# table saws under attack



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

I was just emailed this article about table saw safety standards.
http://www.finewoodworking.com/item/35233/tablesaw-safety-goes-under-the-microscope-again


----------



## timmybgood (Jan 11, 2011)

I agree with this 100%. The second I can afford a saw-stop I'm buying one. Spending $4000 is alot less painful than losing fingers.


----------



## BassBlaster (Nov 21, 2010)

Thats what we need, more Government regulation!!! Geesh, enough is enough.

If you want to own a SawStop, by all means buy a SawStop. Dont force it down the throats of everyone.


----------



## itguy08 (Jan 23, 2011)

BassBlaster said:


> Thats what we need, more Government regulation!!! Geesh, enough is enough.
> 
> If you want to own a SawStop, by all means buy a SawStop. Dont force it down the throats of everyone.


Exactly. I'll take my chances and respect my power tools.

Not to mention the guy behind this is pretty much a scumbag. He invents something, patents it out the wazoo. Approaches saw manufacturers and they say "nope". He then whines to the government to make his device mandatory. If they make it a requirement he will make tons of $$ off royalties. Pretty scummy thing to do - my idea won't survive on its own so I'll get the government to ensure I make $$ off it.

Should be interesting - if this passes I wonder if we will see tablesaw kits to get around this....


----------



## BassBlaster (Nov 21, 2010)

itguy08 said:


> Exactly. I'll take my chances and respect my power tools.
> 
> Not to mention the guy behind this is pretty much a scumbag. He invents something, patents it out the wazoo. Approaches saw manufacturers and they say "nope". He then whines to the government to make his device mandatory. If they make it a requirement he will make tons of $$ off royalties. Pretty scummy thing to do - my idea won't survive on its own so I'll get the government to ensure I make $$ off it.
> 
> Should be interesting - if this passes I wonder if we will see tablesaw kits to get around this....


If this regulation was passed, it would be for new saw sales. They can't force folks to update current equipment with new safety measures. (At least not in a home shop) I'm just glad I ordered a new saw that hopefully will give me many many years of service so this guy dosnt ever get a penny of my money!!


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

BassBlaster said:


> Thats what we need, more Government regulation!!! Geesh, enough is enough.
> 
> If you want to own a SawStop, by all means buy a SawStop. Dont force it down the throats of everyone.


The same thing was said about seat belts, air bags, smoke detectors and the list goes on. Everyone looks at this as Gass trying to get rich. Was getting rich the idea when he came up with the technology? No it was to make saws safer to protect people from there own mistakes. There are mistakes and then there is stupidity. The guy who sued and won 1.5 was stupidity and so was the judgment. Gass asked for reasonable royalties 15% of the saws wholesale price from the factory. The extra manufacturing cost was proposed at $150 per saw if they all would have went along with it. Those are reasonable cost and I'm sure it could have been negotiated down more if the Saw manufacturers weren't so worried about big change to what they consider acceptably safe saws. I don't consider 36k to 38k blade to hand accidents a year acceptably safe.


----------



## wrkcrw00 (Apr 12, 2010)

Saw Stop is a interesting and cool feature, but should not be mandatory. Frankly I think this Osario guy has screwed up an entire industry. 1.5M for stupidity. Reminds me of McDonald's and the hot coffee incident. Of course it's hot...it's coffee!!!

We live in a risk averse society. And there are too many stupid people out there. There are also way to many people who are willing to take advantage of a situation and screw everyone else over just so they can get a little "piece of the pie". 

I'm just venting now...but I just can't stand people like that.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

itguy08 said:


> Exactly. I'll take my chances and respect my power tools.
> 
> Not to mention the guy behind this is pretty much a scumbag. He invents something, patents it out the wazoo. Approaches saw manufacturers and they say "nope". He then whines to the government to make his device mandatory. If they make it a requirement he will make tons of $$ off royalties. Pretty scummy thing to do - *my idea won't survive on its own so I'll get the government to ensure I make $$ off it.*
> 
> Should be interesting - if this passes I wonder if we will see tablesaw kits to get around this....


*His idea wont survive on it's own. What planet you live on SawStop is getting larger everyday. It's a high end saw even without the safety feature and their sales will continue to grow.* Difference is if they would have cooperated the technology would have been available at a cheaper cost to us because of the volume of saws. It cost more now because it's on less saws and he had to start his own line.



wrkcrw00 said:


> Saw Stop is a interesting and cool feature, but should not be mandatory. Frankly I think this Osario guy has screwed up an entire industry. 1.5M for stupidity. Reminds me of McDonald's and the hot coffee incident. Of course it's hot...it's coffee!!!


I agree with the verdict amount and stupidity with Osario but just like the hot coffee case it will be appealed and lowered or thrown out. Those are jury problems. 

If you actually read all the info on the spilled coffee case you would understand more that McDonalds was wrong especially since they were warned several times about the risk. That lady was elderly and had 3rd degree burns it wasn't just a little 1st degree burn. They also refused to pay a small amount in the begnning for her medical bills from multiple surgeries. After the lawyers, verdict, appeal and undisclosed settlement all you remember is that she sued for being burned by hot coffee.


----------



## Hammer1 (Aug 1, 2010)

The big issue for SawStop technology is that it's a mechanical device, mechanical devices fail all the time. You can also disable the brake and may need to with certain operations. It's not a guaranty and failure to follow basic saw safety will still get you into trouble. Lack of training and not following the rules is what cuts fingers. I think it's a great addition to a saw but you'd better not do something stupid. The jury in that case was obviously ignorant about woodworking machines and the defense failed to educate them. If there was a written rule that mandated the technology it would be a different story but there isn't, mainly because of what I stated above. Can we create fail safe devices for dummies on everything?


----------



## BassBlaster (Nov 21, 2010)

rrbrown said:


> The same thing was said about seat belts, air bags, smoke detectors and the list goes on. Everyone looks at this as Gass trying to get rich. Was getting rich the idea when he came up with the technology? No it was to make saws safer to protect people from there own mistakes. There are mistakes and then there is stupidity. The guy who sued and won 1.5 was stupidity and so was the judgment. Gass asked for reasonable royalties 15% of the saws wholesale price from the factory. The extra manufacturing cost was proposed at $150 per saw if they all would have went along with it. Those are reasonable cost and I'm sure it could have been negotiated down more if the Saw manufacturers weren't so worried about big change to what they consider acceptably safe saws. I don't consider 36k to 38k blade to hand accidents a year acceptably safe.


 Just because it was said in the past, dosnt make it right. This is America, a free (used loosely) country. I should have the freedom to use my saw with or with out this safety feature. I dont need Gass or the Government to tell me I'm not capable of running a saw safely with out this technology installed.

As far as that court case goes, my understanding is, Gass was somehow involved in bringing this to court.

He is trying to get rich. He may have designed it with safety in mind and thats fine. I actually think its a cool idea. But trying to force it through Government regulation is wrong. What does he care about my safety. My safety isnt his or anyone elses business.

If it only costs $150 more in production for this technology, why do his saws sell for 3 and 4 times the cost of other saws from quality manufacturers? Take that $150 technology off his saws, are they still worth twice what other saws are worth?

I'm not saying the technology isnt a good idea and to be honest I dont care how much he charges for his saws because I dont ever plan to buy one. I'm just saying, I dont need him or the Government to place more regulations on my life because they think I'm too stupid to operate my saw safely. I'm a competent person that knows the risks involved in operating power equipment.


----------



## H. A. S. (Sep 23, 2010)

It's probably obvious, I don't like being force fed anything.

:thumbsup:


----------



## wrkcrw00 (Apr 12, 2010)

BassBlaster said:


> I'm not saying the technology isnt a good idea and to be honest I dont care how much he charges for his saws because I dont ever plan to buy one. I'm just saying, I dont need him or the Government to place more regulations on my life because they think I'm too stupid to operate my saw safely. I'm a competent person that knows the risks involved in operating power equipment.


I agree BassBlaster. Like hot coffee, capes that don't make one fly, and every other ridiculous warning and regulation out there. The government needs to stay out of my business because it's MY business. I operate my saw the way I want...and I face the consequences for MY actions. 

Does no one want to take responsibility for themselves?


----------



## MattS (Feb 17, 2010)

Liability for shops will catapult Saw Stop to the front of the pack sales-wise quickly enough without regulatory issues coming into play. The first few major lawsuits by employees alleging that they requested Saw Stop technology and their employers opted for "dangerous, statistically likely to injure employees", and no insurance company will cover a shop with normal cabinet saws. Suddenly there won't be any used or second hand powermatic/delta/grizzly/jet/etc high end saws coming into the small shops on the cheap, and what were once staples of the industry will only be found in small shops or individual owners (read; those without workman's comp to worry about). 

Sure, the technology might be mandatory on all new saw sales in a few years. No, I don't like it either. But I also think the knee-jerk reaction is overblown by most, as once the technology is mandatory it shouldn't do too much to jack up new saw prices. Saw Stop will not be able to suddenly claim it will cost $300 per saw, when they previously claimed a very manageable $150. I'd be fine with adding $150 to any saw I buy to add that feature, without the government forcing it on us. I'll be fine with it either way, in the end.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Capitalism and free enterprise...*

Will probably come up with a blade stopping design either in competition with the Saw Stop or as retrofit for older ones.
While I believe the Saw Stop electronics are sophisticated they can probably be "duplicated" in a different way unless his patents are airtight. Americans have always figured out more than one way to skin the cat and I have faith some clever folks will do the same in this case.... I hope so, because the retrofit market is 100+ times the new saw market. Just a WAG on my part. :yes: bill


----------



## klr650 (Apr 4, 2010)

I like the concept, although "flesh sensing device":thumbdown: sounds like vaporware claptrap. 

I would be perfectly happy to purchase this as an aftermarket mod or such, but mandatory - sorry. Crushing numbers of rules, regulations, and fees are the road to totalitarianism.


----------



## dbhost (Jan 28, 2008)

MattS said:


> Liability for shops will catapult Saw Stop to the front of the pack sales-wise quickly enough without regulatory issues coming into play. The first few major lawsuits by employees alleging that they requested Saw Stop technology and their employers opted for "dangerous, statistically likely to injure employees", and no insurance company will cover a shop with normal cabinet saws. Suddenly there won't be any used or second hand powermatic/delta/grizzly/jet/etc high end saws coming into the small shops on the cheap, and what were once staples of the industry will only be found in small shops or individual owners (read; those without workman's comp to worry about).
> 
> Sure, the technology might be mandatory on all new saw sales in a few years. No, I don't like it either. But I also think the knee-jerk reaction is overblown by most, as once the technology is mandatory it shouldn't do too much to jack up new saw prices. Saw Stop will not be able to suddenly claim it will cost $300 per saw, when they previously claimed a very manageable $150. I'd be fine with adding $150 to any saw I buy to add that feature, without the government forcing it on us. I'll be fine with it either way, in the end.


Maybe, but let's take the Osario case. It was with a Ryobi BTS10 table saw, that costs maybe $150.00 to begin with... The guy INTENTIONALLY disabled the safety features of the saw, what was going to keep him, for example if the saw was SawStop equipped, from disabling the blade brake and having the same accident? So was it worth doubling, or more than doubling the cost of a dirt cheap saw to prevent an idiot from getting hurt by not allowing the safety devices to do their job? 

The argument about Seat Belts etc... is somewhat legit. Modern table saws do have seat belts, they are called blade guards, and splitters. The safety devices are there if you USE THEM....


----------



## klr650 (Apr 4, 2010)

As an aside - what does this do that the guard on the table doesn't? Isn't that what the guard is for?


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Simply*

The guard is a mechanical device that is supposed to keep your fingers from entering the blade. It rises up out of the way on links that will still allow the material to pass through.
The Saw Stop has an electical /electronic device that senses the presence of a charged body, in this case your finger, that triggers the brake in milliseconds to stop and lower the blade. They are not mutually exclusive, and the the Saw Stop comes with a guard.  bill


----------



## MattS (Feb 17, 2010)

dbhost said:


> So was it worth doubling, or more than doubling the cost of a dirt cheap saw to prevent an idiot from getting hurt by not allowing the safety devices to do their job?


In my opinion (I'm an opinionated guy), Ryobie should have won that suite, and the guy should have been put in the poorhouse paying for the legal fees for both sides. The hyper-litigious people in our society/nation disgusts me.

I really think that if I built and sold a saw that was nothing more than a 15hp motor with a chain driven 20 inch, 5 tooth blade on a tripod, and marketed it as a Table Saw kit without a table, and pointed out on the box that it was highly likely to kill/maim/dismember everyone within a 100 yard radius on startup, and even with careful table construction and extraordinary precautions, there would be virtually no practical use for the device that could be done without injury, *I should have that option*. And I think nobody should ever be able to sue me for it. 

However! If my employer buys this tool, and expects me to use it, I'd be glad to sue my employer for any injuries sustained in the use of it.


----------



## klr650 (Apr 4, 2010)

Well that wasn't really what I meant.

The guard is designed to prevent your hand or body part from coming near the blade. 
The "flesh sensing device" is designed to stop or move the blade out of the way when your body part comes near.

In my mind both are accomplishing the same thing - hence my question.

I am a little curious how this "flesh sensing device" would work in practice. It seems like the action of stopping the blade or dropping it down in such a quick fashion would tend to damage the saw.


----------



## midcent' dave (Dec 20, 2010)

What happens if the gov' forces him to release his patents "for the common good"?! They could them force manufacturers to install the tech on future products which they can charge more for; and also offer retrofit units for older models which they can also charge for. 

Not a likely scenario, but not unheard of. Seems to me big business and their lobbiests would be all for that!


----------



## BassBlaster (Nov 21, 2010)

klr650 said:


> Well that wasn't really what I meant.
> 
> The guard is designed to prevent your hand or body part from coming near the blade.
> The "flesh sensing device" is designed to stop or move the blade out of the way when your body part comes near.
> ...


 My understanding is, the blade and brake must be replaced after this thing goes off. It has to have some effect to the saw over time. The g forces created in stopping the blade that fast have to be very substantial. I havnt researched this though so only speculation. I'm sure this info is out there.


----------



## H. A. S. (Sep 23, 2010)

BassBlaster said:


> My understanding is, the blade and brake must be replaced after this thing goes off. It has to have some effect to the saw over time. The g forces created in stopping the blade that fast have to be very substantial. I havnt researched this though so only speculation. I'm sure this info is out there.


 
That will be a sure 'Moneymaker'. Guy must have excellent lobbyists.:yes:


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

I didn't realize this would stir it up so much so I haven't had time to read all of the responses. My view is this. There is no way I will ever support sawstop in anything they do from now forward. This is supposed to be a free country and we should be able to make up our own minds. I decide to go to McDonalds when I want, and when I want to go to the bathroom, I go. I will also decide that there will be now sawstop crap in my shop, regardless whether this passes.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

Look you have the right to where your seat belt or get ticketed but you have no problem with that. You have air bags required because seat belts are not used or when used or not totally effective. You think that stuff is put in there free you pay for it in the car price but it is mandatory. someone got paid for that stuff just as he glass expects to. Had you invented it would you give it out free? I doubt it and I will call anyone of you that says you would a liar.

I think the biggest point is you all think he got this guy to sew. The only part he had in the trial was as a expert witness. Osario was an idiot , the verdict and award was outrages but none of us have heard all the facts. 

About the price what type saw are you comparing it to a Ryobi, Dewalt or maybe a grizzley? not even close. Compare it to this Powermatic which is comparable to the SawStop I have without the flesh sensing technology. I paid $2999. for my Saw Stop.


----------



## bofa (Jul 17, 2010)

I'm with rrbrown on this one. Safety features are a good thing. Just like many other features, they can be disabled but they should be standard if they are know to prevent major injuries. It doesnt replace common sense but no one is perfect every minute of every day.

And saw stops are competitively priced with other high end saws, which to be honest I expected them to be even higher because of this unique technology.


----------



## BassBlaster (Nov 21, 2010)

rrbrown said:


> Look you have the right to where your seat belt or get ticketed but you have no problem with that. You have air bags required because seat belts are not used or when used or not totally effective. You think that stuff is put in there free you pay for it in the car price but it is mandatory. someone got paid for that stuff just as he glass expects to. Had you invented it would you give it out free? I doubt it and I will call anyone of you that says you would a liar.
> 
> I think the biggest point is you all think he got this guy to sew. The only part he had in the trial was as a expert witness. Osario was an idiot , the verdict and award was outrages but none of us have heard all the facts.
> 
> About the price what type saw are you comparing it to a Ryobi, Dewalt or maybe a grizzley? not even close. Compare it to this Powermatic which is comparable to the SawStop I have without the flesh sensing technology. I paid $2999. for my Saw Stop.


 I think you have misunderstood every post. No one has a problem with the guys technology. I said I think its a cool idea. I do question his prices but hey its a capitalist society and if people are willing to buy it then more power to him. No one is asking him to give it away and your right, had I invented it, it wouldnt be free either but I wouldnt be trying to force it through Government regulation to pad my pockets. Thats my issue and the best I can tell, thats the issue other posters have with it. Why is it you feel its the Governments responsibility to be concerned about my safety?


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*The dogooders need a cause*

and the liability issue is probably another reason. People get hurt on TS's go the ER and someone has to pay...either the hospital gets stuck or the insurance company pays or the individual pays in some percentage. I think it's a follow the money deal. And the govmnt will try to step in with some well meaning congressman sponsoring a bill and everyone will fall in line, "Yah, that's a good idea" and soon enough flesh sensing technology, will become required on all new saws. Firearms fall into the same general thought process, guns hurt people, so we need to fix that and control them. Cars are the same. I ride a motorcycle, so we have helmets laws and I believe it's about the money in every case.....well maybe not for gun control, that's more insidious.
Texting while driving is another example of new legislation, cell phone bans are already in place and it goes on and on. We are a "regulated" society rather than a free society. Then there is the TSA groping you and your wife and kids.... it will never end. :no: bill


----------



## burkhome (Sep 5, 2010)

woodnthings said:


> and the liability issue is probably another reason. People get hurt on TS's go the ER and someone has to pay...either the hospital gets stuck or the insurance company pays or the individual pays in some percentage. I think it's a follow the money deal. And the govmnt will try to step in with some well meaning congressman sponsoring a bill and everyone will fall in line, "Yah, that's a good idea" and soon enough flesh sensing technology, will become required on all new saws. Firearms fall into the same general thought process, guns hurt people, so we need to fix that and control them. Cars are the same. I ride a motorcycle, so we have helmets laws and I believe it's about the money in every case.....well maybe not for gun control, that's more insidious.
> Texting while driving is another example of new legislation, cell phone bans are already in place and it goes on and on. We are a "regulated" society rather than a free society. Then there is the TSA groping you and your wife and kids.... it will never end. :no: bill


 You need to move to New Hampshire...No seat belt law...No motorcycle helmet law...License plates say "Live Free or Die"...Now property taxes are a whole other ball of twine...There is no state income tax though.


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

That is the great thing about our country ( for now), we all get our opinions. I guess some people don't see a problem with the govt. making their decisions for them. I suppose it is easier to choose what to eat since the govt. decides so many other things for you. If your not worrying about someone buying an unsafe tablesaw, you can our more thought into "bacon or sausage this morning?" Like I said, I am an adult and can "wipe my own butt" I can make decisions for myself.
Bassblaster is 100% on point by the way. Maybe I should go to the govt. and demand everyone have me build their homes when I have an exclusive patent preventing others from doing identical work. Wouldn't that be unethical? Maybe not to some I guess.


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

Furthermore, icant believe how many people don't realize that every item like this that is passed, is one step closer to socialism. That is NOT how I want to live.


----------



## ACP (Jan 24, 2009)

woodnthings said:


> Yah, that's a good idea" and soon enough flesh sensing technology, will become required on all Firearms, guns hurt people, so we need to fix that and control them.


 
That's brilliant Bill! Flesh sensing technology on guns! They won't fire when pointed at flesh! You are gonna be RICH!!!



















Disclaimer: I know Bill is a pro-gun person and I may have altered his quote a bit to read as it does. :laughing:


----------



## ACP (Jan 24, 2009)

jstange2 said:


> . I guess some people don't see a problem with the govt. making their decisions for them. I suppose it is easier to choose what to eat since the govt. decides so many other things for you.......you can our more thought into "bacon or sausage this morning?"


 
Um..... I don't want to upset you but they are looking into that already too.....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16051436/


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

jstange2 said:


> That is the great thing about our country ( for now), we all get our opinions. I guess some people don't see a problem with the govt. making their decisions for them. I suppose it is easier to choose what to eat since the govt. decides so many other things for you. If your not worrying about someone buying an unsafe table saw, you can our more thought into "bacon or sausage this morning?" Like I said, I am an adult and can "wipe my own butt" I can make decisions for myself.
> Bassblaster is 100% on point by the way. *Maybe I should go to the govt. and demand everyone have me build their homes when I have an exclusive patent preventing others from doing identical work. Wouldn't that be unethical? *Maybe not to some I guess.


You think regulation is bad in every case. Corporations and big business would rob you blind and work people to death to turn a bigger profit. Lets let doctors decide what they consider safe and sanitary. Lets take away speed limits, banking regulation, labor laws etc. People especially people in power need to have a checks and balance because they would screw you in a second to make a extra dollar. *

To answer your above question, No it would be ridiculous. That's not what a patent is for and your statement is not realistic or sensible.*

*I think you have the established large manufacturers that were presented a good idea to make using a tablesaw safer. They looked at it joined together and tried to shut him down thinking he would go away or cave to there demands. They could care less about user safety and if is idea was so simple why haven't they figured it out many years ago? They don't care just as tobacco companies could care less who died as long as they could make billions. Gass didn't roll over and instead fought back. produced a well built, thought out and safe saw. He is selling them in and around the price of the other comparable saws in quality but not safety. Is it him or the other money hungry manufacturers that are being greedy.*
 


BassBlaster said:


> I think you have misunderstood every post. No one has a problem with the guys technology. *I said I think its a cool idea. I do question his prices but hey its a capitalist society *and if people are willing to buy it then more power to him. No one is asking him to give it away and your right, had I invented it, it wouldnt be free either but I wouldnt be trying to force it through Government regulation to pad my pockets. Thats my issue and the best I can tell, thats the issue other posters have with it. Why is it you feel its the Governments responsibility to be concerned about my safety?



See I do understand but I dont think you do. The SawStop with the safety feature is regular price $2999 a comparable Powermatic saw without the SawStop technology is on sale $2899 how can you have a problem with the pricing unless you are comparing it to a lesser quality saw. Hey a Grizzly saw is a great saw especially for the price but is it Powermatic quality? No. Does anyone bitch and say the Powermatic saw is overpriced I hate them. It's like comparing a Toyota Camry to a Lexus, there both nice cars but one is nicer and more expensive. There also should be some expected higher cost since the company is just starting out. All the other manufacturers already have production set up and there start
up cost have been long been paid for.

He asked for 15% of the wholesale price for royalties. Disney and the NFL get that much. The proposed changes in manufacturing would have been an additional $150 per saw across the board. So a $300 saw plus $150 plus the 15% of wholesale would be roughly $30 or less making that $300 saw now $480. Is that really that bad for the type of safety it brings.

The numbers of 36,000 to 37,000 injuries from blade contact a year is just scary to me. The saw manufacturers new these numbers they were playing the odds to better line there pockets. Don't think so look at the banking problems we had and those guys still think they deserved massive bonuses. Why ? because they have a feeling of entitlement like they are better then us normal working people.

For all you non seat belt and helmet people wanting to live free. If you get killed because you didn't where a seat belt or helmet I bet your family would want to sue if possible.


----------



## BWSmith (Aug 24, 2010)

The "law of unintended consequences",am affraid is gonna be the outcome of this.Oh we'll get around it,life will go on,yadayada.

One big problem is its hitting a fragile industry right between the eyes.And like recent EPA lead rules.......it will make heretofore "honest" folks into criminals.

Comparing a safety device's profit to Disneyland?Yee-up,that makes sense.

The "gentleman" thing to do,if one is truly concerned for the well-being of a community,in this case WW's.........uhh,there would be no profit.And you certainly wouldn't push the agenda on an industry or segmant of society that can afford it the least?

From an engineering standpoint,its ALL about profits and smells of self-serving.Because its a one-time,after the fact device.There are other,CHEAPER more effective ways of preventing the occurance....ever been to a big commercial WW facility.Maybe a furniture factory?You can't even SEE a blade,you'd have to have a 2' long stick to even reach it.The guy is scum....on several different levels."If it only saves one finger",yee-up thats the design criteria...we can make this work.BW


----------



## drcollins804 (Jan 11, 2008)

rrbrown said:


> The proposed changes in manufacturing would have been an additional $150 per saw across the board. So a $300 saw plus $150 plus the 15% of wholesale would be roughly $30 or less making that $300 saw now $480. Is that really that bad for the type of safety it brings.


Its the difference between me having the current saw that I have and having to use the 1960 8 1/2 inch table saw that I used for 25 years. YES!!! $150 to $200 makes a big difference. Just my .02
David

BTW
When you stop the blade on that $300.00 saw with the sawstop technology You will probably be out another $480 because the tabletop and other parts will likely be destroyed by the forces exerted on them at the instant stop.


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

All I'm saying is if he is so concerned with public safety, he should GIVE the technology to the saw manufacturers and the consumer to retrofit. Going to govt. to get a law passed so you can make serious money is NOT how this nation was supposed to be. If you can't see that, I will be sure to skip your future posts on the subject. Thanks for reading.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

BWSmith said:


> The "law of unintended consequences",am affraid is gonna be the outcome of this.Oh we'll get around it,life will go on,yadayada.
> 
> *One big problem is its hitting a fragile industry right between the eyes.And like recent EPA lead rules.......it will make heretofore "honest" folks into criminals.*
> 
> ...


*Comparing it to Disney and the NFL only on a royalty Stand point to show that his royalty fees were not outrages.* Saying his saw is over priced is true if you compare it to a lesser quality but still a good value saw like a Grizzley, however if that same $1200 Grizzley saw changed to incorporate the technology as Gass proposed it would cost around $1500. That's why the SawStop should be compared to a Powermatic quality saw. Everyone has there opinion and I'm obviously in the minority. However I can't believe you think it's Gass and only Gass. *Does everyone on here think that the saw manufacturers or right here and that they have the consumers interest and safety in mind. *Everyone on this forum pretty much complains about corporate America's greed and sending jobs overseas. Now all of a sudden they act like the saw manufacturers collectively are the victims of one man. Like they are helpless against his crazy agenda. I'm not buying it.

*How can any of this turn "honest" people into criminals.*
*
The gentlemanly thing to do would be for Gass to let the saw manufactures have his technology free so they make more profits. Really that sounds like BS there BW.*:laughing: 



If it was proven that the saw manufacturers said we don't care how many people loose fingers it's not our problem we only care about profits. Would it make a difference in your opinion? Because that's basically how I feel it went down. Just like the tobacco companies didn't care how many people died from cancer and kept marketing it towards younger people.

 *I have one question for everyone on here that thinks it's Gass that's wrong and the big helpless manufacturing companies are just victims here.

Lets say you have a 15 year old son that is taking shop class in school. He has an accident on the table saw and looses fingers or use of his hand. He has to suffer through many surgeries and long rehab and still is severely disabled. You have insurance but still have to pay 20,000 as your portion. Is it still your opinion that it's his fault and he has to deal with it? Will you eat the cost and hold no one but him responsible for it or do you sue the school? He can't get a decent job should he get disability? Wait he hasn't paid into the system he can't. Now you find out that for $300 more the saws at the school could have had flesh sensing technology had the saw manufacturers just taken an interest in all the injuries instead of profits. All they had to do is negotiate in good faith to get the technology implemented but they didn't. 

Does it change your mind? 
* 
People are ignorant to the whole truth sometimes until it effects them. I always thought damn I'll never get my hand in the saw blade. I'm safe I watch whats going on I'm experienced and to smart to do something so stupid. 

Guess what it can happen to anyone. I guarantee that if it happens to you, (I hope it never does) you will have a different view. 

Before any of you that don't know me think I'm just wining or feel sorry about myself, Stop I bounced back just like I have numerous times from everything between losing everything to Katrina, cutting off a finger, catching on fire, disabled from the war, and numerous black widow spider bites. I have learned to look at things from many perspectives.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

jstange2 said:


> *All I'm saying is if he is so concerned with public safety, he should GIVE the technology to the saw manufacturers and the consumer to retrofit.* Going to govt. to get a law passed so you can make serious money is NOT how this nation was supposed to be. If you can't see that, I will be sure to skip your future posts on the subject. Thanks for reading.


You can ignore my post if you like. However, since when in a free enterprise system would it be right for someone to spend there money and time inventing something to give to other companies for free so the company can make more money. Especially when you take in to consideration the thought and work that created this technology.Iif it was yours you would give it away for free right? I absolutely doubt it.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

bofa said:


> I'm with rrbrown on this one. Safety features are a good thing. Just like many other features, they can be disabled but they should be standard if they are know to prevent major injuries. It doesnt replace common sense but no one is perfect every minute of every day.
> 
> And saw stops are competitively priced with other high end saws, which to be honest I expected them to be even higher because of this unique technology.


I'm glad at least one person has my back. :laughing::laughing::laughing:


----------



## Microtus (Jun 22, 2010)

rrbrown said:


> You can ignore my post if you like. However, since when in a free enterprise system would it be right for someone to spend there money and time inventing something to give to other companies for free so the company can make more money. Especially when you take in to consideration the thought and work that created this technology.Iif it was yours you would give it away for free right? I absolutely doubt it.


:thumbsup:

Seat belts and airbags were examples mentioned earlier in the thread. I doubt they were invented for the soul purpose of safety or at least without thought of making money. Not all cars come equipped with side curtain airbags. I drive a small commuter car and chose a vehicle (Honda Fit) with them for added piece of mind. My choice. I disabled the airbags in my Jeep, again my choice.

There are other items on the market that were invented/created as a safety device that follow the same lines as the Sawstop. GFCI's which seem to be basically all a Sawstop is, Hilti Firestop would be another. Fire caulking and fire pads are requirements in new construction, as are GFCI's.

With that said, I can see others arguments for the requirement of Sawstop technology on future saw sales and I'm on the fence about the idea. What pains me is to see yet another government requlation. I rally need to change parties and become a registered Libertarian.

BTW...GFCI's do NOT work every time. Airbags and seat belts probably don't work every time either. Now if the end user and what's between the ears worked every time, this topic would be a mute point.


----------



## jacobsk (Jan 19, 2010)

I think that the market will eventually swing towards the protective technology without a mandate.

The safer saws are gaining popularity and consumer demand will eventually lead toward more designs and alternate systems for protecting tool users.

If the technology is mandated I think it'll make certain people lots of money, and still wont protect people from thier own stupidity.

I'll just add my guard free, finger choppin, tablesaw to the list of things the man can pull from my cold dead hands.


----------



## TexasTimbers (Oct 17, 2006)

Our European brothers can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe it is illegal in most Euro countries for private woodworkers (non-commercial) to use dado blades on their table saws. Our society has been under a soft tyranny for decades and we're in the final slide toward an outright hard tyranny. You can call it what you want - I'll call it what I want. Some call it a Kaiser blade, some call it a Slingblade but this is why we see regulation proliferating not because we are being protected by a loving, caring overseer. Follow the money and look to the power and you can better understand the prolific regulation in our society.


We're not going to be like Europe we are there already. While there is still some degree of redress i.e. "the court system" it's not for the commoner *for the most part*. I mean, how's that been working for us, eh? It's been fruitlessly exhausted for the most part and my proof is that regulation has and is growing in leaps and bounds while for the most part our society claims to not want it to the degree we're getting it.

Looking back on what has happened in this society over the past 10 decades (indeed since 1865), why is anyone surprised that government is now coming into our wood shops? You cannot own a toilet without an approved tank, but it's necessary to save the planet so it is okay. You cannot consume certain plants because they are bad for you, so it is a good law. Soon you will not be allowed to grow your own garden because it is bad for the atmosphere, so it makes sense. So why, my good friends, are you shocked and appalled that your "representative government" is going to tell you what kind of table saw you can or cannot own? 


Richard, I cannot read the posts where you use such an abundance of *bolds* and reds and *red bolds*, it's just too busy for my slow eyes. That's just me, but see, I have the choice to read those posts or to just scan them, or skip them altogether. It has nothing to do with what I think of you as a person so let's be clear about that. But do you think it would be a violation of my natural rights if I were forced to read your posts? Would that be acceptable since from your perspective, me being forced to read your posts would enlighten me, making the world a safer, better place for all of us and thus a justifiable regulation? 

I want a Sawstop. I just don't want a gun pointed at me should I refuse to get one if mandated. 



.


----------



## polyhedron (Feb 10, 2011)

I for one really like the SawStop, it's excellent technology. I do not like the way they are trying to ram it down our throat, and the CPSC is eating it up like a hungry hog.

SawStop has patents on just about every permutation of this tablesaw safety device. You look at their patents, and it's locked down really well. Then they write proposals to the CPSC tailored specifically to their patents.



> A detection system capable of detecting contact or dangerous proximity between a person and the saw


This is protected by at least patent numbers: 7024975 and 7171879



> A self-diagnostic capability to verify functionality of key components of the detection and reaction systems


Protected by at least patent: 7197969



> An interlock system with the motor so that power cannot be applied to the motor if a fault interfering with the functionality of a key component in the detection or reaction system is detected.


Again: 7197969

Then, there's my favorite! Patent 7357056. I call this "the catch all"


> The machine includes a cutting tool and a motor adapted to drive the cutting tool. The machine further includes a detection system to detect a dangerous condition between the cutting tool and a person, such as a person coming into contact with the cutting tool. A reaction system is provided to disable the cutting tool, such as by covering, blocking, destroying, wrapping, etc., upon detection by the detection system of the dangerous condition.


So let's see, they've patented the overall idea of detecting someone in a dangerous position. The logic of the mechanism. The detection of whether or not the saw blade is moving. The testing of a detection device. The stopping or covering of the blade, etc. Who can come up with something to compete.

All of these patents make it almost impossible to develop your own system for making a safer tablesaw.

So there's one person writing the rules for everyone to follow. I think the CPSC should at least wait until there's a competitor before taking the step to follow this proposal. Maybe mandate the riving knife is the first step towards safety.

Give the industry time to catch up to the technology.

Right now, I only know of one other system out there that is in development to compete with SawStop. Patents are applied for, but I believe that they won't get through because of SawStops "buffet" of patents.


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

rrbrown said:


> You can ignore my post if you like. However, since when in a free enterprise system would it be right for someone to spend there money and time inventing something to give to other companies for free so the company can make more money. Especially when you take in to consideration the thought and work that created this technology.Iif it was yours you would give it away for free right? I absolutely doubt it.


Him trying to get a govt. mandate to use his technology for profit is the problem. Understand?


----------



## TexasTimbers (Oct 17, 2006)

Microtus said:


> ... I rally need to change parties and become a registered Libertarian. .. .



Just a friendly reminder to all. We can discuss regulation and how it affects us as woodworkers, but if we start discussing parties, politicians or detailed pros and cons about certain political ideologies or philosophies we'll open the can of worms that is a political discussion. We can't do that. 

Micro, no big deal about what you said, but it did give me an opportunity to remind us all not to go past the discussioon of regulation in general and the SawStop situation in particular. 





.


----------



## bofa (Jul 17, 2010)

Also should add, competition alone would drive this technology. Let craftsman add this to their el cheapo bench saw and sales will sky rocket. The rest would follow.

As bad as it might seem that this guy is looking for a profit for his technology, why isn't anyone getting their panties in a wad about the collusion of these manufacturers to block this technology?

I hope he starts selling saws in the 300, 600, and 1000 range and takes a bite out of all of these companies.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

No TT you can skip over my post whenever you want and so can other. I doubt you will. :laughing:

I'm not so much in favor of forcing the technology but I can't believe the amount of people that think the big saw manufacturers are innocent here and he is bad. When is the last time big corporations played fair, gave a crap about anything but their pockets. Yet everyone thinks its Gass. I think it's more likely they tried to strong arm him and get his patent free or dirt cheap, however he was a patent attorney and I'm sure it it iron clad. I also think it is more likely they tried to block his efforts thinking they were bigger then him and he beat them by starting his own company. He may even be trying to get back at them a little but all in all he didn't just stumble across this technology. He was driven for what ever reason to invent this and he should be paid for it. Do you really think if one of the manufactureres came up with this technology they would share it with there competitors free of charge. No they would use it against each other to get the upper hand. 

I think allot of people are buying in on the idea that these major corporations are some how victims here. I don't see it.

Look I said this before, everyone has there own opinion and they are free to disagree with me no matter what it is. I'm a true believer that by joining the Marines to fight for others freedoms means that I may not always agree with them. I also think that big corporations especially, will take advantage of people and need to be checked on it from time to time. If not they control everything and you start losing some of your freedoms. The government is to serve and protect the people, that sometimes requires them regulating things. It's not perfect hell the Government is also in need of regulation through checks and balances. Anyone in power will take advantage of others given enough time. It's sad but true.


Oh, sorry about the bold and colors. My old eyes are not much behind yours. I thought it was a good idea but after looking at it you are probably right. :thumbsup:


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Thanks polyhedron*

polyhedron Great post no. 44 and informative.:thumbsup: If I needed a great new saw I'd get a Saw Stop, while it's till my choice. If it ever makes sense to get another, we'll see. Having taught a college level Industrial Design class to sophomores and juniors, safety was a prime consideration. Imagine a room full of sweet 18 yr old ladies who had never used a power tool much less a hammer....I would have loved to have one back then. Worst loss was a fingernail tip on a disc sander. They were not allowed on the Tablesaw or jointer.
I have a friend, very talented woodworker who runs a one man shop. He's got some of oldest, scariest, open housing exposed cutters, flat belts, running chains and wheels I've seen since I got off the farm with the PTO running the threshing machine. If OHSA were to come in he may be grandfathered in I don't know, but it's just as likely he would get shut down and be put out of business entirely, since he can't afford to upgrade to their standards. Yah, he could replace or make guards and covers, but he probably would still be dealing with some beaurocrat who could care less whether he stays in business or not, feeds his family or not, pays taxes or not....the "regulated society" becomes the controlled society .
I wonder if the Gass guy was a patent attorney, and if so he played the rules to a "T" . The lack of competition by patenting everything but the air in the shop is just as bad as any possible mandate.JMO There are no winners in this great and thoughtful debate, I think only losers...free enterprise and potentially all of us if a mandate comes to be. I'm with the cold dead fingers line in a post :gunsmilie:above on this one. You want 'em come and get'em. :furious: bill


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

woodnthings said:


> The lack of competition by patenting everything but the air in the shop is just as bad as any possible mandate.JMO There are no winners in this great and thoughtful debate, I think only losers...free enterprise and potentially all of us if a mandate comes to be. I'm with the cold dead fingers line in a post :gunsmilie:above on this one. You want 'em come and get'em. :furious: bill


Bill do you think if one of the other manufactureres got the patent they wouldn't have done the same types of patents? would they share the technology for free or try to put the other guy out of business? You know they have patents on your genes. If you get a decease that requires treatment/study of genes you can only go to places that have the patent. I think that is crazier then his patents on the saw design.

I never said they should come get your saws nor did anyone one else your just paranoid. :laughing: It's kind of like cars today they are smarter, safer and more expensive yet people still restore the old ones out of love for the car. You can keep your old saws even the ones with exposed belts and blades that's your choice but the new ones should be as safe as possible. Again about the price I listed the powermatic earlier and here is a link for the Unisaw same price as the Saw Stop so which one is over priced ?

I think that is one of the things that gets me riled up "Saw Stops are to expensive" "he just wants to get rich." His saws with the flesh sensing technology is the same price as the Unisaw and Powermatic both of which don't include the technology. Yet everyone is complaining about the price. They should be saying why is it that his saw is the same as yours without the technology. Just my .02


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

ACP said:


> Um..... I don't want to upset you but they are looking into that already too.....
> 
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16051436/


yeah, I had seen that. Now that is total BS. Another reason I will never go to the big cities.


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

rrbrown said:


> I think that is one of the things that gets me riled up "Saw Stops are to expensive" "he just wants to get rich." His saws with the flesh sensing technology is the same price as the Unisaw and Powermatic both of which don't include the technology. Yet everyone is complaining about the price. They should be saying why is it that his saw is the same as yours without the technology. Just my .02


Are SawStops even close in quality to Uni's and Powermatic's? Just asking. I think we need someone who is unbiased to answer that question. No offense. The cartridge is $60 - $90 just for the replacement part. Do you really think a saw manufacture could buy the complete assembly for $150? Not a chance in...... There are circuit boards, the cartridge, mounting hardware, just to begin with the parts involved. I'd have to venture that the Grizzly would go up by $400 to $500 easy. How many c-man jobsite saws that are currently $400 do you think they would sell with the extra on it for $800? Bye, bye to a big table saw market.


----------



## bofa (Jul 17, 2010)

Looking at the retail cartridge price and making assumptions on mass production manufacturing costs for the tech are not the same. Circuit boards, sensors, and hardware are not as expensive as you imagine.


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

bofa said:


> Looking at the retail cartridge price and making assumptions on mass production manufacturing costs for the tech are not the same. Circuit boards, sensors, and hardware are not as expensive as you imagine.


Do you think he would sell to them at cost?


----------



## bofa (Jul 17, 2010)

Nope , instead he offered to sell it for a portion of the proceeds. If he can make a high quality saw and sell it at the same price as other high quality saws do you really think his manufacturing cost is over the top with the added feature? Plus if the other companies did buy in, one way or another, manufacturing costs would be even cheaper.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

jstange2 said:


> Are SawStops even close in quality to Uni's and Powermatic's? Just asking. I think we need someone who is unbiased to answer that question. No offense. The cartridge is $60 - $90 just for the replacement part. Do you really think a saw manufacture could buy the complete assembly for $150? Not a chance in...... There are circuit boards, the cartridge, mounting hardware, just to begin with the parts involved. I'd have to venture that the Grizzly would go up by $400 to $500 easy. How many c-man jobsite saws that are currently $400 do you think they would sell with the extra on it for $800? Bye, bye to a big table saw market.


I know you said a unbiased opinion but that could be hard to do. I had a Grizzley 1023 lost it in Katrina replaced it with the Shop Fox equivalent which was sold to buy the SawStop after my accident. Both the other saws were very nice but after the SawStop I can see a difference in quality for sure. Finish, function ease of use and adjustment not to mention customer service. I looked at the Powermatic and Unisaw and I honestly feel the SawStop is as good or better in quality not to mention the Safety involved. I think allot of the problem is people think Gass started the lawsuit involving Osario which was outrages. However he only testified as an expert witness and about how the other companies handled the idea of his technology being incorporated into there saws. I think he is the only one qualified for that. 

As BOFA said cost to retool the saws was considered to have been cheaper if they all used it. That's where my problem with the manufactures comes in. I trully believe if it was offered at a reasonable cost then they were obligated to use it if for nothing other then customer safety. I trully believe they shut him down (no proof but that's my opinion) without concern for the millions of customers that had made their companies so big. If they can sell the saw for the same price as the others then somebody is lying and i don't think it's him. Could he be trying to get back at them maybe but If they tried to bully me I'd do what ever it took to get them also.

It actually sounds a little bit like your hearing what I have been trying to say, which I appreciate since sometimes I may not do as good of a job as I could at explaining . ( well According to the wife who I don't agree with ) I really don't like the government forcing things either but there are times companies think they're to big to have to do what is right and they need the nudge.

If I ticked anyone off that was not my intention but just as you have your opinion I have mine. that is what debate is. 

Even outnumbered I was a good Marine and I held my ground against an overwhelming objective force. :laughing: 

Good or bad I am who I am.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

polyhedron said:


> I for one really like the SawStop, it's excellent technology. I do not like the way they are trying to ram it down our throat, and the CPSC is eating it up like a hungry hog.
> 
> SawStop has patents on just about every permutation of this tablesaw safety device. You look at their patents, and it's locked down really well. Then they write proposals to the CPSC tailored specifically to their patents.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the info your obviously a lawyer or have some law experience. Would the saw manufacturers in your opinion have tried to get the patents just like he did? Isn't that the purpose of getting the patent to protect your invention?

His feeding the CPSC is subject to some scrutiny I agree but I differ on the why. I trully believe he is responding to them trying to block his idea and or steal it for all intents and purposes. He's trying to get revenge for the way they treated him. That makes more sense then the new small kid on the block starting a fight with all the other big kids at one time. Just my .02


----------



## BWSmith (Aug 24, 2010)

This isn't and should NOT be pick on _____ (fill in whomever's name)day.Buy whatever you bloomin want to.........uh,that there is the American way.Force feeding however has never gone over real big with any of the girls I go with.

The thing is "dumb" because its after the fact.Simply work on technology that would shut power off AND use a calipre(the blade is already a rotor))that WON'T mess up blade........when your hand crosses "the" line.IOWs if a body part gets to within 8"(or whtever Mr Engineer deems necessary)the pwr gets cut and the disc brake slams shut.

The above took less than 5 seconds to figure out.Just goes to show however that you can have NON-DESTRUCTIVE safety devices that are BEFORE the fact.......and it can be retro fit on any bloomin saw.And yeah,you can have that idea.....if it saves one finger.Haha,BW


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

Here is my official stance. I think the flesh sensing technology is a good tool. I think that schools and teaching centers that use tablesaws should have them. I was a teenager at one time and know how flighty the brain can be even at times when you need all of your concentration on a dangerous piece of equipment. That being said, the government has already overstepped their bounds in sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo many instances. If people are adamant about flesh sensing technology, they WILL buy sawstop saws. This WILL take sales away from other said brands. This WILL then lead to the said brands making deals with Gass, or developing something else (within the constrictions that his patents will allow). THAT is how industry works. You don't go to congress because you want money and expect to get a law passed that will make you rich. The point I am trying to make here is this. We deserve the RIGHT to choose for ourselves. Government making decisions for us is veeeerrrrrrrrrrryyyyyyyyyyy baaaddddddd. The government has a very bad reputation of not knowing how to run a business. IE....the national deficit If I were bringing in $100,000 per year and spending $200,000, I would be in jail. Nuff said.


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

Some more diverse opinions. Let me know if I can't post this type of link.
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?158765-Todays-USA-today-TS-article


----------



## BassBlaster (Nov 21, 2010)

rrbrown said:


> If I ticked anyone off that was not my intention but just as you have your opinion I have mine. that is what debate is.
> 
> Even outnumbered I was a good Marine and I held my ground against an overwhelming objective force. :laughing:
> 
> Good or bad I am who I am.


 Didnt tick me off. Were aloud to disagree. I actually stopped posting to this thread for fear of offending someone. I'm a member of other forums where people are not aloud to have any kind of debate. As soon as a conversation like this starts up, it gets shut down. I'm glad it was aloud to continue here. Nothing wrong with debate unless it gets personal.

I love this site and I'm one of the new guys so making enemy's(sp) didnt sound like a good idea. I have recieved a lot of help from people here and would like more help in the future so I just decided to shut up, lol.

By the way, thank you for your service!


----------



## reprosser (May 19, 2010)

I started to write out a post to clarify some points and present some thought provoking aspects, but I realized that for most, it seems to be an emotional issue that is not going to change, so there just does not seem to be much point.

...and yet I still come back each day to see if there is anything new in the thread :icon_smile:

I am glad to see that the SS threads are able to stay active for a while now. They were/were almost banned from most forums for a while. Maybe we are all getting better at civil communication on controversial topics.


For the record, I have a Sawstop.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

BassBlaster said:


> Didnt tick me off. Were aloud to disagree. I actually stopped posting to this thread for fear of offending someone. I'm a member of other forums where people are not aloud to have any kind of debate. As soon as a conversation like this starts up, it gets shut down. I'm glad it was aloud to continue here. Nothing wrong with debate unless it gets personal.
> 
> I love this site and I'm one of the new guys so making enemy's(sp) didnt sound like a good idea. I have recieved a lot of help from people here and would like more help in the future so I just decided to shut up, lol.
> 
> By the way, thank you for your service!


Your Welcome and yes they allow this type debate which I like also. I can get carried away sometimes. Again my wife claims I'm so damn competitive as if it's a problem. :laughing::laughing::laughing:


----------



## snookfish (Jan 10, 2011)

It seems to me the only real possibility that could ever come from this is that at some point all tablesaws sold will be fitted with some kind of "sawstop" technology. maybe his patent doesn't last that long and someone else joins in on producing a similiar system. either way, if for some reason all new tablesaws are fitted with sawstop technology, surely the mass production will bring the cost below $150 due to shear quantity. Honestly, I would buy a sawstop tablesaw for that feature alone, reguadrless of how careful I am and have been, I like knowing the sawstop is there and no matter how much it adds to the cost, if you have ever been to an emergancy room for anything remotely related to a deep cut or broken bone, even with insurance you aren't getting out of the hospital without giving them a check for at least $1000. So all my fingers attached to my hands are worth $150. i don't like the government angle, but from a cost perspective I'd go along with it.


----------



## Zircon (Aug 1, 2009)

THAT is how industry works. You don't go to congress because you want money and expect to get a law passed that will make you rich. The point I am trying to make here is this. We deserve the RIGHT to choose for ourselves. Government making decisions for us is veeeerrrrrrrrrrryyyyyyyyyyy baaaddddddd. The government has a very bad reputation of not knowing how to run a business. IE....the national deficit If I were bringing in $100,000 per year and spending $200,000, I would be in jail. Nuff said.
[/QUOTE]
That is exactly how you get rich today. Get a law p assed that requires ethanol in gas. Get laws passed to deregulate the banking industry to rip off consumers. Defense industry-Get your lobbiests working in congress to require useless weapons systems-etc.etc


----------



## GeorgeC (Jul 30, 2008)

BassBlaster said:


> Thats what we need, more Government regulation!!! Geesh, enough is enough.
> 
> If you want to own a SawStop, by all means buy a SawStop. Dont force it down the throats of everyone.


I could not agree with you more!!!

I do not think that any new government regulation should be allowed until 3 old ones are abolished!!!

George


----------



## GeorgeC (Jul 30, 2008)

BassBlaster said:


> Didnt tick me off. Were aloud to disagree. I actually stopped posting to this thread for fear of offending someone. I'm a member of other forums where people are not aloud to have any kind of debate. As soon as a conversation like this starts up, it gets shut down. I'm glad it was aloud to continue here. Nothing wrong with debate unless it gets personal.
> 
> I love this site and I'm one of the new guys so making enemy's(sp) didnt sound like a good idea. I have recieved a lot of help from people here and would like more help in the future so I just decided to shut up, lol.
> 
> By the way, thank you for your service!


You are allowed to disagree or post anything you want. Just do not get mad when someone disagrees with you.

People are going to disagree with you regardless of what point you post. There will always be someone with an opposite view.

That is allowed.

George


----------



## H. A. S. (Sep 23, 2010)

Here's a question from jstange's link I find interesting:

"I have seen many SawStop demonstrations on video and it looks to me that the demo hot dog is moving much slower than most people push a piece of wood through a table saw. Keep in mind that at a slightly faster working speed, you finger will be going through the blade a little faster. Only one tooth on your blade has to travel about 1/2" or so to remove your finger. Does the SawStop work that fast? Can someone here run a hot dog through their SawStop at a normal working speed and post the results?"


Most people losing digits aren't going to be feeding their stock at such slow speeds. When your table saw is set up right, you can feed the stock faster, (such as industrial, production environments) so, it's about the speed of approach to the blade.

Thoughts?


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

H. A. S. said:


> Here's a question from jstange's link I find interesting:
> 
> "I have seen many SawStop demonstrations on video and it looks to me that the demo hot dog is moving much slower than most people push a piece of wood through a table saw. Keep in mind that at a slightly faster working speed, you finger will be going through the blade a little faster. Only one tooth on your blade has to travel about 1/2" or so to remove your finger. Does the SawStop work that fast? Can someone here run a hot dog through their SawStop at a normal working speed and post the results?"
> 
> ...


I'm going to test mine at the end of the month to show some family members that are woodworkers how it works. At $60 a cartridge you won't find many that want to test it just to do it.

This should answer your question also.
http://www.sawmillcreek.org/showthread.php?158765-Todays-USA-today-TS-article&p=1626562#post1626562


----------



## toollovingschultz (Jan 10, 2011)

this is obviusly a heated topic one thing though if your kid was in shop class and his finger was saved by saw stop is it worth it? Maybe the saw stop or similiar technology would keep the shop class from being shut down what is that worth ? If your employeee only gets a small nick on his finger instead of a amputatio how much money does it save you in insurance cost? I have a small scar on my pointer finger left hand and a similiar one on my right thumb 2 warnings after from cutting small pieces in the field with a portable table saw after the second time I invested in a track saw and a bridge and to build a power bench and other tools from eurekazone so the wood would be trapped under something and held in place the dead wood concept. It is nice when we do these things on our own The first nick was after 20 years experience with power tools and no accidents how much would loosing a finger or a hand cost us? It could cost you your livlihood what is that worth having to retrain or use a prosthetic?


----------



## TexasTimbers (Oct 17, 2006)

reprosser said:


> . . . I am glad to see that the SS threads are able to stay active for a while now. They were/were almost banned from most forums for a while. Maybe we are all getting better at civil communication on controversial topics.


The reason this thread is still active is because our members don't engage in "name-calling" (personal attacks), and we don't trash-talk a woodworking company or the CEO of such a company in a personal way. If someone has negative critique regarding a company big or small, and wants to warn others they better back it up with facts. This is a partial quote from a post at another forum where I am a member:

_The owner of Saw Stop is an unscupulous business man._​

While the member had much else to say about the SS and the technology etc. he didn't explain why he made such a derogatory statement about someone. If I see something like that here I would give the member a chance to explain what he meant by that, and if he couldn't I would consider that comment to be a libelous attack not worthy of the time it takes to read and I would remove it.

It's a controversial subject to be sure and emotional to many, but as long as people remain civil with one another and respectful of others' opinions, we can discuss it with all the passion we want. Don't you just love WWT? 











.


----------



## Firewalker (Jan 3, 2011)

It seems to me that the new proposal is written in such a way that it describes saw stop pretty dead on. If you watch the commercial on their site the hot dog cut looks to be just about what they proposed to be the max damage to a finger. 

I think the technology is pretty brilliant.........yay for him for coming up with it. I don't know if the blade is totally boned should the feature activate. Is there a clutch or some other type of mechanism to absorb all of that rotational energy in such a violently abrupt stop? If not you would think the arbor would crack or snap off.

It's great technology and I enjoy the freedom of take it or leave it. I think it should be a personal call on what you buy and take responsibility for your actions. Motorcycle helmet laws for instance. I support the fact that I can ride with or without it. I choose to wear it because I feel like my coconut is better protected with it on. This is an age old argument with the chin strap breaking your neck vs road rash face/crushed skull. 

Make your choice and go with it. The government can stay the hell out of my Koolaid.

Scott


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

Firewalker said:


> It seems to me that the new proposal is written in such a way that it describes saw stop pretty dead on. If you watch the commercial on their site the hot dog cut looks to be just about what they proposed to be the max damage to a finger.
> 
> I think the technology is pretty brilliant.........yay for him for coming up with it. I don't know if the blade is totally boned should the feature activate. Is there a clutch or some other type of mechanism to absorb all of that rotational energy in such a violently abrupt stop? If not you would think the arbor would crack or snap off.
> 
> ...


 Yes it's design absorbs the sudden stop but that involves the entire guts of the saw including the trunnions which is why its not able to be retro fit.


----------



## maxwoodshop (Feb 7, 2011)

i feel like its to late now not to make the tech. a mandate on all saws. the cats allready out of the bag so to speak. say if you have an employe get hurt whats to stop them from sueing, and winning crazies suites seems to be all to easy. please dont get me wrong im all about smaller gov., but until we get these law suits under control, id say it would be better to live with the mandate than help put another penny into a personal injury lawers pocket!


----------



## FiveOneSix (Sep 26, 2009)

*what a Gass****...*

i don't want this turd getting my money but my hands are what feed my mouth...and i want a family soon and i need to feed them as well...plus i have a CRAZY passion for drums...but after a bowling incident almost ruined my left hand (and no it wasn't the ball return haha) i want this technology on my saw.
playing drums, playing ice hockey and woodworking are the 3 things that keep me sane...if i cut off any of my fingers...well i'd lose a hell of a lot more then just some digits!!!
i don't like what he's doing but if someone else doesn't come up with some competition soon...i might have to go with the sawstop.
i am all about it not being forced...but who wouldn't want this feature?!?!
i truly believe i respect the saw enough to lessen my chances of getting cut...but iv'e seen some pro's have some scary close calls! a family friend, a woodworker for over 30 years just recently cut off all 4 fingers! i guess the fact that he was almost drunk doesn't help.
sorry for the novel...i'll shut up now haha!


----------



## burkhome (Sep 5, 2010)

Anybody seen thishttp://whirlwindtool.com/


----------



## Nate1778 (Mar 10, 2008)

You guys won't have to worry about the government, insurance companies will require before they do and as of right now they is officially private sector. My last dance with the saw cost my insurance company $14,000.00 and change. Hmm insurance pays $14,000 or requires homeowner to by a Sawstop, guess you know where thats going.


----------



## toollovingschultz (Jan 10, 2011)

*table saw safety*

The reason the goverment steps in can be illustrated in a conversation I had with another trim carpenter. He noticed I had a slotted freud blade on my table saw and he told me it was dangerous becaus he used his finger to stop the blade before on a table saw with a slotted blade and tore off his finger nail. He proceeded to tell me his old boss taught him to do this and it was a habit. I promptly told him not to use my saw!! With the people in charge having this attitude it gives the goverment reason to demand more safety from the manufacturer. Any thing that will keep amputations down and insurance cost down is good in my book!

If insurance companies offered a discount for people who had equipment like this then maybe government wouldn't have to make laws. Wait did I say insurance companies giving someone a break I must have been joking. A lot of long time woodworkers I know are missing a finger or have had a bad accident that cost a lot of money. I really can't afford to loose a finger or have the down time a accident like that would cost me I think the technology is good.I also think there are safer ways of doing things but people are very stubborn.


----------



## mdntrdr (Dec 22, 2009)

burkhome said:


> Anybody seen thishttp://whirlwindtool.com/


 
Interesting.

Resetable, with dust extraction.

Thanks for posting. :smile:


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

Saw Stop has been a debate of one sort or another since it came out. I've nicked my thumb, and fortunately it was just a flesh wound that needed stitches. I could go on and on about how many hours per day six days a week I operate a table saw. That doesn't mean squat. So, what is an "accident"? Did the tool screw up or was it the operator. I'll venture a WAG, that it's the operator. I haven't seen exact statistics, but what would be interesting is of the accidents reported, were all the safety items in use that came with the saw, or available for it?

I have driven several guys to the hospital with their hands wrapped in a towel. Just the look on their faces tells it all. So, finally there is a saw that is intended to help out those that stick their fingers in the blade. I wish I invented it. I can't blame the inventor for whatever he wants to do. It does seem like his actions may be self serving...so what. 

I haven't seen any figures on what amount of money he spent from the git go to bring the saw to market. I'll bet it was a small fortune. I hear a lot of complaining about the cost of the saw, the modules, government intervention, and the money Gass wants to make. If operators keep sticking their fingers into a running blade...maybe somebody should step in to protect them. The question still lingers as to what your fingers are worth.












 







.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

burkhome said:


> Anybody seen thishttp://whirlwindtool.com/


No I haven't seen that but thanks for posting. 

My opinion from the start. It's a guard which looks like more trouble then a normal guard and they get removed all the time. Removed guards is why they have so many accidents. I don't think it will be as effective at stopping amputations or be as cost effective as Saw Stop. Now with That said, Gass has everything else patented so good for him for being able to squeeze something in. It looks slower then Saw Stop but is reusable. It also seams to be a easy retrofit.

As stated Insurance will cause the flesh sensing technology to be on all new saws. Homeowners policies will start having no coverage for damage by saws. Work places will be forced to have them or face not being insured or have premiums costing more then if they bought the saw.


----------



## wrkcrw00 (Apr 12, 2010)

TexasTimbers said:


> Richard, I cannot read the posts where you use such an abundance of *bolds* and reds and *red bolds*, it's just too busy for my slow eyes. That's just me, but see, I have the choice to read those posts or to just scan them, or skip them altogether. It has nothing to do with what I think of you as a person so let's be clear about that. But do you think it would be a violation of my natural rights if I were forced to read your posts? Would that be acceptable since from your perspective, me being forced to read your posts would enlighten me, making the world a safer, better place for all of us and thus a justifiable regulation?
> 
> I want a Sawstop. I just don't want a gun pointed at me should I refuse to get one if mandated.
> 
> .


That's the key...it's about choice. I think SawStop is cool, but must not become required. it should be my choice whether i want it or not. It has nothing to do with the cost of the tech, who else wants or doesn't want it, or injury stats. my tools should be based on my choice.

btw...if you make something "idiot proof", society will just produce better idiots.


----------



## polyhedron (Feb 10, 2011)

No, I'm not a lawyer.

Here's the issue with tablesaw manufacturers and why they didn't take it from the beginning.

Imagine that you are a Tsaw manufacturer and you have a whole line of saws that you already sell and make a profit from. They have blade guards, riving knives, etc installed, which when used make the saw fairly safe. Then someone comes to you and shows you this flesh sensing technology which looks really cool and works well. You think to yourself "man this would be awesome to put this on our saw and stop people from getting hurt on our saw when they remove the guard that they are not supposed to remove". We wouldn't have to spend as much time in court battling against consumers who CHOOSE to use a saw without (key) following rules set forth in the user manual, such as using a blade guard.

This will work great on our PM2000, Unisaw, etc!

Hmmm, but what about the 64? Gosh that saw will have to go up to $2199. I doubt they will sell at that price. So I can't put the technology on that saw until there's a cheaper solution.

Meanwhile, I install SawStop technology on all my PM2000s. Then a week later, Johnny, cuts himself on the 64 he bought last Saturday. The lawyer says, "You knowingly sold a saw without a safety device that would have prevented Johnny from losing his finger". It doesn't matter that he was using the saw incorrectly, it was shipped from the factory without all possible safety devices available.

Johnny gets paid $3 million dollars for that finger.

Then, also, what happens when the technology fails?

----------------------------------------------------------

About Whirlwind tool. There's a metal band around the blade guard that detects the change in capitance when someone touches the band. This is very close to dangerous proximity stated in SawStop's patents. I'm not sure how the blade stopping mechanism works, I would imagine it's a solenoid holding a blade brake in the open condition.

Keep in mind, most accidents on the tablesaw happen with the blade guard removed.

The only way this gets through is if SawStop makes a business decision and chooses not to challenge this patent attempt in an attempt to have another "competitive" flesh sensing technology on the market. Whirlwindtool is much inferior to SawStop technology at this time and has years of development to catch up.


----------



## polyhedron (Feb 10, 2011)

Richard, It's not really about homeowner insurance or shop insurance.

It's about manufacturer liability. If a manufacturer other than SawStop licenses this technology, then it will all fall like a house of cards. All it will take is for one to cross the line (other than SawStop). Then they will all have to do something because of product liability.

I'm not so sure a manufacturer who's selling saws today isn't taking a huge risk. Only time will tell.

The technology is here, and I'm sure it's only a matter of time before all saws, big and small will have this on them.


----------



## TexasTimbers (Oct 17, 2006)

I'm not a patent attorney but I can say with near certainty, one or more R & D departments are currently working feverishly on instantaneous blade-stopping apparatus that will not violate any of the SS patents. I can also say with near certainty one or more will succeed eventually. And even if if one of the safety device we will see comong onto the market within the next few years is eventually ruled on by some judge, it will have taken years of litigation and during that time hundreds of millions of dollars will have been made. 

Bankruptcy and reorganization and entity structuring prior to such a ruling, far enough in advance to sidestep the "structuring" window is not uncommon and SS can't get blood from turnips. This is why corporations pay sinful sums of money to entire law firms on a full time basis; they learned long ago not be reactionary but to employ firms that are constantly monitoring their client's strategies and business model, making frequent maneuvers that you never see or hear about. 

Take the recent sale of Delta to Chueng or whate er the company is named. None of us know what that was really all about. It could be just as it appears, a company selling out in whole or in part, but it could be something altogether different than what it appears for reasons we'll never know. For us commoners to be sitting around saying this will happen this way, and that will happen that way, and the patents are air tight, and the SS is the only and best method to accomplish safety . . . well, this is all poppycock. We can't see the future and usually can't even guess close. It could be that SS itself goes boobs up in the near future for all we know and some ROC company comes in and buys the patent rights. Next thing you know Grizzly saws have the SS technology and are selling their tables saws for about the same price as they did before. 

None of us know what _tomorrow _will bring, much less a year or ten years down the road.














.


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

wrkcrw00 said:


> That's the key...it's about choice. I think SawStop is cool, but must not become required. it should be my choice whether i want it or not. It has nothing to do with the cost of the tech, who else wants or doesn't want it, or injury stats. my tools should be based on my choice.
> 
> *btw...if you make something "idiot proof", society will just produce better idiots.*


I agree. I would have no problem if every single tablesaw built had the technology on it. I just don't like the govt. trying to make it a law and FORCING it on us and the manufacturers. When someone else gets some technology figured out, I WILL buy theirs. It will probably be better anyway. The first is usually the rough try.


----------



## cowboy dan (Apr 11, 2010)

the guy who invented the sawstop had before tried several retro fit applications. nothing worked. that is why it it's expensive. but see, seat belts are in every car. the sawstop is just the sawstop. all one needs to do is make a few changes in their design. he doesn't have a retro fit patent. that doesn't mean someone else can't. if he makes it rich, he deserves it. i met the inventor and i assure he is no scumbag. it's time other manufacturers follow suit. when i was a kid being tought, one thing was mentioned every day.... finish with all your didgets! then grab a broom. i don't have the sawstop and i worry every day i hit that switch, this might be the day. respect for the tool is one thing... not having to worry, is better. like every thing else that is new, it's expensive, if other ts companies make them it would drive the price down. here is an example: xbox360 when it first came out it was $600, now i can buy one for $179. blue ray is the newest technology. my father inlaw payed $500 to be one of the first owner of one lol, now look at the price. all i can say is, the future looks pretty if you could get on board now and maybe invest rather than be grumpy at the idea of change. i for one look forward to getting one... one day


----------



## glh17 (Jul 7, 2010)

Discussions over the size and role of govt. in society are interesting but the train has left the station when it comes to table saw safety. Regardless what the CPSC decides with respect to flesh sensitive technology, saw manufactures are in a heads you win tails I lose position in the long run. 

If the CPSC doesn't require it, courts and insurers are going to effectively mandate it. Manufactures may win the majority of lawsuits over injuries, but there's bound to be more loses with substantial awards. The potential risks of following the present road will become untenable. 

Barring complete capitulation to SS technology requirements, about the best the manufacturers can do is to work with the CPSC to establish new standards that hopefully will stand the test of civil lawsuits. This will require a new strategy on the part of manufactures. They fought the new standards on the riving knife but have learned to live with it. They should have realized this during the debate leading up to the 2005 standard that required riving knifes on new saws. They need to start thinking seriously about new ways to make their saws safer or else the table saw industry will face drastic change in the future. Necessity is the mother of invention and the power tool industry needs to think innovation when it comes to safety.

This is the way I see it. But, of course I could be wrong.


----------



## rrich (Jun 24, 2009)

Let me put it this way.

If you want to depend upon a flesh sensing system to protect you on a table saw, you are not welcome in my shop.

HOWEVER

If you want to learn the safe method to use a table saw so that you will be save on my table saw and any other table saw, I will gladly take the time to teach you.

In my shop, those are your only two options.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

TexasTimbers said:


> I'm not a patent attorney but I can say with near certainty, one or more R & D departments are currently working feverishly on instantaneous blade-stopping apparatus that will not violate any of the SS patents. I can also say with near certainty one or more will succeed eventually. And even if *if one of the safety device we will see comong onto the market within the next few years is eventually ruled on by some judge, it will have taken years of litigation and during that time hundreds of millions of dollars will have been made. *
> 
> *Bankruptcy and reorganization and entity structuring prior to such a ruling, far enough in advance to sidestep the "structuring" window is not uncommon and SS can't get blood from turnips. This is why corporations pay sinful sums of money to entire law firms on a full time basis; they learned long ago not be reactionary but to employ firms that are constantly monitoring their client's strategies and business model, making frequent maneuvers that you never see or hear about. *
> 
> ...


TT you make allot of my case with statements like these. Corporations spend tons of money on law firms trying to be up one on the competition. They use them to overwhelm normal people in Lawsuits for bankruptcy/reorganization and if they could they would use them to steal/break the Saw Stop patents. Everything is about making more money at any cost. Yet everyone makes it out that Gass is the bad guy.

If Gass is selling a comparable quality saw to the Powermatic ans Unisaw but with the added safety why couldn't they do the same with the technology. They will spend more money fighting lawsuits, trying to break his patents and or trying to fight the change then it would have cost to work with him and implement the new technology at a reasonable cost.

As far as the cost $150 extra per saw, that would be for materials needed for the technology and to retool the manufacturing plants. He himself was asking for 8% (originally reported as 15%) of the wholesale price of each saw so lets say $24 on an el cheapo saw with the new technology and $200 on a high end cabinet saw. He's making allot of money but most of the cost is for the parts and retooling. I'm sure if they really wanted to they could have negotiated it down a little more



*When in this life time did the big bad heartless Manufacturers and there CEO's become helpless victims. I feel like I'm in a Twilight zone. *:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

cowboy dan said:


> the guy who invented the sawstop had before tried several retro fit applications. nothing worked. *that is why it it's expensive.* but see, seat belts are in every car. the sawstop is just the sawstop. all one needs to do is make a few changes in their design. he doesn't have a retro fit patent. that doesn't mean someone else can't. if he makes it rich, he deserves it. i met the inventor and i assure he is no scumbag. it's time other manufacturers follow suit. when i was a kid being tought, one thing was mentioned every day.... finish with all your didgets! then grab a broom. i don't have the sawstop and i worry every day i hit that switch, this might be the day. respect for the tool is one thing... not having to worry, is better. like every thing else that is new, it's expensive, if other ts companies make them it would drive the price down. here is an example: xbox360 when it first came out it was $600, now i can buy one for $179. blue ray is the newest technology. my father inlaw payed $500 to be one of the first owner of one lol, now look at the price. all i can say is, the future looks pretty if you could get on board now and maybe invest rather than be grumpy at the idea of change. i for one look forward to getting one... one day


The point about it being expensive is falsely based on comparing it to the wrong typr of saw. Yes it's more then a Jet, Rigid, Grizzly and such but so are the Unisaw and Powermatic which are the same quality as the SawStop but they don't have the Safety feature. If it is expensive, then the Unisaw and especially the Powermatic or way over priced.



rrich said:


> Let me put it this way.
> 
> If you want to depend upon a flesh sensing system to protect you on a table saw, you are not welcome in my shop.
> 
> ...


No I have two other options

I would like to use and treat a SawStop with the same respect as any other saw, yet in the event something does happen no injury needing more then a small band aid.

I can choose to use my shop and not yours.:laughing::laughing:


----------



## ACP (Jan 24, 2009)

For what it's worth, I can see both sides of this argument. For the record I am against mandating this technology. The thought of this being required doesn't sit well with me. I understand these companies are in this for profit too. Ford knew about the problem with the Pinto too, but deemed it cheaper to deal with the suits than recall the cars. What I would like to see is a number from the government showing that all of their table saws have flesh sensing technology. From the woodshops in federal prisons, to the shiops of the Seabees, do they have sawstops in place? If they don't why is this even being brought up? Good leadership leads by example. That in mind I wonder how many saws the fed's would have to replace and at what cost to taxpayers. State governments too for that matter. Oh well, guess we can always borrow more money from China....


----------



## H. A. S. (Sep 23, 2010)

Government leading by example? Does that mean we can all be thieves and get away with it?


----------



## burkhome (Sep 5, 2010)

ACP said:


> For what it's worth, I can see both sides of this argument. For the record I am against mandating this technology. The thought of this being required doesn't sit well with me. I understand these companies are in this for profit too. Ford knew about the problem with the Pinto too, but deemed it cheaper to deal with the suits than recall the cars. What I would like to see is a number from the government showing that all of their table saws have flesh sensing technology. From the woodshops in federal prisons, to the shiops of the Seabees, do they have sawstops in place? If they don't why is this even being brought up? Good leadership leads by example. That in mind I wonder how many saws the fed's would have to replace and at what cost to taxpayers. State governments too for that matter. Oh well, guess we can always borrow more money from China....


 Now you no that the status quo mandates that government exempt themselves from the laws they make.


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

rrbrown said:


> *When in this life time did the big bad heartless Manufacturers and there CEO's become helpless victims. I feel like I'm in a Twilight zone. *:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:


I could care less about the manufacturers. I want to keep my civil liberties until my grandchildren's grandchildren are finally put in the ground. Maybe I'm being selfish wanting to make my own decisions instead of someone making them for me.

PS. I would have no problem with insurers requiring the technology. That actually makes sense since it would be in their best interest in case of an accident.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

jstange2 said:


> I could care less about the manufacturers. I want to keep my civil liberties until my grandchildren's grandchildren are finally put in the ground. Maybe I'm being selfish wanting to make my own decisions instead of someone making them for me.
> 
> PS. I would have no problem with insurers requiring the technology. That actually makes sense since it would be in their best interest in case of an accident.



Ok your anti government I'm OK with that because there is a legitimate problem involving too large of a government and on over regulating, I agree. 

Lets clarify you want no regulation right? Everyone is responsible for themselves you are as free as a bird.
Do away with all regulation on pollution, safety, construction. Should we do away with laws because they are just another form of regulation. We can go back to the old days when it was the quickest draw and best shot that decided who was right. Maybe it should be who has the most money and influence. Big corporations decide what they want us to have, lead painted toys for kids, dump all the radioactive wast in the local water system because we can. Pollute the air because it's cheaper, build unsafe cars, oh here's a good one no regulation or insurance for banks and financial institutions. Let all the CEO's and corporations make as much money as they can and it's up to them to not rip off the little guys like us. I believe history has shown What big companies would do if they had no regulation. Corruption, unfair business practices, serious heath problems and taking advantage of the public to name a few, all in the name of a bigger profit.

Just go back and look at the banking problems, Make bad loans so that the banks make more money, get ordinary people to invest in there bad loans and shady deals while paying them selves huge salaries and bonuses. The system falls apart and they need to be bailed out. Me I think they should have all went under (the Banks) new ones would have taken over. The government stepped in because if not allot of ordinary folks would have lost there entire savings if it was in the investments the banks were doing and in the insured money that would have been lost. 

I didn't like the bail out and neither did anyone else but the whole problem was linked back to lack of regulation or oversight. I didn't have any money in investments. I live a little better then month to month because I have a little savings but If they let the banks fail the economy would probably be worse now. There are allot of things that government does to spend money not involved in regulation that is wasteful and stupid. Regulation no matter how much we hate it is here to protect us from the problems of the past.

Hell if were going to the days of the gun fighter, I'm ready.:gunsmilie:


----------



## BassBlaster (Nov 21, 2010)

rrbrown said:


> Hell if were going to the days of the gun fighter, I'm ready.:gunsmilie:


 Me too!!!!!!


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

BassBlaster said:


> Me too!!!!!!


Mine was with a Glock model, how about yours? Oh you have quite a few in the 9 ring and seem to have jerked one into the 8 ring but impressive. Although it looks like you have more shots then I did. :laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:


----------



## TexasTimbers (Oct 17, 2006)

rrbrown said:


> TT you make allot of my case with statements like these. . . .


Uh, no, I don't. I make my case. You took my words and just pretended they reinforce your case, in whatever convoluted form it may currently be. :wacko: 




rrbrown said:


> . . . Yet everyone makes it out that Gass is the bad guy. . . .


I've not ever even typed the name "Gass" until just now. I haven't alluded to him either at least not intentionally. Richard, I hope this thread doesn't give you a stroke. I appreciate your passion and have no lack of it with certain topics myself. When I get all riled up I have a buddy on the forum that will send me a PM short and sweet that goes something like:

_"Hey man, you might want to go post in the Off Topic section for a while. Take a deep breath." _


Not saying you should, just sayin' . . . . . . 







.


----------



## BassBlaster (Nov 21, 2010)

rrbrown said:


> Mine was with a Glock model, how about yours? Oh you have quite a few in the 9 ring and seem to have jerked one into the 8 ring but impressive. Although it looks like you have more shots then I did. :laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:


 Mine was 50 shots each target with a Springfield XDm 9mm. That was the first time I ever shot that gun. For some reason I never seemed to improve with it so I sold it. I have a Springfield XD 40 sub compact that I just love. Its my EDC weapon. I can keep all of em in the red with that little thing. I really like the looks of the new gen Glocks. I have never owned a Glock but would like to shoot one.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

TexasTimbers said:


> Uh, no, I don't. I make my case. You took my words and just pretended they reinforce your case, in whatever convoluted form it may currently be. :wacko:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I didn't pretend, I highlighted them and in black for easy reading. As for Gass I'd have to look back on that one. 

I think your friend is sending you a pm as I post. You sound a little riled.
:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

polyhedron said:


> *No, I'm not a lawyer.*
> 
> Here's the issue with tablesaw manufacturers and why they didn't take it from the beginning.
> 
> ...


OK your not a lawyer and yet you have allot of info on this such as patent info on both Saw Stop and Wirlwind tool. How did you get that info if you don't mind me asking?

Your theory about the model 64 could carry more weight if you didn't use distorted figures. You added like a thousand dollars to incorporate the Saw Stop technology where it would be more in the $250 range according to all reports. 

The point about it being on one saw and not others is valid and that's also why the proposal was to put it on all saws which would reduce cost because of the volume of saws being changed. I will add this the $99 bench top saws would be the biggest sticking point but if you added the $150 to that you may out price the saw to some. Personally I would think they could offset some of it to more expensive saws , help in creating ways to lower that cost or just live with it. I have no idea what type of saws have more accidents linked to them but it would be interesting to know. Problem is most emergency room people just know its a table saw or like one doctor said about mine "A circular type saw." They don't know the difference. 

My last thing is the verdict although no name was mentioned I'm assuming we are working with the Osario case or something like it. That case was ridiculously out of balance and the verdict will probably be removed or reduced at appeal.


----------



## bofa (Jul 17, 2010)

I'm not saying government regulation should apply to everything, but it has its place. Those complaining about requiring a safety feature are also the same people that protect themselves and their families with other government mandated safety features (seatbelts, smoke detectors, etc). 

There are quite a few policies I disagree with, but safety features are rarely one of them. And even then if you really want to show them who's boss you can choose to not use them or disable them. Just ask the 17000 or so people that die each year choosing not to wear their seatbelt.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*I hope this makes sense*

If I needed a great new table saw, I'd get a Saw Stop. I don't.... but that could change.
I don't like government "control" but a certain amount of "regulation" is necessary to keep traffic flowing and things running smoothly in a large society. Where you draw the line is always the issue. The worst case I experience is in traffic "controls" where you spend minutes waiting for a light to change when the traffic is obviously clear, wasting time and millions of gallons of gasoline, if you figure all the lights across the country, soon to be $5.00, a gallon...dumb. If the traffic is clear, and I'll be the judge of that, turn or cross, or proceed with caution etc.
I don't believe in gun control, and "regulating" who gets them, is well meaning, but impossible to prevent or predict, so in that case I believe in being on equal footing with the criminals everywhere I go.
Having the government regulate the home shop environment, no matter what the reason is an "unreasonable" intrusion on my freedoms. 
Union shops and school shops and prison shops are different, public funds/tax dollars are involved, and so it's the "public safety" so the government will probably get involved and they may dictate which tools can be used, I donno, but I can see it coming.
If the government stays out of my shop and my gun cabinet, I'll be just fine. I bought more guns when Clinton was president and so did everyone else I know than ever before, just as there was a rush to buy them in Nevada after the recent shooting because people feared a government shut down of sales.
People should not fear their government, the government should fear it's people. Go Egypt! :thumbsup: bill


----------



## itguy08 (Jan 23, 2011)

This sure is an interesting topic. Couple of points:

1. This is not like seat belts, air bags, etc. Those are good safety features but they did not become standard because the owner of all seat belt or air bag technology lobbied the government to put them in all cars (and line his pockets with money). That's what the owner of Saw Stop did and it doesn't sit well with me.

2. The legal system needs an overhaul. The fact that you could sue and win because of your stupidity is insane. What ever happened to personal responsibility? Outside of some defect with the saw (like a blade flying off, parts flying off, etc) you should have no right to sue for your own stupidity. In order to prevent these types of suits the looser should pay all legal expenses. A saw is made to cut things and it doesn't care if it's wood, metal, flesh, or bone. Learn to use and respect your power tools.

3. The fact that another saw from a manufacturer has it should not be grounds for a lawsuit if your saw doesn't have it. Back in the 80's, Air Bags were optional on many cars. You didn't see people suing Ford because they didn't buy that safety option. Same with the saw - it's an option and if you want it you pay.


I'm sorry, I don't see why I should pay for someone's stupidity. And if I cut my fingers off, I'll take 100% the blame and responsibility for it.


----------



## Minnesota Steve (Feb 12, 2011)

I don't have a table saw, we just moved into a house where I finally have some room to set up a small shop.

I doubt anything would happen with this for several years. But one thing to remember about government regulation is that frequently it is the industry who demands it. A regulation that effects all players keeps it a level field.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

itguy08 said:


> This sure is an interesting topic. Couple of points:
> 
> 1. This is not like seat belts, air bags, etc. Those are good safety features but they did not become standard because the owner of all seat belt or air bag technology lobbied the government to put them in all cars (and line his pockets with money). That's what the owner of Saw Stop did and it doesn't sit well with me.
> 
> ...


Someone lobbied for the seat belts and airbags because they had a stake in it and it effected allot more people, so they are similar. Non woodworkers won't lobby for it they have no idea and we can't expect the saw manufacturers to lobby for it they had already tuned down the idea.

As far as the legal system at what point should someone be able to make a large company do something that is right. You don't want regulation, you don't want lawsuits so unless you have as much money as the big corporation does to spend on legal fees they pretty much can do what ever they want. As stated in an earlier post Ford decided years ago that it was in their best interest to fight and settle lawsuits rather then fix the problem with the pinto explosion problems. It didn't matter that people were dying it was about money and not wanting to admit they were wrong.

I dont agree with the Osario suit because he did everything wrong and was awarded an obscene amount of money. but it will we overturned in appeal it has to. However if a company is aware of a problem involving 36,000 plus accidents with blade to hand contact a year, they then learn of a reasonable effective fix. Then that is now a known design flaw. they choose not to worry about it because they consider those accidents acceptable damage which makes them wrong. They are not much better then Ford was.

That lawsuit is about them knowing the problem and the fix but refusing to take action. With Ford and such it was at least an option with the saw manufacturers they tried to make it go away but he stuck to it and proved the thing was effective and possible at a reasonable cost.

If any one of those manufacturers got the design they would be trying to do the same thing because it's about the money. Him I think the money is also it but revenge sounds more likely. How often can one person battle a big corporation and win.

So if you cut off your finger you going to pay the $20,000 medical yourself your 100% to blame. Second thing is it's not always stupidity that causes the injury. The manufactures know the guard designs are bad and that people remove them. they tell you in the manual to remove them for certain things, yet they just started making it easy to switch back and forth because they were made to put riving knives on all saws.

Before you say what you would do or think if you ever cut off a finger stop. You have no idea, not a clue and I know from experience. I have 20-25 years experience and it just happen that everything that could go wrong did for just that split second. I have always worked safe and respected my tools all of them but it accidents can happen even to you. you just don't know what you will feel or do.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Hey Richard hows about a poll?*

changed my mind on the whole thing.....bill


----------



## duncsuss (Aug 21, 2009)

*but who is qualified to vote in such a poll?*

Bill, I don't know about you but I believe that it's the duty of a voter to inform themselves as to the questions they are voting on -- and to abstain from voting when they don't have a clue what the question means.

So who is qualified to vote in a poll like this?

Everybody? Just those people who have seen a table saw? Just those who have used a table saw? Just those who have bought a table saw? Maybe just those who have had an accident while using a table saw?

I don't know the answer to any of this -- I don't even think I know the right questions to ask. But, in my heart, I really don't feel it's something that should be decided by a "democratic" vote of people who don't know the first thing about it, and whose opinion will be swayed by whichever side throws most money at the campaign.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*You raise some good points*

I didn't suggest the poll to "decide anything" just to get a feel for the whole debate. I don't think anything we say or do here will decide anything in the long run. :no:
Just a poll to see we we're at :yes: bill


----------



## glh17 (Jul 7, 2010)

woodnthings said:


> Questions like:
> Should SS technology be mandated on all table saws after 2013
> yes, no, other(why).
> Ideally, the new regulations should not be technologically specific. The focus should be on outcome. For example, a riving knife that doesn't have to be removed for any cut (such as through cuts) and an overarm blade guard should be sufficient. SS technology would add another layer of safety but the problem with table saw safety in the past has been that most users have to remove the safety equipment in order to perform certain tasks. The equipment is not well designed for easy removal and replacement. In addition, it's been just plain sloppy on a lot of saws. I use my stock set up, but my blade guard is a real pain.
> ...


 I'm not sure what I'd pay for a retrofit. I'm not a big table saw user and I seriously doubt ever replacing my DW 746. I have looked into replacing the standard safety setup with a riving knife and overhead guard, but there's no aftermarket riving knife that fits my saw. The B.O.R.K. doesn't fit the dw 746. I'd probably go $300-$400 for such a setup if possible.


----------



## itguy08 (Jan 23, 2011)

rrbrown said:


> Someone lobbied for the seat belts and airbags because they had a stake in it and it effected allot more people, so they are similar. Non woodworkers won't lobby for it they have no idea and we can't expect the saw manufacturers to lobby for it they had already tuned down the idea.


I was not around when they mandated seatbelts (I was born way after) but I do remember when airbags were not in cars. There was a lobby but I think it was more the insurance companies and NHTSA rather than people. And in that vain not one company got all the royalties from the design or installation of air bags.



> do what ever they want. As stated in an earlier post Ford decided years ago that it was in their best interest to fight and settle lawsuits rather then fix the problem with the pinto explosion problems. It didn't matter that people were dying it was about money and not wanting to admit they were wrong.


Actually, the facts proved you were no more likely to die in a Pinto's rear end collision than any other small car from the same time period. Also NHTSA didn't even think there was enough evidence to recall the car and the recall was initiated by Ford. Ford sold 2+ million Pintos and around 27 died in fires involving the Pinto. It's an interesting read about how the media likes to blow things out of proportion for their own agenda. 

You can read more here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto
http://www.pointoflaw.com/articles/The_Myth_of_the_Ford_Pinto_Case.pdf

Same thing with the Corvair, GM Gas tanks, Firestone tires, Toyota acceleration, etc. 



> However if a company is aware of a problem involving 36,000 plus accidents with blade to hand contact a year, they then learn of a reasonable effective fix. Then that is now a known design flaw. they choose not to worry about it because they consider those accidents acceptable damage which makes them wrong. They are not much better then Ford was.


Unless the blade is flying out or changing it's position it's not a design flaw. Or if the safety devices are not working properly. Other than that, the machine is working as its designed to. Saws cut things. Whenever you are working with power tools you should be on alert. I know I am. I make sure my working area is clear and I'm always watching my hands to make sure they are clear of the blade. 

If it happens to me I'll "man up" and deal with it. I'll also say it was my fault. What I won't do is demand that it never happen to anyone.



> So if you cut off your finger you going to pay the $20,000 medical yourself your 100% to blame. Second thing is it's not always stupidity that causes the injury. The manufactures know the guard designs are bad and that people remove them. they tell you in the manual to remove them for certain things, yet they just started making it easy to switch back and forth because they were made to put riving knives on all saws.


I do have medical insurance and I'm sure it covers my stupidity.  I've cut with my table saw with the guards off and it scares me. I'm extra careful. I stand to the side, use a long push stick and turn the saw off right away and put them back on immediately when I'm done with a cut that requires them to be off.




> Before you say what you would do or think if you ever cut off a finger stop. You have no idea, not a clue and I know from experience. I have 20-25 years experience and it just happen that everything that could go wrong did for just that split second. I have always worked safe and respected my tools all of them but it accidents can happen even to you. you just don't know what you will feel or do.


I don't know exactly how I would feel if it happens to me but I do have a good idea based on my life's view. I don't think we can make the world a 100% safe place. Accidents will happen. I'd have no issue driving a car with no airbags, side impact zones, etc. Wouldn't bother me in the least.

I also know the risks I'm assuming by choosing to work with power tools. The table saw could cut my hand off. The drill could leave me with a hole in some part of my body. The router bit could fly off and hit me. I could get my hand caught in the router bit, etc. I know the risks and accepted them the minute I turned the tool on. 

If people want to buy a SawStop that's fine and I hear they are great saws. It should be an option for those that prefer that extra level of safety. It should not be mandated for those that don't want it. And if you don't want it and hurt yourself you should not be able to sue. You should be laughed out of the courtroom and told "you should have bought the model with the safety features". 

It is a great debate.


----------



## Zircon (Aug 1, 2009)

I picked up on the 36,000 hand injuries a year with table saws figure and I am trying to put it in perspective.
There were 34,000 traffic deaths in 2009. This figure is down from about 50,000 a year in the 1970's when the population was 220 million and now it is 300 million.
Deaths by gunshot are holding steady at 30,000 per year for the last several years.


----------



## cowboy dan (Apr 11, 2010)

itguy08 said:


> This sure is an interesting topic. Couple of points:
> 
> 1. This is not like seat belts, air bags, etc. Those are good safety features but they did not become standard because the owner of all seat belt or air bag technology lobbied the government to put them in all cars (and line his pockets with money). That's what the owner of Saw Stop did and it doesn't sit well with me.
> 
> .


 it kind of is. all those items save lives and minimize injury. the flesh sensing technology saves fingers and possably hands. it seems you care more about his skill in politics than what his invention is. it's a good idea, too bad polotics and money trump even saftey. if lining your pockets with money from a good invention is wrong, just ask yourself who the goverment is and how they make their money. if nothing else, how he went about it proves he is an inventor and not a politician


----------



## dejones (Oct 15, 2010)

I come down on the side of personal responsibility. Getting into woodworking is making the decision to involve yourself with very dangerous tools. Each tool purchase follows investigations into the pros & cons of various styles and brands. I expect that the expression "buyer beware" is taken more seriously by power tool buyers than by almost anyone else.

Today, the new table saw buyer will know (not might know, WILL know) that SawStop is the only brand that has this amazing technology. He will make a very careful choice as to whether to pony up the extra cash to add some "finger insurance" or whether he "takes his chances" without it.

In regards to demanding the TS manufacturers improve their product, why not add a simple check for blade guard usage. If the user does not have it installed, he would need to do some extra step to get the saw going. I know for me, if all of a sudden the saw wouldn't start I would immediately know the reason: "Hey bonehead, you forgot to put the blade guard back on after removing for that last unusual cut you had to do". I would put it back on rather the use the "blade guard" bypass step the saw might provide.


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

Another point would be that if the tablesaw has this technology mandated on it, EVERY other power tool would also have to be required to have the same. Drill press, router, circular saw, shaper, jointer, planer, sanders, lathe...... some of these tools wouldn't be able to be sold until the technology was invented. Think about lathes. You would have to have "loose clothing technology". That might be tricky.


----------



## dejones (Oct 15, 2010)

Nate1778 said:


> You guys won't have to worry about the government, insurance companies will require before they do and as of right now they is officially private sector. My last dance with the saw cost my insurance company $14,000.00 and change. Hmm insurance pays $14,000 or requires homeowner to by a Sawstop, guess you know where thats going.


I have to agree with this. A few years ago I had to get rid of my kid's trampoline because my homeowners insurance company does not insure homes that have them. They did not even have the option where I could pay more. They just did not want to touch them.

I had that problem as they asked specifically about trampolines once and I was rightfully honest. Perhaps they might start asking about table saws one day...


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*table saw guards*

Every table saw since the '40's as far as I can tell, has come with a guard. I even have an old Dunlop with a cast alumium blue guard that's just a antique resto project for in the future. 
If the operator chooses to remove the guard, then they have changed the rules of the "game" and are opening themselves to certain risks and dangers, and should not be able to hold anyone else responsible for the consequences, however disasterous. JMO I seriously doubt if there have been many, if any, table saw mishaps with the safety guards in place. I could be wrong, but that is the $64 question for me. 

I have used guards and not used them, guards with splitters, splitters only, every combination there is.
I've had some real close calls, kickbacks and rotating workpieces....all because of bad operating proceedure, never because the saw up and decided it was gonna show me who's in charge. The saw does the same thing every time, unless something shifts or changes. I'm in charge, and I determine where to place my hands and fingers and wheter to use the safety guards or push sticks, and that's the way I like it. Experience is a powerful teacher and even the most experienced of us may let our "guard down" for a split second, and that's when bad things happen. Total focus is required at all times, no lapses!

If you extend the blade stopping/flesh sensing technology to all cutting equipment, and why wouldn't you, that opens up millions of possibilities and a whole new realm of regulation. What's good for one tool is good for all....routers, shapers, jointers, bandsaws... It gets real complicated. :blink: bill 
BTW 1. This debate will go on for ever, but different opinions are always interesting.
BTW 2. My newest bandsaw has a motor brake and I specifically wanted that feature for it's safety aspect.
Imagine a 12" high blade at 3400 FT/M  But I still have to hit the "off" button.


----------



## cowboy dan (Apr 11, 2010)

in short... the ts is only as dangerous as the user? just so people are aware, the sawstop also ruins the blade as well as replacing the brake cartridge every time it is triggered. mistakes are costly no matter what eh? top shelf saw outfitted with cheap blades is still a cheap saw...lol


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Yup!*



cowboy dan said:


> in short... the ts is only as dangerous as the user? just so people are aware, the sawstop also ruins the blade as well as replacing the brake cartridge every time it is triggered. mistakes are costly no matter what eh? top shelf saw outfitted with cheap blades is still a *cheap* saw...lol


Well dangerous maybe?

I'm pretty certain the SS has a bypass mode for wet material and other situations I'm not familiar with, but that makes it just like any other TS then, "operator beware", so it kinda goes full circle and you still have to know and understand proper operating procedures for the "bypass" mode.  bill


----------



## klr650 (Apr 4, 2010)

dejones said:


> I have to agree with this. A few years ago I had to get rid of my kid's trampoline because my homeowners insurance company does not insure homes that have them. They did not even have the option where I could pay more. They just did not want to touch them.
> 
> I had that problem as they asked specifically about trampolines once and I was rightfully honest. Perhaps they might start asking about table saws one day...


My homeowners insurance will not cover me if I have firearms valuing more than $300 at the residence. Yes, $300 bucks! I greatly resent this type of control over my life.


----------



## cowboy dan (Apr 11, 2010)

by the time i can afford the ss, there will be more options anyway. there are better ways to stop the blade without damage. and i'll bet there are better systems in the works right now that could do better. just wait and see. no person or company could get a law made that would/could allow a company to get the monopoly anyway. the tactic is mainly to open peoples eyes that there is a way to save people from unnessasary injuries. the ss proves this. after a few years people will wonder how guys ever used a ts without one... like toilet paper or tv or the automobile and yes, seatbelts...lol. could you imagine a ts with an onboard computer? it senses your finger... to which you signed your morgage and insurance papers. fingers are quite the commodity these days.


----------



## Jackfre (Dec 23, 2009)

*We have created a society*

where the consumer bears no responsibility for anything. i was making a legitimate:thumbsup: return to home depot a few years ago and the fellow ahead of me had two leaf rakes. I looked at them and being naturally nosey I enquired if he was returning them. He said, "yes"! I said they look to be in good shape, to which he smiled and replied, "yeah, they're fine, but I'm done with them". On another ocassion I was trying to sell a line of sump pumps and the fellow told me he sold 950 pumps that spring when the water was high. He asked if I knew how many came back to him when the water went down? No, I replied and he said 725 were returned which, with the companies "no questions" return policy, they promptly backcharged to the manuf.

I think the Sawstop is a great idea and think the man deserves to make a fortune. He has built a better mousetrap and probably deserves to have the world beat a path to his door. Do I like his tactics in growing his business? No, but he is playing by the rules which we have created.

For my part, I'm the only one who runs my 48 Unisaw. I am very careful with it. It is an excellent piece of equipment. When this summer I move west both my daughter and sil want to begin learning how to work with wood. I accept the risk as an individual in the operation of my saw, but I would have a real hard time if anything happened to either of them or anyone else who used my saw and was injured. I think there is a SS in my future. If I discuss this with the boss, I am sure there is! :yes:


----------



## cowboy dan (Apr 11, 2010)

klr650 said:


> My homeowners insurance will not cover me if I have firearms valuing more than $300 at the residence. Yes, $300 bucks! I greatly resent this type of control over my life.


 seems as though you need more options. like a new insurer. my inlaws have several firearms and no issues with insurance... these companies are like lawyers... there is one on every city block...lol. you might also want to look at storage safes as apposed to wall mounting guns


----------



## TexasTimbers (Oct 17, 2006)

klr650 said:


> My homeowners insurance will not cover me if I have firearms valuing more than $300 at the residence. Yes, $300 bucks! I greatly resent this type of control over my life.


You can get stand-alone firearms insurance. 

I'm not a fan of the NRA for reasons I won't discuss but if you like the NRA, their members get between $7500 in free insurance (regular member) and $12,500 (Life membership). You can also buy more than that if you need it through their Ins company ArmsCare Plus Rates are reasonable on the order of $170 a year for $10K coverage and that's or _replacement cost coverage_.


BTW most homeowner's ins. companies will increase their limits if you ask. Some won't though. There's a lot more info concerning this topic but don't want to derail the thread. 




Jackfre said:


> I'm the only one who runs my 48 Unisaw. I am very careful with it. It is an excellent piece of equipment.
> I think there is a SS in my future. :yes:







I have a similar situation. I run a '47 Oliver 16" behemoth for big stuff but I wouldn't let my wife touch it if she wanted to. I bought her a 10" saw but she just could never get comfortable using it either. 
I'm going to buy a SS one day soon most likely and just ignore the BS currently surrounding it. But if it were just me I wouldn't and not even because of the political posturing by the company, but just because I'm comfortable using my saws. 


Would I *prefer* to have such a safety feature on my current saws? Of course, but I wouldn't buy a SS just to have the technology if it were only me to consider. So I'm stuck in the middle. Do I want my wife to be able to start using the TS - yes I do. So I have to buy one and see if that gets her over the fears. 

I have already cut one finger off - my left thumb. It was not technically "off" as it was still hanging by a strand of tendons and skin on the outside edge, but it went through bone at the joint and 90% of the flesh. It was not due to a woodworking accident -but by a large glass shard that I fell right on top of. I've not ever mentioned this because it's kind of embarrassing to admit I cut it off that way, but I guess it wasn't that big of a deal to me because a Navy surgeon was able to reattach the dangling thumb. When I move it you can hear the bones grind together but it doesn't hurt at all, and I have full range of motion. 

The bottom line is the technology is super, and hopefully one day, somehow, this technology will be available for retro fits on current saws. Although I'm comfortable with my 16" monster saw, there's situations when it is intimidating even to me and it would be nice to know that huge blade might stop in a billionth of a second should I decide to fall across it or something. 




.


----------



## dejones (Oct 15, 2010)

I watched the Consumer Reports video of the breaking feature in action and noticed that the user was pushing the wood with the hot dog through the saw much slower than I think most users would be pushing a piece of wood. An earlier poster noticed this as well and wondered whether movements at real world speed would get the same protection.

I calculated that the blade would move 10.5 inches in the time it takes for the saw to stop. The circumference of a 10" blade is 31.4 inches. SawStop promotional material refers to 4,000 RPM, so by their reckoning the blade moves about 126,000 inches in a minute or 2,100 inches in 1 second. The saw is said to stop in 5 milliseconds (.005 seconds). So, since rate * time = distance, 2100 inches/second * .005 seconds = 10.5 inches.

I guess the blade is also accelerating down into the belly of the saw at the same time, but your hand could well be moving in that direction too. It probably is not creeping up on the blade as the hot dog does in the demo. 

Would a 1/3 turn of a blade do much damage? I suppose it all depends on exactly how the blade and your fingers come to meet.


----------



## ACP (Jan 24, 2009)

Interesting questions Dejones. I think we'd have to look at some of the saves SS claims and might find some answers there. 

I would pose another question to members. I know some of you ride bikes. Seatbelts save lives and are mandated federally. What's up with motorcycle helmets? Those are a safety feature I have personally seen save lives or serious injury. The feds are gonna tackle table saws before getting their hands on helmet laws? Eck. I don't think people should have to wear helmets if they don't want to, I don't think people should have SS tech if they don't want to. Don't they know it'll be easier to pry our guns from our cold dead hands if we are missing fingers? That's the problem with our government, no foresight.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*A helmet saved me*

Maybe even my life, but certainly from being severely brain damaged. A relatively slow speed "highside" where I was violently thrown over the handlebars "out the front window". My head/helmet hit the pavement first, followed by my right shoulder resulting in a separated clavicle...very painful. So, when riding in states where helmets are not "required" CA and FLA,, I wear one anyway. The laws of physics are more stringent than the helmet "rule" and cannot be circumvented. A 16 lb mass, your head, traveling at x speed, stopped abruptly, to 0 speed needs to have a shock absorbing cushion to avoid internal injury. The better the cushion the less the damage, simple physics. And a hard shell protects against perforations and will contain any "loose parts" for the highway clean up afterward.
Road rash is a whole 'nother issue :laughing: 

Sure heads are different than fingers, and are more critical for daily living  and head injuries are more prevalent than table saw injuries since there are probably more riders than woodworkers...except on this forum.:huh:
And ACP is right, since when is the government "forward looking" think Post Office...Social Security....Border security... our security? :thumbdown: bill


----------



## Zircon (Aug 1, 2009)

dejones said:


> I watched the Consumer Reports video of the breaking feature in action and noticed that the user was pushing the wood with the hot dog through the saw much slower than I think most users would be pushing a piece of wood. An earlier poster noticed this as well and wondered whether movements at real world speed would get the same protection.
> 
> I calculated that the blade would move 10.5 inches in the time it takes for the saw to stop. The circumference of a 10" blade is 31.4 inches. SawStop promotional material refers to 4,000 RPM, so by their reckoning the blade moves about 126,000 inches in a minute or 2,100 inches in 1 second. The saw is said to stop in 5 milliseconds (.005 seconds). So, since rate * time = distance, 2100 inches/second * .005 seconds = 10.5 inches.
> 
> ...


Interesting and got me thinking. My take is that the rim speed of the blade does not matter but the speed of advance of the hand into the blade is the critical figure. I took my stop watch and slid my hand across my desktop to simulate feeding stock speed. Of course feed speed will vary depending on stock thickness but I took an average and moved my hand 47inches in 6 seconds. In the .005 seconds it takes to stop the blade my hand moved forward .039 inches which is just slightly over 1/32" which is barely band aid depth. I think most people would consider themselves lucky if they got away from a blade encounter with a 1/8" deep cut.


----------



## duncsuss (Aug 21, 2009)

Zircon said:


> ... the rim speed of the blade does not matter but the speed of advance of the hand into the blade is the critical figure ...


I agree -- just did the arithmetic before reading down and seeing you'd already made the point.


----------



## duncsuss (Aug 21, 2009)

klr650 said:


> My homeowners insurance will not cover me if I have firearms valuing more than $300 at the residence. Yes, $300 bucks! I greatly resent this type of control over my life.


I thought we were only allowed to resent control that comes from the government?

:shifty:


----------



## dejones (Oct 15, 2010)

Thanks Zircon - I agree with you: it is really the relative speed of the hand's approach vs the blade's retreat and my quickie calcs are similar to yours: about 1/10 of an inch cut in a pretty worse case scenario (hand moving at 20 feet/second), and it also assumes that the blade is not retreating at all during the .005 seconds but rather just stays in place and stops.


----------



## reprosser (May 19, 2010)

There have also been some tests/demo where the hot dog (or was it a chicken wing?) were slapped down on the blade instead of pushed along with a board. 

I guess this was to simulate a fall onto the table saw where your hand or arm might come down on the blade...

The damage was more than the slow push, but still only minor.:thumbsup:

"Another point would be that if the tablesaw has this technology mandated on it, EVERY other power tool would also have to be required to have the same."

I don't think this would be the case. Even with seat belts, not all vehicles are required to have them (School busses for instance). Perhaps as technology is available for other tools, it might become required, but I can't see the tools being outlawed waiting for technology to catch up. I could be wrong ... again...:laughing:

It seems clear that IF there is an accident, the damage will be MUCH less severe - if the technology works at the time. Nothing is guaranteed 100%, so I won't be throwing caution to the wind, but I like the additional insurance.

Great thread.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

duncsuss said:


> I thought we were only allowed to resent control that comes from the government?
> 
> :shifty:


Well the state government does have a Insurance Commissioner or equivalent who regulates what insurance companies do in their state, so your good with resenting them also.:laughing::laughing:


----------



## Rodand1 (Dec 22, 2010)

Maybe the government will vote in a new stimulus package that will subsidize a saw stop for all of us that currently use other saws like Powermatic 66's, Delta Unisaw's, etc. Maybe congress can approve a plan to force all woodworkers to own a new Saw Stop, whether they want one or not. My vote is to keep my Unisaw and be responsible for my own actions. What if a Saw Stop shorts out and the operator gets electrocuted? Maybe the government could then make our table saws pedal operated so we couldn't get electrocuted? Guess I better sell my V8 muscle car because it goes fast.


----------



## bofa (Jul 17, 2010)

Man, some people get so extreme so quickly... Another govt stimulus is not a good thing. The govt would not force you to buy SS. It's more likely to negotiate the technology be shared with manufacturers, or at most set a distant deadline for similar safety precautions to be standard. 

And I'm betting your V8 muscle car is slower than some modern day V6's (possibly some 4-bangers) with lower emissions and better fuel economy. I'm not saying it's better (I personally love older cars and trucks), but new technology and regulation isn't exactly a step down in performance. It just makes us think of safer, more efficient ways to move forward. 

I've said it before, not all regulation is good, but let's not just label it all bad either.


----------



## ACP (Jan 24, 2009)

That's a good post Bofa. Well said. One would have to consider if this was mandated, with the patents in place as they are now and no other company being able to compete, Sawstop would be in violation of government anti-trust laws for holding a monopoly. There is a good chance that they'd get broken up and have to share. Gass may end up regretting such a push for this regulation if he gets anti-trusted and loses his patents on the SS. Also curious, when do the patents expire? Or do they? You know pharmeceuticals get their patent or whatever they call it in that business for a period of time then it expires and all the generics get produced. Just curious if anyone knows.


----------



## bofa (Jul 17, 2010)

I believe US patents are 20 years.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

It use to be less but just changed in recent years. Us Patents last 20 years (14 for design patents) which I think this would be considered. I thought it use to be 10 and (7) but not sure.


----------



## bofa (Jul 17, 2010)

The 14 year design patent is for decorative designs. I think the 20 year will still apply. Let's hope we don't have to wait that long.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

bofa said:


> The 14 year design patent is for decorative designs. I think the 20 year will still apply. Let's hope we don't have to wait that long.


Really I didn't even think of a decorative patent.:confused1:


Hopefully we dont have to wait that long.

This is one of those subjects that there is no end like dust collection duct, PVC or metal? Maybe even worse.:laughing:

As much as I'm for the technology I can see some interesting points from the other side. I'm just surprised how many people act like the big manufacturers are innocent or are victims in this. 

I'm done on this one, it gets out of hand quick sometimes. For the record I respect everyone's opinion on here whether or not I agree with them.

I will ad this If we can't get the few members on this thread to agree or compromise their thinking on this one topic, is it any wonder our elected officials can't seem to agree or get things done.


----------



## SteveEl (Sep 7, 2010)

Jackfre said:


> ..... my daughter.... begin learning.... discuss [Sawstop] with the "boss".....



so THAT'S how I can get one! 

Thanks!:thumbsup:


----------



## clarionflyer (Apr 27, 2008)

I have to say (sorry)...
After reading this, I'm proud to be American again. Most are obviously saying enough with the laws.
This is simply a wood tool, but it's also politics (and I hate politics).
But I'm proud because the folks here simply don't want the government telling them how to live and work to create what is... America. That's what it all really comes down to.

Is the SawStop safer? Probably. But let the marketplace drive that, it will.
I keep reading history, and NO where does it say the government is my Mommy and Daddy. Yep, I've been hit by a saw blade through my own negligence. So keep inventing better ways, and let me decide what I'm willing to buy.


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

I found this very interesting. 25,000 cheerleaders went to the ER in 2007 alone which was slightly below average with the previous couple of years. http://cheerleading.lovetoknow.com/Cheerleading_Injury_Statistics
38,000 from stationary saws (which they label as table saws). This is actually interesting stats. http://tablesawaccidents.com/

I really like the second comment in this one. http://www.finewoodworking.com/item/24638/new-study-discusses-tablesaw-injuries

Here's a doozie. Do you have a license for your table saw? http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/Should+We+License+Table+Saws.aspx

http://www.popularwoodworking.com/article/kickback/


----------



## polyhedron (Feb 10, 2011)

Guys two new developments that's going to change everything!

First: As of last week, you can't order a JET, Powermatic, or Shop Fox (which is owned by Grizzly) contractor tablesaw from the manufacturer. I'm sure there are dealers out there that still have them in stock, but the manufacturers/importers won't ship them right now. I'm thinking this has a lot to do with the SawStop thing.

Second: Ryobi failed to file an appeal for the Osario case in time. OOPS! I really wonder what happened there. But one thing's for sure, a precedent has been set.


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

polyhedron said:


> Guys two new developments that's going to change everything!
> 
> First: As of last week, you can't order a JET, Powermatic, or Shop Fox (which is owned by Grizzly) contractor tablesaw from the manufacturer. I'm sure there are dealers out there that still have them in stock, but the manufacturers/importers won't ship them right now. I'm thinking this has a lot to do with the SawStop thing.
> 
> Second: Ryobi failed to file an appeal for the Osario case in time. OOPS! I really wonder what happened there. But one thing's for sure, a precedent has been set.


Assuming that this is true. Up until now I assumed it was the jury that ignored the defense's case and that everyone was wrong for saying that Ryobi's lawyers were bad. However either they didn't file an appeal because of a agreed lower number for not filing it or they really do have the worse lawyers in the world.

As for the saws not being available don't over think it. We will have to wait and see if there is any connection to the Saw Stop.


----------



## SteveEl (Sep 7, 2010)

"once you have to pass laws about ethics or stupidity you have already lost the battle"

I agree with that.

I also agree that so long as my insurance premiums or taxes are partially driven by other peoples' personal injury claims and disability gov't assistance, then its not just a matter of personal choice, but one of society's choice.

And so this is an endless debate, because both perspectives are true, yet seemingly incompatible.

....I'm still waiting for the blood pressure and body-fat index scanner test, as a prerequisite to ordering a cheeseburger and fries... think of all the money we'd save cutting down on cardiac related medical expenses!


----------



## SteveEl (Sep 7, 2010)

jstange2 said:


> 25,000 cheerleaders went to the ER in 2007 alone....



....but a bunch of them just turned out to be pregnant.....


----------



## jstange2 (Dec 5, 2010)

http://blogs.popularwoodworking.com/editorsblog/SawStop+Might+Meet+A+Competitor+SawDrop.aspx?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PopularWoodworking+%28Popular+Woodworking%29


----------



## rrbrown (Feb 15, 2009)

They are talking something similar to air bags in cars. I hope it's cheaper then the $1000 cost of an air bag deployment in your car. :laughing: It probably would be because no dash or steering wheel to destroy and no need for as large of a device. Sounds like a pretty good idea at least in theory.


----------

