Wadkin PK slider table saw or Martin T17 slider ?

[peter gagliardi]

For those that have used both, or know about them, if you had to pick, what would you pick? Both in same good operating condition. No, I don't have/ know how to post pics. I know these machines are foreign to MOST of the crowd here, but I'll bet someone knows something.
Thanks,
Peter

[Erik Loza]

It's like vintage cars. Ask six different people and get six different answers and of those six, half might answer "neither". Really boils down to which the buyer likes the most and whether he would rather own an antique or a more modern, more functional machine.
Just my 2-cents.

Erik Loza
Minimax USA

[David Kumm]

Zayd is the Wadkin guy here. I'm not familiar with the T17- kind of a short version of the T75 which a favorite cast iron slider. I've not used one but think the old PK with the cast iron base and the two wheels in the front is the most beautiful old saw ever made. Rare and hard to find in 230 v. Dave

[peter gagliardi]

To Erik, I have a mix of 100 year old cast iron machines to the brand new T75 from Martin so it has less to do with ultimate functionality as I have plenty of options in the shop. However, there is absolutely nothing as nice and smooth as an old cast iron machine, all the new stuff included. My old T75 still puts a smile on my face every time I use it. Perfect simplicity.
Most people consider these antiques, but with riving knife in place and guards I would argue the new isn't so advanced that it makes the old obsolete. I do love SOME of the new stuff for speed and repeatability.
I was trying to see if anyone had dual experience and their take-away on them.
To Dave, although PK's are rare, it seems the T17 is rarer still, I only know of 2 others in the states?
Peter

[Kyle VanMeter]

I saw you made a similar post over on the OWWM forum, and thought it may be an ok time to make my first post over here on this forum.

Aren't those two saws pretty different animals?

I am not terribly familiar with the T17, but I thought it was more of a panel sizing saw for sheet goods or smaller cabinet parts. But maybe I am mistaken. Unless I am wrong about what a T17 actually is, comparing these two saws would be like apples to oranges, or some other delicious fruit....

I know that the PK is designed solely around quickly dimensioning solid lumber, with extreme accuracy and precision. The PK is also a lot cuter than the T17, but I guess that should not be a deciding factor if you need a sliding table saw to break down sheet goods. What do you intend to use either saw for?


Kyle VanMeter

[David Kumm]

I've never seen a T17. didn't they have a bearing system unique to that saw and not duplicated on any other? As nice as the Oliver, Greenlee, Yates, Tanny short sliders were, the Wadkin was woodwroking art. Oh, can I have your shop when you are through? Dave

[peter gagliardi]

Kyle,
The T17 is Martin's take on the " universal saw bench" . They are similar, but the Martin has more capacities- rips 6" thick, cross cuts about 5' and has about 59" rip capacity to the fence. Martin is belt drive, Wadkin direct drive. I have only seen my T17, but have heard of 2 others. There seems to be a bit better supply of the Wadkins tho not much.
Peter

[Kyle VanMeter]

From what you are describing, the T17 sounds like a nice machine., but is more intended to be used with sheet stock (I assume it is equipped with a scoring blade).

I would not choose one saw over another without knowing for sure what type of work you intend to do. It sounds like the T17 may be a tad undersized for trying to produce large volumes of cabinetry, since you can not rip a full 4x8 sheet with the sliding table. But you can still get decent yield out of plywood with crosscutting first, it is just nice to be able to rip 8' with the sliding table sometimes. It may also not be the best choice for dimensioning solid lumber (compared to the Wadkin or another universal saw bench as a guideline).

If you happen to be into making segmented turnings, the PK may be the best machine ever made for such a task. Regular 45's and odd miters are a breeze with a quadrant and sliding table. You can quickly and accurately change angles with the quadrant gauge, and the smaller sliding table makes easy work of mitering a large number of pieces quickly and easily. I would also default to the PK for making picture frames, odd joinery tasks, and final sizing of solid wood parts.

I guess keep both saws if you have the room!

[peter gagliardi]

Kyle, I have 2 other Martins- an old 1961 T75 for general crosscut ting and ripping- I won't move the crosscut fence from 90 degrees, and a new T75 with all the motorized and digital goodies with a 12' sliding miter crosscut table -definitely more accurate flexible and quicker than any of the others including the Wadkin. I expect to use for occasional overflow cross cutting and ripping. The Wadkin is definitely easier on the eyes, but is it easier in use? That is the main question it seems.
Peter

[Kyle VanMeter]

I use a newer Martin and SCM slider at work, and they are both nice machines to work with. I also have an Oliver 260 with a small sliding table in my home shop, which shares many features with the PK. Since I have used both types of saws quite a bit, I will tell you that the usefulness of each really depends on the kind of work you are doing.

Given your current setup, I would say a Wadkin PK would compliment your current lineup of tablesaws much better than the T17. I really like the versatility of a USB style saw for dimensioning solid wood parts. I can attest to the fact that they are very easy to use and are very practical machines for shorter parts that need to be cut precisely. There is nothing antiquated about the design of my 260 or the Wadkin PK, as they both have a riving knife, nice guard, and zero clearance insert. I also feel that the rack and pinion fence can be adjusted with greater accuracy than modern T-square or Euro style fences (albeit adjustment is slower).

[zayd alle]

I haven't seen or used a T17 slider, but after a bit of research on them, I think Kyle's assessment seems spot on. With its extended rip and crosscut capacities, I'd slot it for sheet goods work before anything else. The Wadkin PK was built specifically as a solid wood dimension saw, and one of high precision at that. It was not marketed to woodworkers, but to patternmakers and engineers. The real historian on Wadkin is a fellow named Jack Forsberg. I've corresponded with him over at the Canadian woodworking forum and he's a Wadkin nut -- not to mention his PK restoration is over the top.

I'm actually about to start a PK restoration myself. I've barely kicked the tires on the thing and am already impressed with the fit and finish of the saw -- much more so than the Oliver 270 I sold to get the PK.

By the way, Kyle -- small world. I think you bought my Oliver quadrant!

[Kyle VanMeter]

By the way, Kyle -- small world. I think you bought my Oliver quadrant!

Zayd! A small world it is. The quadrant for my 260 worked great. I am very appreciative that you sold it to me. These sliding table saws are not nearly the machine they are capable of being without a quadrant gauge.

I would love to see some pictures of your PK. They are very slick looking machines.

[zayd alle]

Zayd! A small world it is. The quadrant for my 260 worked great. I am very appreciative that you sold it to me. These sliding table saws are not nearly the machine they are capable of being without a quadrant gauge.

I would love to see some pictures of your PK. They are very slick looking machines.

I hung onto hope that I'd find my 270 slider for too long, so I put that quadrant away for that day... but it wasn't meant to be. I'm just glad it went to a fellow old iron guy who will use the heck out of it!

I'll likely start a restoration thread on my local club forum -- I'll send you a link when that starts.

[mreza Salav]

Go to Canadian Woodworking forum an there are quite a few fellows who are experts on Wadkins (some from UK). Jack (mentioned above) has a shop full of Wadkins (including a PK) that are just too beautiful to use for anything; he restores them like hot rod bikes, one was featured in FWW magazine I think recently.

[Joe Calhoon]

The T17 is a joinery saw. It is basically the body of the old T75 with a optional sliding table like they used on the shapers.
I know the quality of the T75 but have never used a PK. Just looking at pictures of the PK I like the sliding table next to the blade. There would be plus and minus to having the table away from the blade like the T17 has. I know the rip fence on the Martin is accurate and easy to use. Not sure how the center mount fence of the PK works or functions. It looks a little unhandy.

Be great to find someone with time on both saws.263415263416263417263418


Joe

[peter gagliardi]

Joe, I figured you'd be along at some point. I actually thought you might be one of the folks with experience on both, oh well. It seems the only real advantage is the Wadkin has the slider next to the blade, and looks of course. Otherwise, the Martin has more capacity to accomplish the same tasks. Where did you dig up those images? My sleuthing skills are substandard it seems.
Peter

[Joe Calhoon]

Peter, without using the PK and based on looking at pictures and specs I would go for the T17. The way the sliding table folds down on the T17 is real nice. I think both the cross cutting fence and rip fence on the 17 are better. Martin was always ahead of their time even back with the cast iron machines. Old US iron is nice but the designs did not improve since mid century. The Wadkin machines a little more advanced but not as cutting edge as German iron of the same vintage. Thats my opinion for what it is worth. Not that I would turn down a PK if ever the chance... Any of this stuff is hard to come by in my neck of the woods.
I think the ultimate home or retirement shop would be great with the old iron. These machines can be had cheap especially in Europe. It is a huge amount of work to bring them back to original though. I was about half way there on my old T75. I really admire the PK that Jack in Canada restored.
263493263494Most every shop in Europe has nice old iron stuck back in the corners left over from the fathers and grandfathers before them. This years tour we saw a nice compact Funk 2 spindle shaper - tenoner that was pretty neat along with a lot of other old machines. The owner mentioned he would not refuse any reasonable offers on the old stuff.
If you ever get the chance to visit the Martin museum in Ottobeuren they have a lot of info about the old machines. Here is a picture of a T11 or 12 from the museum. And a nicely restored T17 that Kent A sent me.
I have a hard time putting pictures on here. Is there a way to rotate the T17?

[Peter Kelly]

http://www.finewoodworking.com/uploadedImages/Fine_Woodworking_Network/Image_Resources/Magazine/230/011230077_01_1950s-wadkin-pk-tablesaw_xl.jpg

http://www.finewoodworking.com/uploadedImages/Fine_Woodworking_Network/Image_Resources/Magazine/230/011230077_03_1950s-wadkin-pk-tablesaw_xl.jpg


Wadkin PK hands down. Martin is great but that T 17 just isn't as sophisticated a machine.

[peter gagliardi]

Joe, when you say "this years tour" what are you referring to? Am I missing out on a great trip? Also, when you call Martin here in the states, they know nothing of these machines, and when they contact Germany, they know nothing as well- must not be talking to the museum operators. Those are very nice machines! I don't know who Kent A is ? My saw has the same style fence as the one on the left- it tilts to 45 degrees , and lifts vertically to swing under the table when not in use. Mine does not have the mortising attachment, but rather another 3'+ of cast iron top along with rip fence bar for 59" of capacity.
I had heard they had 2 different styles, mine must be older. I agree with everything about the comparison from a working standpoint, the real edge for the Wadkin is the fact that the sliding table abuts the blade for good short part support, not divorce mounted like the Martin with about 8-10" of solid table to the left of blade.
Peter

[Mark Bolton]

Wadkin PK hands down. Martin is great but that T 17 just isn't as sophisticated a machine.

Unreal, total work of art.

[David Kumm]

Were there any functional deficiencies to the Wadkin? Even the unrestored ones are eye candy. I used to think the Greenlee 495S was a good looking saw but it is the ugly stepsister in comparison. Dave

[Joe Calhoon]

Joe, when you say "this years tour" what are you referring to? Am I missing out on a great trip? Also, when you call Martin here in the states, they know nothing of these machines, and when they contact Germany, they know nothing as well- must not be talking to the museum operators. Those are very nice machines! I don't know who Kent A is ? My saw has the same style fence as the one on the left- it tilts to 45 degrees , and lifts vertically to swing under the table when not in use. Mine does not have the mortising attachment, but rather another 3'+ of cast iron top along with rip fence bar for 59" of capacity.
I had heard they had 2 different styles, mine must be older. I agree with everything about the comparison from a working standpoint, the real edge for the Wadkin is the fact that the sliding table abuts the blade for good short part support, not divorce mounted like the Martin with about 8-10" of solid table to the left of blade.
Peter

Peter, We give 4 day workshops on Euro window - door construction and shaper use - Alpine Technical Workshops. Greg from Rangate tooling is involved with this and he has put together a European technical tour the last couple years with timing to attend Ligna this year and Fensterbau the off years. FFI, Zuani and Martin are sponsors of the workshop, last year they set up the shop tours including one to my cousins shop in northern Italy. This year we were in northern Germany. Michael from the Holzfachschule Woodworking school was kind enough to give us 3 great shop tours of small to medium size German shops and his school.263506 We also spent one day learning about Passivehaus construction. We will be going again next year, its a lot of fun and a great learning experience.263507I think your saw might be older like the picture of the T16. The picture from the museum in my last post is actually a T60. Carl and Dan at Martin know some about these machines and can usually come up with PDF manuals and some parts for them. Dan is in Arizona now. Martin wants to sell new machines. You have to understand the German way of thinking. They cannot fathom why we would want to work on antique machines... The woodworking business is totally different over there.
I think the T75 is also a great joinery saw if you have room for the sliding table and push it all the way to the front. We used to put dado and shaper heads on ours by cranking the table away from the blade. This cast iron sliding table design worked well and is basically not much different than the new Martins.
Joe

[Peter Kelly]

Were there any functional deficiencies to the Wadkin?

http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/tool613/IMG_0503.jpg

http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/tool613/IMG_0505.jpg

http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/tool613/IMG_0526.jpg

http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/tool613/IMG_0458.jpg

http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/tool613/IMG_0530.jpg

http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/tool613/IMG_0511.jpg

http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/tool613/IMG_0514.jpg

Nope.

[David Kumm]

Peter, can I convince you there must be a million and i could take the stress away for you? Dave

[mreza Salav]

I think these are photos of Jack's machine. He has restored a number of Wadkin machines and every single one of them is a work of art.
Search for 1941 Wadkin RM to see his lates trestroation of a 24"/26" J/P.

[peter gagliardi]

Joe, I never knew such workshops existed, I'm sure after hours ,after the workshops, the refreshments are terrible.
My saw is very much like the T16 you show.
Dave, I wish you could help me.
There is no doubt that the English machines have good lines and work well. However the Germans could just about care less about the flashiness or coolness factor, they make machines to work period! I think it a little shortsighted to claim that the Wadkin is the engineering marvel some here seem to think. There is more going on behind that simple looking monotrol dial on the Martin than in the whole Wadkin saw, but I'd still like to have one in my shop to look at .
Peter

[David Kumm]

Peter, we are in pretty rarified air here. I would argue that some of the most beautioful machines I've seen have been German from before the steel base era. Bauerle, Kolle, Panhans, and even Martin were just fun to look at. I've never used any but I've got Yates, Greenlee, Oliver, K-C, Porter, and Oakley. All are better looking and have higher skills than me. Dave

[Ron Kellison]

I have been "up close and personal" with that particular Wadkin PK. It is an incredible piece of machinery, wonderfully restored by a master craftsman. You should see the Bursgreen jointer, Wadkin patternmaker's lathe, Maka mortiser and Wadkin bandsaw, all in the same workshop! He should issues drooling bibs at the door!!

I would also point out that all of this incredible machinery is used...it's not a museum!

Ron

[jack forsberg]

while I think the T17 is a very fine saw for what it is and that the Name Martin is legendary its a little erroneous to say its more advance than the Wadkin PK.

First is that the PK was designed in the mid 20s and the T17 in the 50s. A fair compassion would be the Wadkin PP and the advanced version of the PK.

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/001-88.jpg




http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/002-73.jpg




http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/003-46.jpg




http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/004-41.jpg




http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/005-23.jpg




http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/006-18.jpg




http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/007-21.jpg




http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/008-15.jpg




http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/009-10.jpg




http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/010-9.jpg




http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/011-4.jpg




http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/012-5.jpg




http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c368/JFCarpentry/013-5.jpg




jack
English machines

[peter gagliardi]

He's Baaack! Good to hear from you Jack, and thanks for all the images. Just to be clear, I'd like to have both! But I was trying to get feedback from users of both machines. No machine is perfect, the question becomes , do its strengths outweigh its weaknesses.
Peter

[David Kumm]

I feel the fever starting to build. Dave

[Keith Bohn]

It's like vintage cars. Ask six different people and get six different answers and of those six, half might answer "neither". Really boils down to which the buyer likes the most and whether he would rather own an antique or a more modern, more functional machine.
Just my 2-cents.

Erik Loza
Minimax USA

I think you might have a mis-understanding of the build quality of Wadkins and Martins.

[peter gagliardi]

Dave, not on my end, I have zero interest in flaming this out.

[jack forsberg]

He's Baaack! Good to hear from you Jack No machine is perfect, the question becomes , do its strengths outweigh its weaknesses.
Peter

Really i do think the Wadkin PK is perfect if viewed from a point of view that machines become a part of the craftsman who stands in front of, and does the work its was designed for. in the case of the wadkin PK solid wood dimensioning .

the PK is sized right for solid lumber. lets face it you are not going to come across wood wider than 24" very often and the cross cut is plenty for even glue ups. You don't need more than 24" rip or 36" cross cut. The fence is for solid wood with a lock down on a sliding dovetail way at the very apex of the cutting teeth. This give them a very ridged fence index to the cut because the fence is not reaching from a front bar so so by design there is not deflection at the cutting point. The micro adjustment has a 1&1/4" travel so that if you need to move the fence its very easy to slide across to within 1" you very first try. Now what makes it special is the fence does not need to be unlock to use the fine adjustment nor pins pulled to locate so if your making a tenon you range though this and all fence setting can be done with the fine adjustment handle(with 2 fingers) because of it 1"+ travel.


the Wadkin PP and the Martin T17 for that matter are what i call 1/2 panel saw. They both far short of solid wood dimensioning in terms of ergonomic, the T17 more so as the sliding table is an after thought IMO and the scoring blade set the main further back from the front. The increase of the table size makes them larger and harder to work over the blades for wood joinery( the largest complaint of tradesmen doing work on modern sliders) and for sheet stock there just too small. Anyone with a full panel saw will not want one for panel work. there is a reason large sliding table saws have aluminium tables. I do not think i would like to be push a huge big ass cast slider like the bolt on Oliver 88DX. these 1/2 panel saws were short lived because they were transition saws to the full slider,that's what make them rare. the PK was made from the mid 20s to the mid 60s even though the PP had been introduced the PK was still being ordered. Could be why the 1/2 panel saws are more rare. they just did not have the production years. What i do think is Wadkin drooped the ball on panel saw development which made way for the Italian and German to take the market. That being said you will not find a nicer saw for solid wood than the Wadkin PK and i would like to add that the Brits had no quorum at making them look good at doing it too. this is just not what saws are made for today.



Not sure many have seen how smooth the slider is on a PK so here is some Porn.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-NGFQCDlhw

jack
English machines

[jack forsberg]

I feel the fever starting to build. Dave


that would be Wadkinitis:p

jack
English machines

[David Kumm]

that would be Wadkinitis:p

jack
English machines

As much as I love my big Euro sliders I agree with the smaller stuff. I seem to always go to my Hammond Trim saw but the Wadkin in the video looks to be fairly small footprint and way more versatile. The oliver 88 is too big, the 270 too rare, so small footprint sliders are hard to find although there are a few euro ones around. They are rare on the used market too. Any changes in the PK between the 20 and 60s that are worth mentioning. Hope I'm not going too far off course here. Dave

[Kyle VanMeter]

I think Jack really hit the nail on the head. There (probably) is not a better, more efficient saw out there for solid lumber, nor another saw that can cut with the accuracy and repeatability than the Wadkin PK. This saw was marketed specifically to pattern shops and engineering firms that would settle only for the best. (That being said I really like the Oliver 270 slider, and my Oliver 260 dual arbor slider for cutting solid wood accurately)

It is true that the P17 has a larger capacity for crosscutting and ripping, but that can be a disadvantage when using it to cut smaller solid pieces of wood. Conversely, I would not go to a Wadkin PK to size medium or large panels for case goods. A P17 or a full sized Euro style slider would be a more appropriate choice. Each of these types of saws has situations where they excel, and the Wadkin will take the cake when it comes to solid lumber dimensioning.

Here is an example of work I have done on a dimension saw, that I absolutely could not have accomplished on a Euro sliding table saw, or a modern conventional machine (Unisaw, PM2000, etc). These dimension saws don't drive themselves, but they are very easy to use and offer consistent results, which really allows you to focus on the work you are trying to accomplish.
263600263601

[jack forsberg]

Just to be clear, I'd like to have both! But I was trying to get feedback from users of both machines.


the only 2 people i know that have used both are Dev Emch and Arthur in NJ.

emchd@qwest.net


http://www.owwm.net/wordpress/?author=1

jack
English machines

[jack forsberg]

Any changes in the PK between the 20 and 60s that are worth mentioning. Hope I'm not going too far off course here. Dave

Lots of threads on the PK history and wadkin and many other English machines Makers at Canadian woodworking vintage tool forum.
http://forum.canadianwoodworking.com/forumdisplay.php?53-Vintage-Power-Tools

jack
English machines

[Joe Calhoon]

263640
Great discussion. Most likely I will never see a 17 or PK in my shop unless opportunity presents itself but it is sure fun to compare the two. Jack, that is hands down a work of art on that saw. It is beautiful!
One thing to consider is at that time these saws were made and still today woodworking in the UK is a lot different than Germany and the rest of Central Europe. Furniture, doors, windows, stairs and built in cabinetry are not approached the same way. The machinery designs from both countries reflect this - just look at the difference in shapers, tenoners and mortisers between the 2 countries.
Jack is right that the dimension saw was a stepping stone to the full on sliding panel saw. Martin promoted the T75 as a joinery saw by sliding the cast iron slider forward and removing the outrigger. I never had a issue with the cast iron slider or the accuracy of the front mount rip fence on that saw. We used ours for years like this after getting the newer saw. I regret selling the saw after getting a straight line rip but we were out of room.
Myself, if I had only one saw to use for solid wood crosscutting, ripping and sizing in a small shop I would still pick the 17 just because of the capacity and convenience of how everything functions. Fold down rip fence, fold down sliding table, rip fence that slides front to back and can be turned with a thin section to the blade. We pretty regularly size large glueups and crosscut large timbers and don't see how this could be done easily on the PK without going to that fixed extension table like the PP has. No doubt the PK would be better for smaller pieces with the sliding table close. If Martin had offered the T75 with a 4’ slider they would have had it all for a small joinery saw. I see the Wadkin saws only have one blade speed. One thing I liked about the Martin was with the different speeds we could run a quiet 12 or 14” blade for most work only using the noisy 18 or 20” for massive timber.
Peter said “ There is more going on behind that simple looking monotrol dial on the Martin than in the whole Wadkin saw,”
This says it all, only someone who has crawled inside a T17 or 75 would know what he is talking about.
I have spoken with Dev before about Hofmann shapers. If he has a PK I will stop in and take a look sometime.
As a side note we have been using the Fritz and Franz jig on our large slider for a few months now and it turns this machine into a very convenient and safe saw for doing solid wood cross cutting and ripping even on small pieces. I would say it is safer than the Sawstop just because your hands are never close to the blade. We keep a 1960 Unisaw on wheels for odd stuff and have not turned it on since using the jig.

Joe

[jack forsberg]

263640
Great discussion.
Peter said “ There is more going on behind that simple looking monotrol dial on the Martin than in the whole Wadkin saw,”
This says it all, only someone who has crawled inside a T17 or 75 would know what he is talking about.
I have spoken with Dev before about Hofmann shapers. If he has a PK I will stop in and take a look sometime.

Joe

Dev never may not have found one but he was looking hard for a PK a few years back.

http://www.ukworkshop.co.uk/forums/wadkin-hounds-i-need-your-help-to-find-this-old-girl-t8210.html

So Joe whats going on under the hood? . Little monkey moving parts around:p. Do ya not think we would understand how the German made a rise and fall tilting arbor that was controlled by one handle? the Oliver 260 got things under the hood too. While the Germans may work wood differently they did not invent wood.well maybe partial board:p
The Germans worked with the Brits and the Americans in fact it was the Germans that gave Oliver the clam head cutter block for there jointers. There is no question that the Germans made good Kit,the question is how did they made it good? lets compare.

jack
English machines

[peter gagliardi]

Jack,
On the Martin there are concentric dials approximately 10" diameter out front with a series of chains, sprockets,and gears behind with a spring assist for elevation.
The inner dial raises and lowers the arbor assembly with a graduated edge scale that is labeled in mm with each graduation representing 1 mm and being approx. 1 1/8" apart allowing for extremely fine and minute incremental height adjustments with a center height clamp lock knob.
On the tilting arbor portion- the outer ring, it is graduated in single degrees around the perimeter also with a separation of about 3/4" between markings. The very cool part is that the saw goes from 90 degrees to 45 degrees with ONLY ONE complete revolution again allowing for very finite adjustments to the cutting angle.
After looking at numerous old machines in person and pictures , I'd bet there is not a better or more accurate graduation system out there- certainly well within pattern shop tolerances even though they probably never used one of these in that environment. I think it less about one saw more accurate than the other, and more about the manner in which these manufacturers accomplish the task.
A good operator can probably get equal work out of the units at hand.
Mostly, it comes down to aesthetic differences than unit capability.
I certainly am enjoying the exploration though.
Peter

[jack forsberg]

Joe and Peter

you have to remember you are comparing your saw to something that was developed 30 years early. The wadkin PK was one of the first electric driven machines to have a tilting arbor with rise and fall(pre 1926) after the american model. if you look at the Martin history in there early years you will find there saws barbaric.
http://www.martin.info/cms/_main/company/history/1922-1949-en.html


its fair to say that the Brits had been at it a lot longer than the Germans at this point and it would have been there kits in there pattern shops that could have built the pattern for there first models I mean let face it Germany had the shit kick out of it after WW11. the Brits still had there industry intact to a greater extent and being broke from the war had to keep the old patterns going until the 50s. Martin was making farm tractors at this point.


the technology that was available to the Germans in the 50s due to the war machine had made it possible for some very interesting advancements in the industry. so mush money was pored into the war effort that the industry were starving for a market after peace.Put in front of the Germans that the Brits had most of the patients on wood working machines and you have the mother of invention. the 50s onward s is German and Italian .


Because the PK was made in so far off a time frame as the T17 you have to take into account the way things were made in the 20s. Its just so happens that i believe that this to be the purest time of machine making in term of a direct connection to the the craft.


let me explain


the first machines were to replace hand work . this meant that machines in the early years were made by craftsman that work with there hands entirely. there was a direct connection to the machine and the hand work that it was replacing. the next generation of machines were improvements in machines based on older machines and not so much hand work. As the new machines displaced hand work they became improvements on machines only and not the craft. today we have machines solely abstract from the craft IMO and driving its direction as to how to build. the PK for me gives this back.


gauges on the PK were made by hand


the quadrant with locks into presets and hand cut makings.
http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/tool613/IMG_0542.jpg


it can be set to complimentary angles or mirror angles with one setting.
http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/tool613/IMG_0544.jpg


it can be locked near the front of the table for increased cross cut with 90 pin lock.



it can be used as a tenon jig with tapering of stock
http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/tool613/IMG_0546.jpg
http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/tool613/IMG_0547.jpg


not sure if all slider tables do this but the PK slides open for tapers of to 5".
http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad111/tool613/IMG_0548.jpg



i do not have a pic of the in laded rule in the table for the fence(1/16" markings by a firm from the 1830 well know for there interments but i could get one)if you would like. it is accurate at any angle the blade is tipped the makings.


all the inner-eds in the PK rise and fall tilting are enclosed in oil baths with bronzes gears works and never see saw dust .


just a way different time frame when dust collection was not at every shop and shop set up in the woods.




jack
English machines

[Joe Calhoon]

Jack I agree the technology of Wadkin is earlier even though they were made into the 50s. And I would not want a Martin made before 1960 or so. They had some interesting machines like a tilting table shaper. Not near as developed as Wadkin or some of the US iron. The industrial revolution started in England and along with the US I think had the best woodworking machines up till the late 50s.

The T75 was the most successful and best selling machine Martin made. I actually like the hydro pedal movement of the tilt and rise on my newer saw but the T75 had a magic to it. I think Peter said the newer machines are more convenient to use and that is a good way to put it.

The T75 is the only machine other than your PK that I have seen with lateral movement of the sliding table. There are probably others.

Joe

[Peter Kelly]

Great pics!

I often wonder what Wadkin would have to charge for a modern version of the same machine these days.

[David Kumm]

Since this thread is hijacked all ready, there is a T70 and a T71 for sale right now. Are there advantages and disadvantages to either model over the other? SCMI made a saw shaper in the 90s that moved the arbor sideways rather than the table so the blade and shaper could be used together. Cut the end and run the profile in one pass. I think there are several old US sliders that moved the table as well. Dave

[peter gagliardi]

Dave, sorry I only have experience with the oldest stuff, and the newest stuff Martin has imported T17, T75,T73,T75PreX, T21, and T26 so i have no input on the in between years. As for older American sliders, I have owned an American model #20 USB, I still have an American USB , and a Yates-American model #30 USB - these 3 saws, have far and away the smoothest and easiest to operate height and angle adjustments of any saws I've owned. I've also owned the Greenlee 495S
slider which was fantastic as well, along with the Oliver 260 which didn't impress me all that much. I have also owned the Tannewitz J-250 non-slider which is the nicest looking cast iron Tanny out there I think, but the adjustments left a little to be desired.

[Gary Hassan]

I have a 1969 T17 and a 1979 T75 Martin saws.....Both are wonderful and both have pros and cons on their condition and use. I need to sell one or do I keep both and use the decommissioned one for parts. Not worth letting go for a few thousand dollars. What do you think?