# 1/16" Saw Blade



## rrich (Jun 24, 2009)

In the latest issue of "Wood Shop News" there was an article about a 1/16" kerf saw blade. 

YES it is 10" in diameter.

YES the kerf is 1/16".

The company is Total Saw Solutions or WWW.totalsawsolutions.com

The cost is about $175.

Interesting to say the least.


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

rrich said:


> In the latest issue of "Wood Shop News" there was an article about a 1/16" kerf saw blade.
> 
> YES it is 10" in diameter.
> 
> ...


Is that all...such a deal.

One of the shops I consult, was concerned about his tablesaw blade. With the blade extended high, and running a piece of wood was gently fed in to the side of the teeth, creating a wobble.

I quit using thin kerf blades years ago. They may be beneficial for low powered saws, but a blade purposed for the procedure, IMO is a better bet. For ripping thick stock a 32T or 24T would be more productive than a thin kerf blade.











 





 

.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*They talk it up pretty good*

Someone here should buy one.
And give us a review.....anyone? 


Knotscott :blink:...you here?  bill


----------



## Brink (Nov 22, 2010)

Can't the wood get hung up on the splitter with such a thin blade?


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Good thinking!*



Brink said:


> Can't the wood get hung up on the splitter with such a thin blade?


I can't really see any advantage if that's the case. I rely on my splitter more than ever these days. The thin blade was developed by a company who made custom commercial saw blades. According to the article the thin blades were used primarily ... "for various ripping operations where precision cutting was important"...
http://www.totalsawsolutions.com/index.htm
Obviously on plywood or other sheet goods a splitter is not needed, since the wood will not not move/close up when the cut is made. Having just ripped a couple thousand lineal ft of red oak in the last 3 days with my trusty $30.00 Freud Diablo 1040, I had the kerf close up several times and I stalled the blade a few times also. I sprayed the splitter with SILICONE...God Forbid  and man what a difference! It went through like butter. I know C-man will have a word with me in the wood shed. Oh well! 
Anyhow, at $175.00 I can go through enough Freuds to last me a lifetime. You would think thinner is less steel...cheaper?  bill


----------



## klr650 (Apr 4, 2010)

I'd be very wary of using a very thin kerf blade. Too many things to go wrong in a manual operation. I bet heat build-up on the blade would be a larger factor, and because it's so much more flexible it would more prone to binding.

All of this applies to manual use, if the blade was mounted for a mechanical or robotic operation I bet none of this would be a problem - and I bet that's what this blade was designed for.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

klr650 said:


> I'd be very wary of using a very thin kerf blade. Too many things to go wrong in a manual operation. I bet heat build-up on the blade would be a larger factor, and because it's so much more flexible it would more prone to binding.
> 
> All of this applies to manual use, if the blade was mounted for a mechanical or robotic operation I bet none of this would be a problem - and I bet that's what this blade was designed for.


Apparently the blade has a shoulder then gets thicker near the arbor to prevent distortion. It's an interesting concept and I'm sure it works. If it's ground from a thicker plate that's where the expense is....:yes: bill


----------



## knotscott (Nov 8, 2007)

Yeah I'm here, but geez that's a lot of moola for 1/2 a blade! Now, if the twins who make this blade would like to send me one for scientific evaluation, I'd be happy to give it a spin! :laughing: 

Another well respected wwer name Joe Grout, who gets around several of these forums tried one and ended up returning it. He liked it but thought it dulled too quickly, and wasn't superior to his WWII. Most comments I've read are favorable, but so are most comments about a $27 Freud Diablo and a $17 Delta/DeWalt 7657. It comes with a built in stabilizer, which they claim offsets the high cost by a bit. I have no doubt that it's possible to make a 1/16" blade that'll track pretty well, but the laws of physics still apply...both for the thickness of the kerf, and for the quality of the cut. Assuming that deflection is negligible, it should indeed require less power and have very low feed pressure, but I question whether it's possible to get a better cut than other top flight 40T general purpose blades like the WWII, Infinity Super General, Ridge Carbide TS2000, Freud Fusion, or Tenryu Gold medal provide. When I need a cleaner cut, I reach for an 80T Hi-ATB blade, but even the best of those doesn't provide a finish ready edge.....at a certain price point you reach a point of diminishing returns as far as cut quality goes, so unless you can benefit from wood savings, which would take a lot of expensive exotics, I'm not seeing justification for this hobbyist to shell out $175 vs sale prices of $65-$90 for other top flight 40T blades. You guys wanna chip in for one and take turns with it?  :laughing:


----------



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

klr650 said:


> I'd be very wary of using a very thin kerf blade. Too many things to go wrong in a manual operation. I bet heat build-up on the blade would be a larger factor, and because it's so much more flexible it would more prone to binding.
> 
> All of this applies to manual use, if the blade was mounted for a mechanical or robotic operation I bet none of this would be a problem - and I bet that's what this blade was designed for.



Nah, here's some info on slitting saws.:

http://www.slittingsaw.org/


Used to use them all the time in tool and die shops, cutting steel, aluminum, brass, wood, composites. They make solid carbide saws to cut any material on manual or CNC machines. I think the smallest kerf I ever used was .020 thick and up to 6" diameter. Get the feed and speed right, there's not a material that can't be cut.

Seems like every year, more and more companies are adapting metal cutting technology, into the woodworking trades. Pretty cool!:thumbsup:


----------



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

woodnthings said:


> Apparently the blade has a shoulder then gets thicker near the arbor to prevent distortion. It's an interesting concept and I'm sure it works. If it's ground from a thicker plate that's where the expense is....:yes: bill


I bet you're thinking of hollow ground blades, some of them get extremely expensive.:yes:


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Just saw their You Tube Video*

It seemed to me that the slabilizers, extra support collars as they call them, are an "add on" rather than ground away as I thought. I could be wrong, but that would make way more sense as far as cost. :thumbsup: bill


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

woodnthings said:


> It seemed to me that the slabilizers, extra support collars as they call them, are an "add on" rather than ground away as I thought. I could be wrong, but that would make way more sense as far as cost. :thumbsup: bill


Some thin kerf blades have a thicker body and about a 1.25" available cutting edge. I think I found a correct picture here. If that's the wrong picture, the blade looks like that one with the thicker body as outlined.

There are blade stabilizers that are about 6" in diameter, that are flat (like a huge fender washer), and go under the outside nut and washer on the arbor. Problem with them is the same as the blade with the differential, in that you only have a short cutting height.

Idiots like me like to run the blade high, and IMO, the cut is better, and the lift on the front of the cut is minimized.












 







.


----------



## klr650 (Apr 4, 2010)

woodnthings said:


> Apparently the blade has a shoulder then gets thicker near the arbor to prevent distortion. It's an interesting concept and I'm sure it works. If it's ground from a thicker plate that's where the expense is....:yes: bill


Well the website does indicate that heat buildup is a problem, which is what I suspected.

I don't have anything against this kind of blade, other than the cost at 175 a pop it's far too fragile for normal hobby use.


----------



## rrich (Jun 24, 2009)

"run the blade high, and IMO, the cut is better, and the lift on the front of the cut is minimized"

I don't doubt you, I'm just trying to understand the physics of the blade lift. I have to ask, why?


----------



## cabinetman (Jul 5, 2007)

rrich said:


> "run the blade high, and IMO, the cut is better, and the lift on the front of the cut is minimized"
> 
> I don't doubt you, I'm just trying to understand the physics of the blade lift. I have to ask, why?


It's pretty simple. If the blade is just high enough to expose the teeth, it produces the longest cutting angle (and contact) to the wood, and produces an upward lift. The length and angle is more "upward" than if the blade was high. With the blade high, the cutting length is shorter, less contact with the blade, and the cutting action (angle) is more downward, producing a downward force.

The shorter cutting angle produces less friction, and the blade being high cools better, and dispenses debris more freely.












 







.


----------



## knotscott (Nov 8, 2007)

Cabinetman's right about the physics of the blade when raised higher ... cools better and there's more downward force, but I'll add that the tooth geometry of each blade is different so they all respond a little differently to the same set of variables. Many of the premium blades run tight side clearances to give a nice polished edge, but can also be more prone to burning in some materials in some situations. Running the blade a little higher can help reduce the burning but you may loose some of that polished edge effect. It all really depends on the blade configuration, number of teeth, the material, objective, etc.


----------



## woodnthings (Jan 24, 2009)

*Yup, physics is involved*

Just like on the "dreaded RAS" some folks call them "evil", the first teeth entering the workpiece when pulled out from behind the fence tend to push it down and into the fence and table. If you were to push the saw into the work from front to rear, the first teeth to contact the work would tend to lift it off the table. That's why those in the know always pull their RAS from the rear to the front. 
It's about the physics involved, not a personal preference or an opinion. :thumbsup: bill
BYT there is a whole lot of physics involved in cutter operation and blade efficiency as well as just managing heavy and awkward workpieces with tipping points and all. BTDT :yes:


----------



## Gary Beasley (Jan 21, 2009)

I have one and I made a splitter for it that mounts to the zero clearance insert. Cuts very nice and I get about 2 1/2 inches or so max cutting depth. You have to put a dado set in the saw and raise it under the zero insert and make room for the shoulder, stopping just shy of 1/16" from the surface. I use it for slicing high dollar wood for pen blanks, lets me get more out of it.


----------



## nostrildamus (Feb 24, 2009)

If you REALLY need a 1/16" saw blade, I bought a 5 1/2" 36T combo blade, carbide-tipped, from Coastal Tool http://www.coastaltool.com/a/ab/matsu****a/matsu****a.htm
It was only $19.50 plus shipping. They come in various arbor-hole sizes. It cuts great but I would be very leery of using a 10" blade due to the possible wobble.

Anyway, for anyone who cares why I needed a 1/16" blade, I needed to make a series of kerfs exactly 1/16" wide and at a 15-degree angle, and this blade was the perfect solution. I'm trying to build a harpsichord, and at the back of each key there is a 1/16" wide pin that rides up and down in a slotted piece called the rack.


----------



## SeanStuart (Nov 27, 2011)

nostrildamus said:


> I'm trying to build a harpsichord, and at the back of each key there is a 1/16" wide pin that rides up and down in a slotted piece called the rack.


Harpsichord!! We are going to need pictures of that!!


----------



## Calzone (May 15, 2012)

Meh, I don't see the appeal

I do all my ripping with 3/4" dado saw blades. 1/2" if it needs to be thin
I hope you know I'm kidding


----------



## Calzone (May 15, 2012)

Nah, but seriously I just stick to a good 1/8" saw. I just don't see that happening when I rip 4/4 mahogany. All I see is a Frisbee skidding across water.


----------



## Steve Neul (Sep 2, 2011)

I don't know anyone that likes the thin kerf blade. Someone gave me one years ago and I used it for 15 minutes and put it away never to use it again. I wouldn't go to the store and get a 1/16" blade if they were free.


----------



## knotscott (Nov 8, 2007)

Steve Neul said:


> I don't know anyone that likes the thin kerf blade. Someone gave me one years ago and I used it for 15 minutes and put it away never to use it again. I wouldn't go to the store and get a 1/16" blade if they were free.


Now you do. When I had smaller saws, the better 3/32" thin kerfs were a God send. A 1/8" full kerf is 33% thicker, and requires considerably more power to cut through the same wood....on thicker materials, it really made a noticeable difference in how well the saw handled the load. I never had an obvious issue with them deflecting and the cut quality was excellent. I used only higher quality TKs, my saw was well tuned, the lumber was flat and straight, and my cutting volumes are low...usually just one or two cuts, shut down, repeat as necessary, so heat build up wasn't an issue. Now that I've got a 3hp saw there's less incentive to use the TK's, so I now use mainly 1/8" full kerf blades, but I was very happy with those that I used previously, and still own several. It's worth noting that not all TK's are created equal...there are some excellent examples.

Material savings was a non-issue for me with the volumes and materials I use, but if I worked with a lot of expensive exotics, I could see the savings benefit of a good 1/16" TK. 

Since this thread was originally posted, I've had the opportunity to test the new Infinity Laser 1/16" Laser thin kerf....man, that is one slick blade. The cut is bordering amazing. During some initial test cuts, it trounced my WWII, Tenryu RS25550, DW7640, and held it's own against my full kerf Infinity Super General, which is an outstanding blade as general purpose blades go. The cut is way nicer than anything I've ever gotten from a 7-1/4" circular saw blade, and it has quite a bit more cutting depth. Expensive for sure (~ $160), but could be a very wise investment for the right user.


----------



## Lola Ranch (Mar 22, 2010)

This subject has been discussed at length on several threads. I think it boils down to personal preference. 

Used to run standard thickness blades and thought that more expensive must be better. Now days I don't think there is a 1/8" thick blade in my shop. I use mostly the Frued Diablo 1060x blades from HD for about $40. The cut quality is as good as any blade I've ever used. It's also thin. 

I also have a 8-1/2" diam 1/16" thick DeWalt "finish" blade that I use to rip thick hardwood. I was re-sawing some hickory yesterday with it. Cutting 1-3/4" deep from each edge to make some panel boards. With a three HP saw it was a breeze. The blade tracked very straight and the cut was pretty smooth.

I think the saw that the blade is mounted to may have more to do with the quality of the cut than minor differences in good quality blades.

Cabitnetman, jeese, lower the blade. Why would you want all that blade sticking up there? I know, I read what you said, just seems scarey. IMHO you are just increasing the risk of the blade touching you by have it up so high. I like it about 1/2" to 3/4" above the workpiece. 

Bret


----------



## nostrildamus (Feb 24, 2009)

Well, here it is so far...
The case is plywood and will be covered with marquetry. The interior "soundwell" was veneered prior to assembly. On the closeup photo you can see the angled 1/16" slots for the guide pins in the back of each key.

Several years ago I read an article, can't remember where, about a woodworker who built harpsichords and it seemed like a totally outrageous project. Zuckerman Harpsichords International sells kits but I wanted to do it from scratch. The library had a great book on making a "Grand" harpsichord (looks like a grand piano, with strings running parallel to the keys), but we don't have enough room in the house for it, so I'm building a "Virginal" harpsichord (strings run perpendicular to the keys, looks like an upright piano).

I bought plans for a Virginal from Zuckerman but, as I'm finding out, there are no plans or instructions anywhere for making the keyboard (they sell the keyboard as a unit for this kit, starting at $995). So, I'm making it up as I go along.

The key levers are basswood, key tops are maple. For the black keys I bought a chunk of Gaboon Ebony ($$$!) Anyone have any pearls of wisdom about working with Ebony?


----------



## GroovyMambo (Jun 10, 2012)

Wow if you accomplish this project you have my deep respect as it looks like a real challenge. Great work so far.


----------

