G0605x/G0651 Comparison - When it comes to table saws, bigger is better - right?

[Brad Bartley]

I'm getting ready to pull the trigger on a table saw have a question regarding a comparison of the two Grizzly saws.

G0605X = 12" = 5hp = $2,069.00 (delivered)

_G0651 = 10" = 3hp = $1,939.00 (delivered)
----------------------------------
Difference = 2"/2hp/$130

The two saws appear to be identical with the exceptions noted above. For $130 more, I'm thinking it would make more sense to go for the larger, more powerfull G0605x or am I over simplifing the comparison? Sure some might say 5hp and a 12" capacity are overkill, but for $130 more - why not? Right?

The 12" blades are considerably more expensive that the 10" blades, but the G0605x accepts both sizes with an arbor change.

Let me know if this is a no brainer or if there is something other than the a table saw's specs I should consider.

Thanks!!!

[Gary Keedwell]

I am not a table saw guru and I don't play one on a TV how-to show, but I don't see any need for a 12" , do you? My 3 HP Uni cuts through hardwood like cutting butter and it has never slowed down a bit. I wonder how convenient it would be to change arbors on that 12" machine.

Gary

[David Weaver]

Bigger blade = ability to cut thicker stock - that's the biggest advantage I can see. I don't know how often anyone cuts stock that's thicker than about 3 inches, but if you did do it, I'm sure a 12 inch saw would be more pleasant to do it with - and the extra 2 hp would make it nicer, too.

If you're going to get dedicated 12 inch blades, there probably wouldn't be a need to change the arbor, either, but if you're only going to use 10 inch blades on it, I don't see the point in getting it.

[Ray Knight]

If you don't need the bigger size for thicker lumber (I use band saw for that), it is argued by some that any run out will be greater with the 12" and that precision may therefore be better with 10", if your capacity needs are met. That's why I use a 10" miter chop saw and will be sticking with 10" TS. More power is always useful, more size - now that's been argued for centuries, or millenia. Ray Knight

[Rick Cicciarelli]

The 12" one appears to come with a nicer metal guard where the 10" model has the usual plastic guard.....

[Mitchell Andrus]

12" blades will deflect more than 10" blades.

[Allen Bookout]

It would be real tempting to get the 12" saw and use it as a 10" saw. Then if you ever need the larger capacity you could convert it for that use. I do not see any negatives using it like that.

[Jim Becker]

It would be real tempting to get the 12" saw and use it as a 10" saw. Then if you ever need the larger capacity you could convert it for that use. I do not see any negatives using it like that.

Blade tip speed may be slower when using the smaller diameter blade if the saw was designed to spin the larger blade at a particular ideal speed for cutting. But that's minimal. I run a 10" blade on my 12" capable Minimax saw...no way was I going to give up/replace my nearly new WW-II blades!

[Allen Bookout]

Good point Jim. I should have thought of that.

[Shiraz Balolia]

I used to run a G1023 series saw for many years. Later (about 6 years ago) I changed to the G5959 12" tablesaw.

Here's my take on it -
1) I typically run thin kerf blades with a zero clearance insert. With my 12" thin kerf blades I use 6" stiffners on each side of the blade. This effectively reduces my cutting height to a little under 3" because the stiffners stop at the zero clearance insert. You can use 4" stiffners, but I went for the 6" for maximum stability and accuracy. I also have Forrest 12" blades that I use without stiffners and they cut the wood like a hot knife in butter, leaving almost glassy smooth finishes. There is no issue with runout when you use good blades and have an accurate arbor to begin with.

2) The cast iron tabletop space is larger than the tabletop on the 10". This allows me more support etc., although many people build auxiliary tables themselves. When I was working on the specs. for the G0605X, that is one thing that I wanted to provide "turnkey" to the customer (because that is what I would have liked as a user).

3) Most people don't need more than a 3 H.P. for their tablesaw and I don't either, but there have been times when I have been ripping a 10 qtr. board of Bubinga that the extra H.P. came in handy.

If I had the space and was doing this again, it would be a 12" without a doubt, and the one you are looking at (G0605X) would be it.

[Kyle Stiefel]

I run the G1023 and there are times when that larger blade would come in handy. I run alot 8/4 and less 12/4 but that being said when I am using my cross cut sled I don't have the height to make the cut. The other time when I don't have the height to make the cut is when I am cutting on an angle with the crosscut sled.

So if you plan on working a fair amount of 8/4 or thicker stock the 12" blade could be benificial.

Kyle

[Brad Bartley]

To those who replied to my question, thanks for taking the time - your input is much appreciated.

I wasn't aware of the difference in size between the two saws - thanks for pointing that out, Shiraz. I just assumed they were more or less the same saw, but with different motors. After taking a closer look at the spec sheets on both verifies the G0605X is in fact much larger, weighing in at close to twice the 10" saw (actually 2/3rds more)

Table dimensions and weight comparison:
G0651.....21.25" x 27.00" @ 430 lbs total machine weight
G0605X..24.50" x 30.75" @ 715 lbs total machine weight

For $130 more than the 10", it's hard to pass on the G0605X. That being said, the G0605X it is!!

Thanks again for the help.

[Justin Bukoski]

Brad, make sure you come back and tell us how you like it!

[Chris Barnett]

Well, the 12-inch higher [than WWII] tooth count Woodworker I standard kerf is about $52 minus discounts right now on Amazon. The 10-inch WWI is not available in a standard 1/8 inch kerf . Larger is not always more.

[Charlie T. Bear]

Hey Brad How do you like the saw? I am about to buy one myself