compared to the wide population of saws available for sale. While I think the magnitude of this premium is vastly overstated, and while the SS is by all accounts an excellent saw even forgetting about the braking, a buyer who opts to pay this premium is likely to be doing so for safety reasons. Hence, there is self-selection for safety consciousness among SS users.

3. Related to 2. above, someone willing to pay for a premium saw is more likely to be an experienced or committed woodworker than someone who is satisfied with a less expensive machine that is presumably at least somewhat less well made. It would be interesting to see what accident rates look like in, for instance, buyers of new General 650s.

4. There is probably a correlation between Sawstop ownership and level of income. The latter is correlated to education level.

5. Sawstop owners may be less inclined to report injuries. I doubt this effect could be very strong in an essentially anonymous survey, but as someone trained as a psychologist, I know this much: people are funny.

A rigorous study would select a sample of users with varying levels experience and saws, and conduct a longitudinal survey of accident rates. No, I didn't expect this survey to do so. But I am sure someone HAS done it.
My intent was to point out that anyone can find something that will support their preconceived notions in any set of statistical data.

Because this reporting is self selected, it has little value for decision making.

Mike

[Neil Brooks]

2. Sawstop saws are expensive compared to the wide population of saws available for sale. While I think the magnitude of this premium is vastly overstated, and while the SS is by all accounts an excellent saw even forgetting about the braking, a buyer who opts to pay this premium is likely to be doing so for safety reasons. Hence, there is self-selection for safety consciousness among SS users.


Ahhhh. Somebody to geek out with :)

Yeah. John wanted this poll to just BE this poll. It is what it is, and I respect that.

So ... ignore me, John !

I'd figure the "safety conscious" would likely be offset by those who had a hit, or a near miss, or heard about a buddy who lost his finger on a TS.

[In one way, they COULD actually be less safe TS users than the average, coming to a SS /after/ an injury or near-injury.]

I'd call those a wash. I might even say that the truly safety conscious are -- consciously or unconsciously -- more aware of "risk compensation," and don't need no stinking badges, or flesh sensing technology, or blade guards.

[Risk compensation indicates that ... when you WEAR a helmet ... you might ride in a more inherently risky manner, assuming you're safer than you really are.]

Okay. Maybe riving knives, though ;)

Back to you, Doc !

[Neil Brooks]

Also, let's face it ....

It's a self-selecting sample, by definition.

What you'll see most -- quite likely -- is the same passionate folks on both sides of the SS debate chiming in -- an inherent limitation in passive polling, vs. actively phoning and polling TS owners, until you get an adequate sample size.

:)

I still think it's a cool poll. I just take it FWIW.

[Brian Kent]

Does anyone have stats on the number of table saw accidents vs other woodworking machines and tools?

[Gary Max]

I am holding out for the hammer that never misses the nail.:eek:

[Michael Peet]

Voted "SS Owner: Brake fired accidentally", assuming firmware bugs erroneously popping the brake fall into this category. I had one go, then put in a new brake and it fired too. SS replaced them both at their expense. Since the firings were on startup I was able to salvage the blade too. As an engineer, I know things don't always go right "out in the wild", and I am more than willing to accept stuff like this.

I've not had a tablesaw injury yet myself, but was present when my dad had a pretty bad one.

Mike

[Neil Brooks]

I am holding out for the hammer that never misses the nail.:eek:

If you mean thumb nail ... you're welcome to my hammer.

It never misses ;)

[Alan Lightstone]

I have had a kickback on a SawStop with a properly installed riving knife. It was caused by the outfeed table being slightly too high, and when pushing the wood it hit the edge of the outfeed table, and rotated into the back of the blade - kickback. Left quite a welt on my abdomen. Felt like I was kicked by a horse. Wondered if I ruptured my spleen (fortunately didn't) To be fair, the blade cover was off, though, which likely would have prevented the kickback.

All safety features decrease the risk of an accident. They don't eliminate it. And operator error (which mine, sadly I guess qualifies as) can trump all safety features. That being said, there is no way I would give up my SawStop.

Oh, and Neil, "I wonder where Ruth is?"

[Roger Feeley]

I agree with all your points, Kelly. Perhaps the real benefits of the SS technology will be when it finds its way into the hands of the weekend warriors that currently use the $99 saws (that will be $299 with the SS brake).

I don't think there is a way to truly test for SS effectiveness other than to get the tech out there and interview the folks showing up at the ERs.

[Craig Kalkman]

I need to vote twice:
Formerly a non SS injured. Currently an SS non-injured. Best move I ever made, and by the way, an SS solution with an Incra fence is a wonderful combo.
If I was doing it over I'd do the SS the first time and reduce the risk, both for myself and my kids that are getting started in the shop. I'm quite sure nobody plans their injuries, so just "being careful" is a little like playing Russian roulette. Haven't seen any replacement fingers on sale at Woodcraft.

[harry hood]

- Has anybody (not just SMC members) seen/heard a kickback while operating a table saw (any kind) WITH a properly installed/aligned?

After 12 years of using my little Inca 259 which has a true riving knife (and is 30+ years old) I've never had a kickback. I have had a piece of oak I was ripping pinch the knife with so much pressure that I had to pry the kerf open with pry bar in order to get it off. That would have been a pretty nasty kickback on saw without a knife I think.
Contrast this with the old Unisaw I grew up using that would throw stock so much that for a long time I thought that's just what tablesaws did every so often.

[mreza Salav]

I have had a kickback on a SawStop with a properly installed riving knife. It was caused by the outfeed table being slightly too high, and when pushing the wood it hit the edge of the outfeed table, and rotated into the back of the blade - kickback. Left quite a welt on my abdomen. Felt like I was kicked by a horse. Wondered if I ruptured my spleen (fortunately didn't)


I am still trying to imagine the picture how it actually got kicked back. was it the end of the piece (the one that you were pushing) that got tangled into the blade?

[Larry Edgerton]

I was injured by a SS when I was helping a friend get his in the garage. He set it on my foot. Was not sure if that figured in you're poll so didn't vote.

I think this poll is a communist plot!:rolleyes:

You guys worry too much about cutting a finger off, its really not all that bad. I still get up in the morning, take a shower, brush my teeth, kiss my wife and off I go for another joyous day of woodworking. I get a chuckle out of the attitude that life is over.

And yes, as soon as someone comes up with a system other than SS, I will probably buy one. One that is not so expensive when it fires.

[Chris Hedges]

As many Sawstop owners know, if a brake accidentally fires, it can be sent back to saw stop for evaluation. If it is deemed that the brake did fire 'accidentally' they will replace the cartridge free of cost.

Chris


It's hard to know how representative the poll numbers might be, but taken at face value there's a disturbingly high level of false firings for a technology that is being pushed as the basis for a national standard. Presuming that these saws need a new cartridge every time that'd suggest it'd be pretty close to a license to print money...

ian

[Doug Morgan]

As many Sawstop owners know, if a brake accidentally fires, it can be sent back to saw stop for evaluation. If it is deemed that the brake did fire 'accidentally' they will replace the cartridge free of cost.

Chris

I had one misfire. The gap was set correctly but when I turned it on and before it was up to speed the brake fired. I sent the cartridge back to SS and they sent me a new one. The blade was not damaged except a small wear and tear, because the motor was not up to speed. The Blade barely dug into the brake. There is one trick I have learned and that is to take clear packing tape and cover the brake so that wet wood does not trip the brake mech.

[Rick Prosser]

SS owner - no injuries, but I have had one kickback that just missed me. (my fault for not holding the board securely on a non-thru cut)

As far as the poll goes - I like it. Interesting information. As with other polls and statistics in general - I would not use them as a basis for much of anything other than entertainment value.

[Alan Lightstone]

I am still trying to imagine the picture how it actually got kicked back. was it the end of the piece (the one that you were pushing) that got tangled into the blade?
I'm thinking yes. It took a long time till I could figure out what caused it.

[Greg Portland]

I posted non-SS injured even though I would classify it as an accident (kickback) with minimal injury (hurt for ~ a day).

[Jim German]

Keep in mind the results of this poll are fundamentally flawed and skewed in favor of the Sawstop. Even if you were a fairly early adopter of a Sawstop, you have only been using the saw for 7 years. Whereas a good portion of people here have been using tablesaws for 30+ years. To get an accurate measurement of how useful Sawstops are at preventing injury, you need to compare injuries per hour of use.

[Andrew Pitonyak]

Caught a kickback in the gut some years back. I just purchased a SS because it has better safety features than my previous saw (ie, riven knife). I think that pretty much any saw would have given me the riven knife, but the SS gives me a bit more safety with respect to fingers.

[Jay Jolliffe]

I've had two accidents that required stitches on a table saw. Now I own a SS & owning this saw I am still careful what I do on it. I treat it like it doesn't have the break cartridge....Yes & I did buy it because of the accidents.

[Ron Natalie]

You can get a kickback on just about any saw with a bad setup/bad technique. Mitre gauge+fence screwup or poorly aligned fence will jam the piece into the back of the blade before the knife. Small off cuts can just bounce into the blade as well.

[Brian Ashton]

Voted "SS Owner: Brake fired accidentally", assuming firmware bugs erroneously popping the brake fall into this category. I had one go, then put in a new brake and it fired too. SS replaced them both at their expense. Since the firings were on startup I was able to salvage the blade too. As an engineer, I know things don't always go right "out in the wild", and I am more than willing to accept stuff like this.

I've not had a tablesaw injury yet myself, but was present when my dad had a pretty bad one.

Mike

I've always been on the side that has said the technology would be to flakey in such an environment and there would be a significant number of false triggers... But I was actually surprised at how high they have been admitted to here.

[Neil Brooks]

I've always been on the side that has said the technology would be to flakey in such an environment and there would be a significant number of false triggers... But I was actually surprised at how high they have been admitted to here.

Hmm.

In talking to the "false trigger" group, we'd find out how many were truly "false" vs. "I did something silly, and the brake did what it was supposed to."

I suspect there's some of each, in there, but wouldn't want to guess at the ratio.

[Glen Blanchard]

I am a SS owner, but didn't respond to the poll. I activated my brake when the corner of my aluminum miter gauge fence nicked the blade. This was not really an accident per se (although it was accidental). Clearly operator error. I have never had a false trigger in (what must now be) about 5 yrs of ownership.

[David Hostetler]

The poll itself is flawed as the potential answers just don't go deep enough, and raises more questions than it answers. Such as...

Those SawStop, and non Saw Stop owners that have had injuries, what sort of injuries were they? If they are a flesh to blade injury, was the guard in place at the time of accident?

I have found that not all, but what appears to be a large majority of saw accidents involving flesh to moving blade come from the user bypassing safety devices... In these cases sure the SawStop tech would have helped. Assuming the brake wasn't turned off... So it's not really the SawStop feature so much as using the safety devices on a saw, SawStop or not that tends to keep your digits in place...

[Prashun Patel]

Man, how many times does John have to say it: the poll is flawed and not complete - and he knows it. He still chooses to ask the question. What's the harm?

We're on an Internet forum, for Pete's sake! He's not writing a PhD on this data, nor should any readers use the data in their's.

Even if he designed the questions with all the scientific rigor of a Gallup, the sampling population of SMC is not necessarily accurately representative in ANY poll.

Jeez, John. I feel for you.

I mean, it's like if my wife asks me, "Honey, do I look fat in this dress?" and I say, "Well, that's a bad question". Wait a second, I resemble that remark ;)

[John Coloccia]

Man, how many times does John have to say it: the poll is flawed and not complete - and he knows it. He still chooses to ask the question. What's the harm?

We're on an Internet forum, for Pete's sake! He's not writing a PhD on this data, nor should any readers use the data in their's.

Even if he designed the questions with all the scientific rigor of a Gallup, the sampling population of SMC is not necessarily accurately representative in ANY poll.

Jeez, John. I feel for you.

I mean, it's like if my wife asks me, "Honey, do I look fat in this dress?" and I say, "Well, that's a bad question". Wait a second, I resemble that remark ;)

LOL...I've given up on that.

I have to say, though, I'm a bit surprised by the numbers. Half of us fire are firing the brake. Yikes. More injuries than I would have thought, too. I can only assume they're all kickbacks or things like that, but I don't know.

[Neil Brooks]

I think this poll is a communist plot!


I remember reading that ... Mao Tse-Tung is buried in one of those ....

Hm.

[Jerome Hanby]

I haven't been injured myself, but my wieners all have nicks...

[Gary Max]

I would rather have a hammer that never missed the nail---------ouch

[Van Huskey]

Why doesn't anyone complaining about the poll do their own? I think anyone who tries will find out of difficult it is, in the format given. A question like this needs to be done in a flow chart manner with far more than 10 possible answers. John, did what HE wanted to do, John knew it wasn't perfect but maybe HE can glean what he hoped for out of it. This reminds me of a "simple" poll I put up one time just trying to get an idea how many people made part or all of their living via woodworking, I ash it and use the word "pro" to signify those who made their living working with wood. It became a huge discussion about professionalism and I suppose some people got their feelings hurt when their idea of "pro" was being reduced to anyone that did their type of work, not just ones that rose to the level of craftmanship they felt they exibited. Reminds me of a statistic I heard just last night, though I am not saying it is fact, apparently when people are ask about positive attributes 90% of people respond they are above average in that regard... I digress.


I am a non-SS owner and have been injured. My only injuries thus far have been minor kickbacks, hopefully with a newer saw with a riving knife thsoe are now behind me, even though better technique at the time could have prevented the kickbacks or at least made sure they didn't hit me. The day may come when I regret not having a SS, just like I may rue the day I didn't buy a Mercedes that helps stop itself before it hits an object...

Finally, someone, anyone that has complained about the shortcomings of the poll, start one yourself seeking to answer the same basic question as John presented and see how it goes...

[John Coloccia]

I wonder the same thing, Van. All I really wanted to see was:

1) rough injury rate on non-SS saws
2) rough rate at which people are tripping the brake for whatever reason
3) whether anyone is actually injuring themselves on the SS

And so far, according to those polled the basic answers are

1) somewhere shy of 20%

2) about half...maybe it's 30%....maybe it's 70%. What's it's NOT is 100% or 10%, i.e. it's not everyone but lots of us trip the brake, and a significant number do it accidentally. That's more than I thought it would be.

3) about half the people that COULD injure themselves are saved by the brake. Frankly, I'm surprised that so many have injured themselves. Maybe it's not half....maybe it's 30% or 70%. What it's not is 0%, which is about where I expected it to be. It seems to be significantly higher.

The mistake everyone makes is assuming that I'm trying to make a rate comparison between SS and non-SS saws. I'm not. I have no interest in any of these companies, what anyone happens to use in their own shop, nor what anyone happens to think about what's in my own shop. As callous as it sounds, I really just don't care. I have my own shop to worry about. I just wanted to get a rough idea of what's going on out there because it seems to come up a lot. Now I can say, "Yeah, lots of us do trip the brake by accident", and "Don't be complacent because the injury rate is still SIGNIFICANT on this saw". I don't know what the rate is, but even with this small, completely unscientific sample, there's a definite and significant signal there that you can't ignore.

[Kyle Iwamoto]

This reminds me of a "simple" poll I put up one time just trying to get an idea how many people made part or all of their living via woodworking, I ash it and use the word "pro" to signify those who made their living working with wood. It became a huge discussion about professionalism and I suppose some people got their feelings hurt when their idea of "pro" was being reduced to anyone that did their type of work, not just ones that rose to the level of craftmanship they felt they exibited....

I think I remember that poll. It amazed me how many people rant on and did not even read the O.P. that clearly defined "pro". If they disagree with the definition of "pro" they should start another poll....

[johnny means]

Thought I'd qualify my vote as SS owner with 2 accidental firings. Both were operator error, me and an employee. Both were a miter gauge contact.

[Neil Brooks]

Awww.

I didn't get a chance to harangue Van about the "worthlessness" of HIS poll ??

I'm hurt :D

[ian maybury]

:D I don't want to get involved in controversy on this topic either, or get diverted into arcane arguments about whether or not terminology means one thing or another (practically speaking it means whatever the perceiver believes it means - there's no single right or wrong answer) - but I have been keeping an eye on the voting in the poll given the rumblings regarding the possibility of legislation to make compulsory this or a similar technology.

There are certainly problems in comparing Saw Stop users with non-Saw Stop users' numbers given the different ownership periods and and population sizes, but if the voting Saw Stop user group alone is reviewed we have 31 'never fired' versus 5 'injury preventions' versus 24 'accidental firings'.

As before I find those numbers pretty worrying for a technology that is being pushed as the basis for a possible national standard, in that 24 accidental firings seems one heck of a high number versus 5 injury preventions. It's also worrying that at least 40% (24/31+24+5) of the voting owners have experienced accidental firings.

Somebody said earlier that you can't consider cost (or something like that) when preventing injury. As a sentiment it has a certain politically correct appeal, but it's unfortunately and demonstrably untrue. First off it's impossible to eliminate all risk of injuries, but secondly our societies and economies would instantly grind to a halt if that same trade off wasn't made (and a practicable balance of risk vs. cost found) in businesses, agencies, private lives and more all over and every day.....

ian

[John Coloccia]

:D I don't want to get involved in controversy on this topic either, or get diverted into arcane arguments about whether or not terminology means one thing or another (practically speaking it means whatever the perceiver believes it means - there's no single right or wrong answer) - but I have been keeping an eye on the voting in the poll given the rumblings regarding the possibility of legislation to make compulsory this or a similar technology.

**snip**


Then don't. I'm going to do everything I can to keep bickering out of this thread because I would like to see this thread survive and see how things change as time goes on. I'd ask that if anyone has anything they'd like to discuss about the relative value of various technologies, start your own thread instead of derailing this one.

[Paul McGaha]

One thing that stands out to me is of the 228 (so far) non sawstop owners that have voted, 40 have had an injury on the table saw, about 17.5%, roughly 1 out of 6 users.

I dont have any information to compare that to but is a higher rate than I would have guessed.

PHM

[Dennis Peacock]

Non-SS tablesaw here. Been using non-SS since the 1970's. Still have all digits (I am a musician ya know. :) ) and I'm also a woodworker. No injuries...but I have had ONE piece of wood kicked back....SS doesn't fix kickback. ;)

[Carl Beckett]

Of course I will chime in with an opinion :)

I have a traditional saw, and a thumb that clicks every time I bend it. But I like that thumb and am happy they got it all back together to where it stayed on.

The next category of the poll might be:

"For those of you who have experienced and injury, does this make you more likely or less likely to consider safety for your next saw purchase". Safety could include SS technology, riving knife, overhead arm, etc etc.

Because for me the answer is YES, after experiencing an injury I am much more conscious of the safety features on the tablesaw. Being a machinist and lab tech for years, I was already pretty respectful but it bit me anyway. Accidents do happen. And as it turns out they happen to me. So if I can do something to improve my health and safety - even if its not a 100% guaranteed slam dunk prevention - I like to give it strong consideration.

Am thinking... .if we merged this thread with a thread about dust collection and which bandsaw to buy, we would get the mother of all threads.......

[Glen Blanchard]

<snip> Saw Stop user group alone is reviewed we have <snip> 24 'accidental firings'.



While this is true, I think it important to note that some (many?) of these were due to operator error (such as mine). There have been a number of firings for "unknown" reasons as well. The latter should indeed be a concern in regards to the technology employed, the former should not.

[John Meade]

SS Owner...Brake fired...likely prevented injury. Doing a narrow rip, (too narrow for the blade guard) I stupidly attempted adjust the path of the cut between the blade and the fence without using a push stick. The back of my knuckles touched the side of the spinning blade and the brake fired so fast it scared the stuffing out of me. I likely would have brushed the back of my hand against the carbide teeth of the blade as I instinctively pulled my hand away after the touch, but the blade was already stopped and below the table insert. I was amazed that I was unharmed, and amazed at how stupid I had been after working with table saws since I was 16. What was I thinking?

I had a new brake cartridge on hand so I was back in business after a few minutes. It ruined a good glue-line rip blade...but better than losing my hand. I previously used a circa 1958 Shop smith as my table saw (combined with a 1976 Craftsman RAS). Both were death traps because of the lack of blade guards (none on the SS and a bad one on the RAS). Luckily, no accidents. The SS is by far the nicest, smoothest, most accurate TS that I have ever used. I wanted a 12" saw, but went for the SS. No regrets. I have had it for about a year. I use it constantly. BTW I have "tuned up" the RAS and use it for some cross cuts, dado's and cuts into green lumber that might trigger the SS brake.

[johnny means]

As before I find those numbers pretty worrying for a technology that is being pushed as the basis for a possible national standard, in that 24 accidental firings seems one heck of a high number versus 5 injury preventions. It's also worrying that at least 40% (24/31+24+5) of the voting owners have experienced accidental firings.

Somebody said earlier that you can't consider cost (or something like that) when preventing injury. As a sentiment it has a certain politically correct appeal, but it's unfortunately and demonstrably untrue. First off it's impossible to eliminate all risk of injuries, but secondly our societies and economies would instantly grind to a halt if that same trade off wasn't made (and a practicable balance of risk vs. cost found) in businesses, agencies, private lives and more all over and every day.....

ian

Ian, I would consider that ratio very cost effective and would be very pleased with those types of numbers. Very likely those 29 firings, having an upward cost of $5000, save our society millions in shared cost due to medical expenses.

[Mike Heidrick]

Reading the 24 accidental firings number makes me want to see the number of non-SS users with trimmed miter gauges.

[David Kumm]

I'm not sure it is fair to diss Ian for discussing the problems with the poll and let others use it as a platform to justify the SS technology. It is what it is- interesting info but not meant to be more than that. Dave

[Mike Henderson]

Somebody said earlier that you can't consider cost (or something like that) when preventing injury. As a sentiment it has a certain politically correct appeal, but it's unfortunately and demonstrably untrue. First off it's impossible to eliminate all risk of injuries, but secondly our societies and economies would instantly grind to a halt if that same trade off wasn't made (and a practicable balance of risk vs. cost found) in businesses, agencies, private lives and more all over and every day.....

ian
Of course cost has to be considered whenever any safety device is used. If you read the CPSC filing, that's one of the major issues raised by the commission in their debate on whether additional safety devices should be required. The cost of the table saw injuries was so high - actual medical cost, not things like loss of ability to work - that it's pretty easy to justify the addition of a safety device of the SawStop type.

Mike

[ian maybury]

Just to be clear - I'm not unduly concerned about the issue, and for sure it's only a straw poll.

That said there's a gazillion things we get up to as societies that probably an even more powerful anti case can be made against on economic grounds - speculative banking activities, smoking, alcohol, sports, risky food additives, poor dietary habits, gambling with climate, biospheric and environmental risks to name but a few.

I doubt that politically the average Joe would be very happy to accept that level of false firings (for which he gets to pay) for the greater good.

There's also the little problem of moving goalposts - as discussed before when you dumb down things people proportionately drop their awareness to the level of risk they perceive as being personally acceptable. With the result that accident levels tend to remain constant.

Not to mention that rules tend by definition to target extreme behaviours at the expense of the majority that behave reasonably.

Add the fact that every time we run with rules that we tend to mobilise a whole slew of competing vested interests. Once implemented and staffed we've very definitely created a pro lobby that mostly doesn't care about the rights and the wrongs - and the lesson of successive societies is that reversal becomes almost impossible.

Worst of all this same self interest means that organisational systems in general never truly solve problems when a lack of care for self and others is at their root - the best they can hope for is to achieve some sort of temporary stasis.

Meaning that while it's tough to argue for the complete elimination of regulation it's dodgy territory needing a lot more care than the usual camel type solutions the dog fight tends to deliver...

ian

[John Coloccia]

This is precisely why I get on everyone about the poll and it's purpose. It's because this thread will rapidly turn into a bickering match and will rapidly get nuked, like all such threads. I'd rather it just exist so that people can continue to vote if they wish to, and everyone can draw their own conclusions. If someone wants to argue about regulation, insurance, what they think is reasonable or unreasonable, etc, please start your own thread and feel free to reference this one, but I just ask that we all keep the philosophy out of this one so it doesn't go off the deep end and disappear.

[Harold Burrell]

Just to be clear - I'm not unduly concerned about the issue, and for sure it's only a straw poll.

That said there's a gazillion things we get up to as societies that probably an even more powerful anti case can be made against on economic grounds - speculative banking activities, smoking, alcohol, sports, risky food additives, poor dietary habits, gambling with climate, biospheric and environmental risks to name but a few.

I doubt that politically the average Joe would be very happy to accept that level of false firings (for which he gets to pay) for the greater good.

There's also the little problem of moving goalposts - as discussed before when you dumb down things people proportionately drop their awareness to the level of risk they perceive as being personally acceptable. With the result that accident levels tend to remain constant.

Not to mention that rules tend by definition to target extreme behaviours at the expense of the majority that behave reasonably.

Add the fact that every time we run with rules that we tend to mobilise a whole slew of competing vested interests. Once implemented and staffed we've very definitely created a pro lobby that mostly doesn't care about the rights and the wrongs - and the lesson of successive societies is that reversal becomes almost impossible.

Worst of all this same self interest means that organisational systems in general never truly solve problems when a lack of care for self and others is at their root - the best they can hope for is to achieve some sort of temporary stasis.

Meaning that while it's tough to argue for the complete elimination of regulation it's dodgy territory needing a lot more care than the usual camel type solutions the dog fight tends to deliver...

ian

Dude...I'm thinking that just for reading that post I should get some kind of college credit. ;)

[Phil Maddox]

While I understand the idea of the poll, it has way too many holes in it to provide meaningful data. Some of the obvious issues:

- Saw availability - how long has the SS been available?
- Number of saws in use (related to above)
- Geographical availability - Is SS available everywhere?
- Kickback is unrelated to the SS blade brake
- Cost - there may be a correlation to the carefulness of the user depending on what sort of saw they can afford
- Type of saw - as far as I know, SS makes a contractors, cabinet and something better than a cabinet saw. They don't make a jobsite saw.
- Usage - hobbiest, professional, site carpenter, DIY'er
- Personality - I would hazzard a guess that a more cautious person would be more willing to buy a SS than someone who is not as cautious - their work habits will be different regardless of the saw.
- Conditions of use - in the field, in the shop, on the driveway
- Sample size - 329 (when this was written) is not enough
- Sample makeup - One has to know who is answering
- Reliability - related to above - are there people answering who don't even have a table saw?


The list goes on.

I don't choose to do my own poll because I don't think it could be pulled off to provide meaningful data without spending a lot of time and money.

Just my two cents.

Phil

[ian maybury]

Please pardon me John, the thread had run for quite a while and it seemed reasonable to open some discussion on the results....

ian

[Ole Anderson]

The big stat that is bandied about in the media relates to "amputations" due to tablesaws, so I will vote: Non SS Owner, no injuries, even though I got hit in the gut by a kickback and I had a nasty bruise, there were no internal injuries, and no blood trickling down. In retrospect another category for "nasty kickback" might have thrown a bit less mud in the water.

[Jeff Nicol]

I am a NON SS user with no blood letting, but a couple of little kickbacks, but on things that should not have been doing. One was a small cut off that tipped back into the blade and was blown into little bits as it shot out, the other was when cutting some styrofoam sheets that tend to move around due to light weight. Large sheet being moved and bent into the blade, made a nice half moon cut in the foam, but no injuries.

On the SS the originator is a woodworker who is a "LAWYER" not saying anything bad about lawyers in general, but he wanted to get a monopoly on making the SS technology standard on all TS and maybe other saws also. So it was for the money and I don't knock him for being a capitalist, but as a lawyer he was and is prone to laws, and lawsuits etc. and when the guy got the award for his own stupidity when using a small saw on a job sight, that lawsuit opened the floodgates for the SS dream on every saw. Here is an excerpt from a report on new UL standards:

PTI is made up of well-known manufacturers of portable and stationary power tools. It's a trade organization whose members have invested $100s of millions to increase safety in table saws. The facts are often quoted in support of statistics that show the number of horrific accidents due to improper use of table saws. In reality, however, injury rates have gone down even though power saw usage has more than doubled in the past 10 years. One of the primary ways in which injuries have been reduced is through the use of new voluntary standards that have been adopted by UL. For example, UL 987 includes a completely revamped table saw guard design along with other standards and has debuted in more than 800,000 saws since 2010.
Here's the kicker: to-date, there have been no reported blade contact injuries on table saws with the new guard. None. That's not to say that there can't be, but the new designs are sufficient. On top of that, improper use of the table saw (including removal of the guard) is the cause of nearly all table saw injuries and the new UL standard makes it more convenient to keep the blade guard on while making a variety of cuts. The new guards also give users better visibility and can be easily removed in parts to facilitate a greater amount of safety on a variety of cuts. The new UL 987 guards are designed not only to protect the operator from blade contact, but also from injuries due to kickback.
So what's going wrong? Well, the CPSC (Consumer Product Safety Commission) is being pressured for new safety standards, specifically referencing new technology that will apply to all table saws. In particular, the company doing the majority of the petitioning is SawStop, owned by Stephen Gass, a patent attorney. Mr. Gass, holds more than 70 U.S. patents (with over 120 filed), meaning that SawStop would have a total monopoly if the CPSC adopted their specific petition request.



So as you can see, it always comes back to the operator and how safe they are, because no matter what type of safety is put on a tool, someone will find away to get around it and hurt themselves. So follow the rules, keep gaurds in place and don't cut things that should not be cut on a TS.

You are your best safety!

My 2 cents,


Jeff

[John Piwaron]

Yes, I voted "I've been injured" - but not from a table saw. My problem was with a radial arm saw.

[Mike OMelia]

I think you actually have to use it before you can get hurt. That's one very clean shop.

:) I was thinking the same thing. I rarely can even see my saw, much less see myself reflected in it. Carrion.

[Daniel Berlin]

PTI is made up of well-known manufacturers of portable and stationary power tools. It's a trade organization whose members have invested $100s of millions to increase safety in table saws.

Jeff

Just as a note, by "Trade organization", they mean "lobbying organization".
They spend a couple hundred k a year lobbying the federal government (more in state governments, where reporting laws are not as stringent).

http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/clientsum.php?id=D000055630&year=2011

They also outspend sawstop by at least 2x on lobbying.

Note that PTI's lobbying money does not include the lobbying money spent by the individual companies (IE B&D, TTI, etc), which each lobby to the tune of a couple hundred k each as well.

They are all "prone to lawsuits" and "laws". They all heavily patent their devices (they each own more patents than sawstop). They would all destroy each other with patent lawsuits if it wasn't mutually assured destruction, etc.

There is no right and wrong here, no good guys and bad guys.
It's all just business.

[Matt Day]

Yes, I voted "I've been injured" - but not from a table saw. My problem was with a radial arm saw.


I'm curious why you'd vote you were injured since this poll is specifically about Table Saws?

[John Piwaron]

I'm curious why you'd vote you were injured since this poll is specifically about Table Saws?

Sorry, my bad. I've had a kickback once or twice over 25 or so years. And there's other things many woodworks have that are at least as dangerous as a TS, maybe more. The thing for me is that *all* of them - planers, jointers, etc. are risky but it's odd (to me) that it's the tablesaw that's getting all the attention. In fact, for me, the tablesaw is almost the *safest* tool I have! My bandsaw is the safest. For me.

About kickbacks - those things are nasty! The first one I had through the workpiece into the block wall about 5 or so feet behind me. It shattered apart.

[Mac McQuinn]

I had one kick-back on a large commercial machine with all guards in place about 18 years ago, hurt like the dickens. Hit me just below the belt. I've used a Contractor saw since without any issues whatsoever....knock-knock. I personally would rather see the manufacturers focus on TS dust collection efficiency.
Mac

[Seth Poorman]

I voted non-SS, no injury. But honestly, clicking that button made me feel like I should knock on wood afterwards.

The one oddity here--and I may be wrong about this--is that the SS doesn't prevent kickback, right? So for an apples-to-apples comparison, we really need to eliminate kickback-related injuries (the bruises; blade-related injuries from kickback seem fair game)? The reason I ask is because I saw a lot of people talking about kickback bruises.

Im Knocking on my computer desk wright now !!!! KNOCK....KNOCK....KNOCK....
Ive been thinking about buying a SS. Just have not pulled the $4000.00 doller trigger......yet..

[Brent Ring]

My injury occurred before I had my slider. Doing wrong things and being in a hurry. Kickback in the stomach and a bruise that lasted almost 9 months. Knocked the wind out of me and it came from a 15 amp Ridgid contractors saw. No injuries so far with my Grizzly slider!

[Richard Dragin]

I didn't answer the poll because I don't think I fit any of the categories offered. I use them at work but have a nonSS at home. I have been injured but not from a blade and the SS would have been disabled for what I was doing anyway.

I just thought you'd like to see the wall of shame from a few years ago....( I'm not on it).
230079

[John Coloccia]

I have been injured but not from a blade and the SS would have been disabled for what I was doing anyway.


You should vote anyway. There's a category that best fits you somewhere if you don't assume this only applies to blade injuries and brakes being disabled. There's a reason I left it at just "I've been injured" and didn't specify anything else. :)

[Mike Cruz]

I've had two kickback injuries from my 3 hp Uni...both my fault, neither one were blade (me getting cut) injuries.

[Bill Arnold]

Non-SS owner - no injuries. Paying attention to setups and stopping when I don't feel safe has kept me from being hurt when using my table saw or other power tools. My worst shop injuries have been from a razor knife when cutting veneer!

[John Coloccia]

I just got kicked in the gut a few days ago from the router table. Small ouchy, but nothing serious. That, and at least one guitar out of the next batch will have the back painted black. LOL. It sort of emphasizes keeping your hands out of the line of fire. It could have drawn them right in had I not been awake.

I suspect that a lot of us have little woopsies on power tools from time to time and get away with it because of habits that keep you reasonably safe even when things don't go perfectly.