Shop Fox Big Bandsaw Purchase Question

[Tom Overthere]

I just paid for a 17" Shop Fox W1707 band saw locally - but haven't picked it up yet (so I can still back out of the deal if I need to).
Here's a link: http://www.woodstockinternational.com/w1707 (http://www.woodstockinternational.com/w1707)

Is this a good saw? I'm unable to find a review or in-depth user comments online. I realize it's basically a Grizzly 17" with iron wheels and a bigger table. Are there any reasons NOT to buy this one?

For $100 more I can buy the 19" W1729 from the same folks instead.
Here's the link: http://www.woodstockinternational.com/w1729 (http://www.woodstockinternational.com/w1729)

I'm a true believer in NOT buying undersized. I want to be able to cut unusually-shaped "artistic" pieces, and also resaw. The 17" is said to take 1/8" to 1" blades, and the 19" is supposed to take 1/8" to 1-1/4" blades.

One concern about the larger 19" saw. The actual weight posted on the side of it's crate is about 15 lbs *LIGHTER* than that of the smaller saw. I note that the table tilt mechanism may be less beefy, but the table itself is larger. I'm thinking maybe there'll be more FLEX in the larger saw's frame.

Anybody have advice or 1st-hand experience?

[John Bailey]

Tom,

I don't have a bandsaw, so take what I say with a grain of salt. The reasons I was more interested in the 17" saw than the 19" were the same you bring up. It's basically the same machine, with bigger wheels and bigger table. I also wondered whether the machine would be able to handle any bigger loads, or if it might have too much flex. So, although I don't know enough to give you a good opinion, I do know enough to say you're asking the right questions. I'll be following the advice here - it's alway excellent.

John

[Richard Wolf]

I think the only advantage to the 19" is the wheel dia. Carbide tipped blades don't really like tight dia. wheels because the teeth flex to much and blade life is shortened. Albeit, alot of manufactures are using better band material which they clain can be used on smaller wheels.
I think the 19" might be worth the extra $100 just for longer blades and longer blade life.

Richard

[Steve Stube]

Interesting that the 17" is 220V only (according to the link) but the 19" is both 110 and 220V, according to amps posted there is no more power for the bigger saw.

Questions now - leads me to think this may have been an impulse buy. I wish you the best with your FINAL decision.

[Jim DeLaney]

...One concern about the larger 19" saw. The actual weight posted on the side of it's crate is about 15 lbs *LIGHTER* than that of the smaller saw. I note that the table tilt mechanism may be less beefy, but the table itself is larger. I'm thinking maybe there'll be more FLEX in the larger saw's frame.

Anybody have advice or 1st-hand experience?

No first hand experience, but I do note that, contrary to your observation, the website says the 19" shipping weight is 64 pounds heavier than the 17".

[Steve Stube]

Yes Jim I noticed that too and then wondered if perhaps this saw ships in two boxes (maybe the motor or table is separate???) and that might explain Tom's observation.

[Brad Olson]

I'd go with the 19".

Why?

The bigger wheels allow you to run wider blades with less fatigue on the blade.

Also it makes it possible to run a 1" Lenox carbide blade which you can't do on the smaller wheels without fatiguing the metal (you can use a 1/2" lenox carbide on any saw >14", but the 1" blades are nicer).

[Tom Overthere]

Thanks a LOT for the input so far. I just got off the phone with a Sales Mgr at Woodstock/ShopFox. Nice guy, but I'm kinda confused.

1) Apparently he had his warehouse crew weigh both machines - crated and uncrated.

CRATED:
Smaller 17" machine is 48 lbs HEAVIER than the larger 19" machine

UNCRATED:
Smaller 17" machine is 3 lbs LIGHTER than the larger 19" machine.

The crating I saw on both machines appeared to be nearly identical. The large saw travels with the table off; the smaller saw has it installed. Other than that, no obvious difference in crating.


2) He said both have balanced cast-iron wheels, but the wheels on the larger machine are designed differently - and as a result are LIGHTER than the 17" wheels. That sounds odd to me.


3) The larger saw has a considerably larger table, and that should account for a pretty large *increase* in overall weight. I don't get it...


4) I can't see through the blasted(!) crate plastic wrap (at the dealer) but it appears to me the larger saw has a smaller, less beefy table-tilt mechanism, too.


It seems to me the 19" saw has larger wheels, larger table, larger column and frame. That thing ought to weigh more, and not just 3 lbs more...right? So now I'm thinking "flex".

[Bruce Page]

Go with the 17", or the 19", we're only talking 1" difference on the wheel radius. The only other factor in my mind is the larger table of the 19" and larger tables are nice.
I run a 1" Lennox carbide tipped tri-master on my MM16 and I haven't had any problems.

JMHO

[Jim DeLaney]

...2) He said both have balanced cast-iron wheels, but the wheels on the larger machine are designed differently - and as a result are LIGHTER than the 17" wheels. That sounds odd to me...

The 17" wheels are probably solid, and the 19" are probably spoked. That could account for 15, or even 20, pounds per wheel.

If you're uncertain about the 19's quality, then stick with the 17 and be safer/happier. Personally, I doubt you could go far wrong with either one.

Note that both have the same motor power, and both have the same (12") resaw capability, so the only real difference you'll see is the 2" less blade to frame clearance. Since, at least for me, most bandsaw cuts are either ripping or resawing, the throat depth wouldn't make that much of a difference.

Even if you're resawing logs, the biggest one that will fit under the vertical is 12" (the resaw capacity) so you won't have fit problems within the throat with either machine.

[Tom Overthere]

Thanks to all for your comments thus far. Good advice across the board, but of course the choice remains unclear.

Assume Jim Delaney is correct about the difference in wheel weight. If the larger saw is only 3 lbs heavier, then the wheels on the larger saw must be a *LOT* lighter than the wheels on the smaller saw (the 19" saw table is considerably bigger/heavier than that of the 17").

If that's so, aren't I giving up the benefits of "heavy wheels"?
(I'm pretty sure the table-tilt mechanism is less robust on the larger saw, as well).

I've seen the 17" wheels in the showroom. They consist of eight or so curved spokes. I saw an online photo of the 19" wheels. They appear to be solid with four large circular cutouts. The salesmen at the local dealer won't uncrate a 19" or let me cut the plastic wrap for me to inspect. They answer my questions about the 19" discrepancies with, "Well, I'm not exactly sure..." I also got some of that from the ShopFox sales mgr...

I've had almost no bandsaw experience. I want to cut some fairly wide scroll cuts / artistic cuts with the saw I purchase now. I think the 17" saw is of better quality overall than the 19" saw, but have NO CLUE whether that extra 2" of throat clearance (blade to column) will bite me in the arse if I buy the smaller saw.

At this point, I'm thinking maybe a Rikon 18 instead? Anybody care to comment on that idea?

Thanks

[john lawson]

Find a used Laguna or MiniMax 16" or larger.

Most of the user issues with bandsaws relate to one of the following machiine quality issues.

1. Balanced wheels to take advantage of all that iron you are buying

2. Alignment of the wheels to each other to help assure tracking

3. Good usable guides for the bandsaw blade

4. Good motor, 3 hp or larger

You might get lucky and get a saw with all the above on a Shop Fox, Rikon or even Grizzly. You improve your chances significantly by buying an Italian bandsaw.

I am not ripping Shop Fox, Rikon, or Grizzly, just stating an opinion about what will make you happy five years from now.

Best of luck in your decision

PS. I bought a 16" Laguna, 4 years old, with a Lennox carbide blade, 3 hp motor, $1200. Love it!!



john lawson

[Jim DeLaney]

...I want to cut some fairly wide scroll cuts / artistic cuts with the saw I purchase now. I think the 17" saw is of better quality overall than the 19" saw, but have NO CLUE whether that extra 2" of throat clearance (blade to column) will bite me in the arse if I buy the smaller saw.
Thanks

Tom,
That extra 2" clearance will undoubtedly 'bite you' at one time or another - no matter how big a saw you buy. It seems that all of us, at one time or another, say to ourselves "I wish I had a 16", 20", 24", 36"... saw instead of this 14", 16", 20"..." It just seems to be the nature of woodworking.::p

As for the Rikon, I have no experience - in fact, I've never even seen one - but they have been well written up in several magazines.

BTW, my own bandsaws - I have two - are a Laguna 16" and a Taiwanese clone (Over 25 years old) of the 14" Delta. Both are good saws, but the Laguna is orders of magnitude better than the old Taiwanese 14".

You say you want to cut some fairly wide scroll/artistic cuts. For that, you'll probably need a fairly narrow blade - 1/8" or 1/4". Make sure that the saw you buy will handle those narrower blades. Most of the bigger saws will do it, but only with an 'accessory set' of cool block (or equivalent) guides. For instance, my Laguna will handle blades down to (<I>supposedly, but I've never tried it</I>) 1/16", but only with an $80.00 set of accessory guides. You might want to factor that into your criteria (and budget).

[Mark Singer]

Less vibration and stability with the big ones if properly designed...I would get the 19"

[Shiraz Balolia]

Tom - I talked to the National Sales Manager of Woodstock (Shop Fox) and found out the following information:

1) The wheels on the 19" bandsaw are 3.2 lbs heavier than the 17".
2) The table thickness is the same on both machines.
3) Out of the crate, the 17" bandsaw IS heavier than the 19" by 22 lbs.
4) Some of the parts on the 17" are "beefier" than the 19", although the 19" is a very fine saw as well.

[John Bailey]

Sounds to me the better value is the 17" saw. Just my take on it, but I would go for the "beef." Too bad it doesn't come in Grizzly Green. Then it would be just about perfect.

John

[Mike Cutler]

Tom. You are almost to the point of picking a puppy. Sometimes you just have to reach in a grab one.
Both saws are nice machines.Both are capable of performing the tasks that you are asking.
All things being equal I would go with the 19" because "You just never know, what you don't know now".
The 2" radius may seem like no big deal right now, but it could help in a pinch sometime in the future.
I'm not really sure about the 19" being able to properly tension a 1 1/4" blade.That is a lot of blade. It is also the point on the blade chart that there is a significant step in the thickness of a blade. I would count on a 1" max. But that is a guess on my part.
The 17" puts the 1" blade right at the acceptable minimum radius for a 1" blade. Depending on your habits it may or may not work for you. But who knows right? I know of folks that are running a 1" trimaster on a MM16.
I have the Rikon 18" Model 10-340. It's a good machine, comporable to the ones you are considering.
I had narrowed my choices to the Rikon, The 19" heavy duty Grizzly, The 19" shopFox, and a discontinued 21" Griz model last winter. I ended up with the Rikon because I could drive 30 miles and throw it in the back of my truck.
I'm lazy and took the low road. It was also on sale.
The one part of my Rikon I do not like is the blade guard. It is a pain when changing blades, but mine is for resawing only .so I don't have to deal with it very often. The ShopFox's have an similar type blade guard to the Rikon.
I use a 1" TriMaster on my Rikon for resawing, but I know a lot of people prefer a smaller blade, and use them with great success in resawing, on even larger machines. I just joined the wider is bigger crowd. You gotta pick a side right;)
If I knew that I was going to be changing blades a lot. I would really cater more to that particular aspect of a bandsaw. It kinda bites to have to retune a bandsaw after each individual blade size change, very time consuming also. Some bandsaws are better than others in this regard.
Good luck and have fun.

[Tom Overthere]

Thanks guys. Still not sure which to load up, but having studied the two saws in so much detail I realize each has it's strengths. As Mike's puppy analogy cautions, I'm probably a bit too "focused" at this point and just need to pick one (or the other..!)

S. Balolia ==
Private message sent to you.

PS. I didn't mean to report negatively on the sales/tech staff at Woodstock Int'l. They've been courteous and helpful. I just seemed to encounter a minor "knowledge gap" regarding the specifics of the 19" saw.

[Tom Overthere]

In the end, I knew I didn't want a 17" saw. After reading a LOT and asking enough obtuse questions, I think a 19" wheel will keep me from reselling and replacing a smaller saw in short order (I tend to "buy dear and sell cheap" so I hate selling anything off).

I wasn't happy with a couple features of the ShopFox 19" saw--undersized table trunnion mostly--so I backed out of the whole deal.

I feel terrible:(. The local dealer/distributor is owned by a VERY nice couple, and it's important to support local businesses. I think they were counting on a solid sale at year end...so my "announcement" went over like a lead balloon.

I've owned my first table saw for more than twenty years now, and I expect to live with whatever bandsaw I buy for a looooong time, too. So this is a SERIOUS decision for me.

As an aside, I notice the Grizzly website no longer features their 19" bandsaw (ShopFox 19 appears to be the same saw with several upgrades). I'm guessing Grizzly is furiously updating their 19" to compete head-to-head in the hot 19" bandsaw market niche (and the ShopFox saw will likely benefit from the change as well). If so, my instincts were pretty good.

Time will tell. I'm waiting until early 2006 to see what happens.

[Dewayne Garrett]

What did you end up with? I'm curious. Oh the suspense.