Something I don't understand about the Sawstop design

**Josiah Bartlett** · 03-31-2010, 2:29 PM

My understanding of the Sawstop is that it brakes the blade and disappears it under the table. Why not just disappear it under the table and dont' destructively brake the blade? It would seem to be just as safe that way and then you wouldn't have to buy a new blade if you tripped the safety.

**ben grossman** · 03-31-2010, 2:32 PM

The Saw Stop uses the kinetic energy of the rotating blade to retract the blade. If you watch their videos, it makes a lot of sense. I am not sure there is another way that can be done cheaply that would accomplish the same thing. The type of servos required to react that fast would probably be far more expensive than the brake kit and a new blade.

**Dan Friedrichs** · 03-31-2010, 2:44 PM

If it could be done, I'm sure they'd do it - it's not like they make blades...

On a side note, I never understand why people are even remotely concerned about the blade. If it tripped unintentionally (cutting wet wood or metal film or whatever), then I can see being annoyed, but it was clearly the operator's fault. If it tripped from actually touching it, why would you care about $70 for a blade?

**Van Huskey** · 03-31-2010, 5:46 PM

Originally Posted by Dan Friedrichs

If it could be done, I'm sure they'd do it - it's not like they make blades...

On a side note, I never understand why people are even remotely concerned about the blade. If it tripped unintentionally (cutting wet wood or metal film or whatever), then I can see being annoyed, but it was clearly the operator's fault. If it tripped from actually touching it, why would you care about $70 for a blade?

Well they sell blades but it is a non-issue.

The design is what it is and they have no incentive to improve it, it works and no one else has it. My guess any design that saves the blade is on the "shelf" until others are able to follow suit then the blade saving tech (if when it exists) becomes a value added feature for Saw stop OR matches the others design. Personally, I think the $100 + for a blade IS an issue but a minor one. I know people who have spent 500+ bucks on false fires which is fine for the safety factor (for them) but it would be even nicer if it didn't ruin a blade.

**Dan Friedrichs** · 03-31-2010, 5:55 PM

Originally Posted by Van Huskey

I know people who have spent 500+ bucks on false fires which is fine for the safety factor (for them) but it would be even nicer if it didn't ruin a blade.

True. But all these "false fires" are not happening in dry wood. These are incidences of people cutting wet wood or metal. If these people aren't worried enough about the $70 blade to avoid doing that (or testing it beforehand and enabling bypass mode), they apparently aren't too worried about the cost of the blade.

**Brian Penning** · 03-31-2010, 6:14 PM

Actually, I think more often than not the blade is salvageable. Mine's hit my WW II twice(dumb miter gauge's fault

) and it's been repaired by Forrest.

**mreza Salav** · 03-31-2010, 8:23 PM

I have thought about having a sacrificial "blade" type thing that the brake would engage into (instead of eating the blade). There are some problems with that idea though and I am sure Sawstop designers have entertained that idea before.

**Dave Cav** · 03-31-2010, 11:34 PM

Originally Posted by Brian Penning

Actually, I think more often than not the blade is salvageable. Mine's hit my WW II twice(dumb miter gauge's fault

) and it's been repaired by Forrest.

We have had one trip on our ICS at school so far. The student swore he never touched the blade. I was able to salvage the blade (sent it out for sharpening) and sent the brake cartridge to SS so they could read the chip. They said the stored data was consistent with a finger strike, and sent me a free new cartridge. The only thing I can figure is the student's finger touched the side of the saw plate based on my observation of his operation of the saw.

**Ken Tucker** · 09-05-2013, 7:46 PM

I cant help it I have to say it . " we want to loose our digits as cheaply as possible

**Dan Hintz** · 09-05-2013, 7:50 PM

3.5 year old thread...

Just a warning before people start thrashing again.

**Howard Acheson** · 03-31-2010, 3:07 PM

The brake stops the blade faster than the blade can be retracted.

**Mike Archambeau** · 03-31-2010, 4:14 PM

When that blade retracts below the table, does the handwheel turn? Seems if the blade stays on the arbor, that the blade raising mechanism has to spin to retract the blade.

**Brian Muecke** · 03-31-2010, 5:17 PM

Originally Posted by Mike Archambeau

When that blade retracts below the table, does the handwheel turn? Seems if the blade stays on the arbor, that the blade raising mechanism has to spin to retract the blade.

no. the arbor is hinged. The catch which holds it in place during normal operation releases under the stress of the brake activation.

**Dave Verstraete** · 03-31-2010, 5:18 PM

Mike
There is some type of release from the mechanism. I had it trigger on some wet wood. I had to lower the blade mechanism to its lowest point and then it re-engages

**Robert gree** · 03-31-2010, 9:03 PM

i see 2 reasons.

1. there using the blades energy,

2. there aluminum block which is 65 bucks is destroyed everytime the the saw is tripped, if they didnt stop the blade and just retracted the blade they just lost 65 bucks

Thread: Something I don't understand about the Sawstop design

Thread Tools

Rate This Thread

Display

Hybrid View

Something I don't understand about the Sawstop design

Handwheel spins?

Posting Permissions