Who's standard is this, and what does it mean if I am injured by the blade, and it is proven that my hand was moving faster that the standard?Originally Posted by Bill Maietta
Member
Who's standard is this, and what does it mean if I am injured by the blade, and it is proven that my hand was moving faster that the standard?
Member
From what I saw in FWW that is the standard the CPSC is working towards. Like I said it's not an exact quote, and the manufacturers are all still trying to get the best deal they can. It's an evolving process, it seems.They would test machines against this standard or whatever carries the day. I doubt your hand will be involved in testing. Hope not. More likely another hot dog.
Member
I dont know, I am sort of on the balance beam on this one. I do believe there are people who do need this type of safety. I also beleive that we live in a country that to some extint we need to be able to decide. Now if an average saw is 600 dollars (this is just for example sake) and the cost is now going to be 750 but with the addition of the safety features then that might work, but I myself cannot afford 2500 dollars for a table saw in anyway shape or form. But then again if someone wants it bad enough they will work to get it...
"To me, there's nothing freer than a bird, you know, just flying wherever he wants to go. And, I don't know, that's what this country is all about, being free. I think everyone wants to be a free bird." - Ronnie Van Zant
Member
If I lived in the US and was a part of this debate I would have no issue with the imposition of laws to force the industry and users to use flesh sensing technology. What I have an issue with is the monopoly of one company forcing others to license that technology back to them due to legislative change. If it becomes a mandatory requirement then the company that holds the technology through patents should lose those patents as it is those patents that have stopped anyone else moving forward and equipping their machines with the technology except under license. If it is not made mandatory by legislation then I have no issue with the patents as by all accounts the machine manufacturers were given the opportunity and could still use the technology by paying the license fees and they missed the boat or choose not to get in the boat.
Chris
Everything I like is either illegal, immoral or fattening
Member
That's a great point. SawStop should not benefit materially from any change in safety reg.s. According to the FWW pieces I've see there are multiple systems being considered. One of the earlier entries in this thread (from Roger) mentioned the whirlwind tools approach (whirlwindtool.com). Sawstop creator Stephen Gass mentioned a system PTI developed but shelved (PTI is group of TS manufacturers... minus Sawstop). So, it seems to be early in the game... but I agree. I'm not sure I'd say Sawstop should lose their patents, rather other companies innovate their own solutions, or buy and develop something like whirlwind. There's more than one way to stop careless woodworkers from skinning themselves. Right?
Contributor
Fine Woodworking had a long discussion from Asa Christiana including a discussion with Steve Gass of Sawstop. They say that it could cost somewhere between $55 and $100 to add to even jobsite saws.
http://www.finewoodworking.com/item/...ne-woodworking
As Cort would say: Fools are the only folk on the earth who can absolutely count on getting what they deserve.
Member
It's a shame the legal system is both instrumental in denying widespread implementation of the SS technology and the potential for a mandate.
Much as I think the SS is a really good saw, it's too bad it is not available on lower priced units from other manufacturers. I am aware of the SS contractor saw, but having moved to a hybrid saw, I am not least bit interested in revisiting the short comings of a CS.
My hope is that by the time I a ready to upgrade to a real cabinet saw, braking technology will be ubiquitous.
Measure twice, cut three times, start over. Repeat as necessary.
i got the fww email yesterday and it made my blood boil again knowing that scumbag that sued ryobi won his award as the ruling wasnt overturned.
some of the judges in this country have to be out of there mind? how can someone that takes off the safety guards and doesnt use the rip fence
who then cuts his hand gets awarded big bucks because the saw doesnt have stopping technology. absolutely incredible that all companies will now
have to start implementing this technology.
so does this mean i can sue a drill manufacturer when i drill something and the bit locks up and the drill torques over hard and sprains or breaks my
wrist?? or what about bandsaws, they better put stop technology on them too? im all for safety but this all just sets a bad standard for mfg's having
to add more safety and the consumer paying a lot more for it.
its going to be a big mess im afraid and the debate will go on and on.
Contributor
Greg. I am not sure how the legal system is responsible for blocking the technology. It may turn out that it played a role in the implementation of the mandate due to the jury award even though it was kind of a "bad facts" case. Dave
Member
I thing the gov should stay the heck out of our lives. This is not their job. The technology is out there. If you want it you can buy it, if you don't you shouldn't be forced.
If you are an employer I would think you would be crazy not to have it, insurance, liability and all. But for the guy in his garage using it on occasion I don't see why the gov should force it on you.
very well said and in complete agreement!
Contributor
The blade drops down in about 5 milliseconds that's a speed of about 700" per second. That's pretty damn fast (about 40 miles/hr I think)
Tim
Contributor
I suspect most manufactured passed on Gass' initial offer for fear that adding the technology to any saw would inevitably lead to lawsuits of the form:
"I bought their cheaper saw (without SS technology). They knew it was dangerous. Look! They had to start adding brakes to their saws! I'm suing because Delta is negligent for selling a product that they themselves admit is too dangerous to use without additional safety mechanisms".
Not to dump on politicians and lawyers, but it's difficult finding another group of people that cause so much trouble.
Last edited by John Coloccia; 10-08-2011 at 11:29 PM.
Member
As long as the SS is in working order the damage you get from that scenario will be substantially less than if the saw was a normal one. If you are expecting zero damage or a slight abrasion of the skin we don't know. But we know that it won't be catastrophic.
Contributor
Well, they've documented hundreds of saves and try as I might I can't find a record of even one serious injury from using the SS. I'm sure there are ways to get hurt with it, just as there are ways to kill yourself even if you're wearing a seatbelt and have an airbag, but there is absolutely no doubt that SS provides a significant safety enhancement.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
