Hot Dog Saw Tested on Finger

Page 4 of 6  


re: "Because the inventor is either a smart businessman, or he has good people running it. "
I'm not so sure. First he tried to get the major manufacturers to purchase his technology and they all showed him the door. That's when he played the safety card and tried to get the government involved.
If the device is mandated across all manufacturers, I doubt the price will come down because they'll all push back and say "We can't do it cheaply. We'll have to re-tool, we'll have to re-train, we'll have to re-lawyer in case the device fails. We'll do it, but the cost will be prohibitive."
I don't recall if it's in the thread I posted the link to or in another, but there was mention of a school district that cancelled it's shop program because the board mandated that they purchase SawStops for their schools. I paraphrase: "If a safety device exists that can protect our kids, we must use it." The schools couldn't afford to buy all new table saws and the program was cancelled out of fear that the "older technology" would make them liable if someone got injured.
A "smart businessman" would have donated a bunch of SawStops to the schools as a means to get them seen in the market and garner a bunch of goodwill. His "good people" should have caught wind of the situation and taken care of it.
If I suffered from "Conspiracy Theory Syndrome" I'd say they didn't want to get involved for fear of the device failing and some kid losing a finger or two. Read on...
A r.w poster supposedly wrote to SawStop and asked if they ever tested the device with a human finger. Here is a snippet from the post and an additional comment from another poster:
*** Begin Included Text ***
"I received the following reply from Stephen Gass, President of SawStop (posted (t)here with his permission):
'However, before we first showed the system at the Altanta IWF 2000 Tradeshow, I tested the system with my own finger and just a tiny nick was the result. Of course, I wasn't shoving it into the blade quickly or anything like that, but it did prove the point. We don't do this on a regular basis for two reasons. First, even a small cut on a table saw hurts a lot. Second, no system is perfect and sometime I'm sure it won't go off, just like airbags sometimes fail. I don't want to push my luck. '
(snip)
Another poster's comment:
"This could be one of the reasons (besides the cost of redesign and retooling, and the resultant price increase) why the big manufacturers passed on this system. From a liability standpoint, it's a lot less risky to market a dangerous tool when there is no implied "fail-safe" finger protector. A small percentage of SawStops will fail, just as airbags will. However, the bags are designated a "supplemental restraint" to be worn with seat belts, while the SawStop has no other system to act as a partner. If someone is hurt as Mr. Gass implies may happen, then the entire liability could become the manufacturer's and the potential costs would be very high. I'd guess that SawStop's literature will be phrased very carefully to remove any implied warranty."
*** End Included Text ***
Should this system ever be mandated by the government, who would be ultimately responsible should it begin to fail more often once it begins to see wide spread use?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You bring up good points, no doubt. Please note that I said he's a good businessman, not a great one, and certainly no saint...even saints aren't saints these days. ;) I agree that a guy that wasn't a dick just after money would donate a few dozen units to high school shop programs in carefully selected areas. Leverage the PR and get people talking about them.
As far as the liability thing, it's really no different than car airbags. And as far as the who's-going-to-pay-for-this if it's legislated in...hell, the jokers we have in office now - on both sides (why are there only two?) - don't seem to understand that there's always a bill at the end of the meal. Maybe that's the problem - they're so far removed from things that they don't see the bill and it's not their money in the first place.
R
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
DerbyDad03 wrote:

The school wouldn't be able to afford the replacement parts, since the kids would be sure to at least do the hotdog test.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

<You're missing my point, DD. The price premium is high - now. It'll come down. The price is immaterial to the fact that it is a user- selectable safety system that actually works, doesn't get in the way of cuts, and is invisible in use. It's better technology.
A better question to ask over at the wreck would be, if you had a choice of paying $2000 now and getting the tip of your finger back, would you?>
Tip of your finger if you're incredibly lucky! Anyone unlucky enough to see how fast a radial arm saw can "walk" across a piece of lumber (usually from starting the motor with the blade already jammed against the stock) knows how fast it could drag your whole arm into the blade with devastating results. A modern power saw cuts human flesh and bone like butter since it's designed to tear through tough oak.
I often wonder why people have such a "stuck in the craw" attitude about improvements in safety engineering? You see it all the time here. Is it a macho thing? Is it oldsters railing at the changes in the modern world that they feel they have no control over? Is it the massive ego of believing they are so smart and so lucky that they are immune from accidents? Well, no one is immune. You can only hope to reduce accidents but you can't control when you have a stroke or a heart attack and when that safety interlock is the only thing standing between a bad event and probably a lethal one.
Anyone who thinks it can't happen to them should read:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/21/most-dangerous-tools-business-healthcare-tools_slide.html
Safety engineers have saved the lives and limbs of countless people. It wasn't too long ago that a poor little girl name Peggy Swan two neighborhoods over from me gored herself to death riding her bicycle into the back of a 60's era Cadillac with huge (senseless, decorative only) tail fins that got the whole ball rolling on modern safety issues. There are stupid people and there are stupid designers. Both need education.
This is a no-brainer like consumer protection on predatory lending. Yes, Angelo Mozillo and all the other mortgageers only ripped off the dumb people, but tell me - are only the dumb people suffering? No, we all are. It turned out that consumer protection equals protection of the entire economy. Same for the guy who saws off his hand. We all pay for that. Higher insurance rates, taxes for disability payments, workmen's comp, etc. It seems like common sense to lower expenses, especially needless ones. Deadman switches don't appear because one man died or almost did. It's because decision makers have seen dozens of deaths and maimings, year after year and feel compelled to limit those occurrences. That's why so many Federal safety agencies are called "tombstone agencies" because they only get into the game when the death rate from something climbs past the ignorable point.
"In the United States, approximately 9400 children younger than 18 years receive emergency treatment annually for lawn mower-related injuries. More than 7% of these children require hospitalization, and power mowers cause a large proportion of the amputations during childhood. Prevention of lawn mower-related injuries can be achieved by design changes of lawn mowers, guidelines for mower operation, and education of parents, child caregivers, and children. . . . Power lawn mowers caused 22% of the amputation injuries among children admitted to one regional level 1 trauma center"
source: http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics ;107/6/e106
All I can say is that if parents don't properly train their kids to operate powertools (and it's clear they don't - I learned OTJ, like most of you!), then someone has to step in, in loco parentis, to compensate. Often, that's the Consumer Product Safety Commission. I'm a cheap SOB but I am not enough of a skinflint that I'd wish a kid, especially doing chores or trying to start a backyard business, the loss of their fingers or their toes, to save $5 or $10 off a lawnmower.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote: (snip)

dead-man switches and skirts making the mower less usable for somebody who knows what they are doing, who wears hard shoes when mowing, and just wants to get the job done. Little kids (under 15 or so) probably should NOT operate power equipment. They don't have enough life experience to pay attention while the engine is running. No kids here, so I am not putting anyone but me at risk. When I sell the mower, I'll take the magnets off the deadman switch handle, and cut the zip-tie holding the skirt up, and all the nanny features will be back in operation. Next owner can make their own decision.
--
aem sends...

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It seems that's a reasonable option - they could make the safety interlocks much, much hard to defeat but they don't and that is a realization that they're a pain to "smart" people. So, if you know what you're doing, you disable them, and if you don't, you can't. The problem is that all this stuff gets sold without a lot of instruction so the safety interlocks become the last line of defense. No one wins when a kid loses fingers or toes in a lawnmower and a kid mowing a lawn is something to encourage - it means they're not huffing glue, vandalizing cars or stealing bicycles. (-: Like I said, I neither mind paying for nor having to defeat the safety features if a few more kids get to keep their digits.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 05:56:22 -0400, "Robert Green"

False choice. Hindsight isn't a logical argument.

Umm, SawStop doesn't have a radial arm saw. I haven't used my RAS in years and really bought a table saw because I don't like the RAS. It has done some things that weren't expected.

Why can't people understand cost-benefit trade-offs? Why does everything have to be an absolute? Why can't people just spend twice as much on everything because it's "safer"? Do you have a fire truck and ambulance standing by in your garage?

Yes, accidents happen. So what? Not everyone will do something that dumb.
<snipped the rest of the clueless rant>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Aug 13, 6:41pm, " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"

Learning from the mistakes of others is. In fact, it is pretty much the supreme logical argument unless you're living in some ivory tower.
I'm not trying to convince you to do anything with your money. You earn it, you spend it. You are free to spend as much or as little on a tool as you see fit. I was merely addressing some inane remarks that the SawStop is worthless and bad technology. It's anything but.
You are now free to resume your normal programming.
R
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

No, because there is no guaranty that any individual will have an accident. The argument was worded as a decision made in hindsight. "If you knew you were going to die today, why don't you stay in bed.".

It's not worthless at all. It's *WAY* too expensive. If it was perhaps $500 instead of $2000, I would likely have come to a different decision. It was *not* worth twice the money.

This is normal, here.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Aug 13, 7:29pm, " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"

$500...? For a table saw? Huh? For $500 you get a DeWalt job site saw. Hardly comparable to a cabinet saw. The SawStop is also more than just the brake. In all of the reviews they mention it's well thought out design and nice features. You are comparing two different animals, saying they're the same, and then basing your opinion solely on money. Where's the logic in that?
It's your opinion that is *WAY* too expensive. Opinions vary, and there's a niche for every tool. It's no skin off of your teeth, is it? So what's your beef? Do you get all bent out of shape because a Mercedes is twice the price of a Toyota? Fine, don't buy it. But to picket in front of the store, which is kind of what you seem to be doing here, seems odd.

True. :)
R
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Yes, I *might* have gone $2000, instead of the $1600 I paid for the Unisaw, but there was no way I was going to shell out $3500 for the SawStop. A nice Grizzly cabinet saw was about $1300.

No, $500 for the SawStop *FEATURE* (it should be closer to $200). I might have gone for perhaps a 30% premium, but *not* twice. This isn't an academic exercise for me. I've been there.

Exactly! Do you propose that *everyone* drive a Mercedes because they may be safer than a Toyota? ...even though they cost twice as much? After all, you're far more likely to get killed driving than you are working on a table saw.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Aug 13, 8:31pm, " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"

I don't think a Mercedes is twice as safe as a Toyota, but no, it's like I said, anyone is free to buy whatever they want. I was just addressing the SawStop disinformation.
BTW, I've recently started making the switch over to Festool stuff. Their smaller circular track saw lists for ~$500. Their jigsaw close to $400. The vacuum I got, with all of the accessories, lists for over $1600 before tax. There are no Festool discounts available anywhere. I picked up the tools at a garage sale, and on eBay and Craigslist. I paid roughly $900 for the three. Including the other Festool stuff I've picked up, I'm all in for about two grand, and I'm not done. I am now selling the tools I've replaced and expect to get at least six or eight hundred. I'm trading up.
Is the stuff worth it to me? Hell yeah. I wish I had gotten into it earlier. Life is too short to work with 'acceptable' tools that inconvenience me. All of their tools are part of a system, and you can use the tracks with their routers, jigsaws, and circular saws. The dust collection with their vacuum is almost perfect, and it's a variable speed _quiet_ vacuum. It makes the work much more enjoyable and I don't spend nearly as much time cleaning up. Time's money, whether you're getting paid for it or not, right?
I can't just look at a tool and say that just because it's X dollars more that it doesn't make sense. I have to factor in the other things, and those other things can easily tip the scales one way or the other. I don't have especially deep pockets, but I'll find a way to afford something if I think it warrants it. I've never used the SawStop, and I'm not trying to sell it to anyone, but if I were in the market for a table saw I'd certainly take a hike down to a dealer and put it through its paces before I shelled out any cash.
R
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Pick your poison then. You would have everyone spend twice as much?

I have a couple, likely won't buy any more, though. Too expensive and I'm happy with the other tools I have.

Have one (TS-55). I may pick up another (shorter) piece of track next week.

No use for it. Perhaps if I didn't already have a Bosch.

Didn't want yet another dust collector. I have enough of 'em. Their bags are ridiculous.

They (TS-55, TS-75, track, and dust collectors) were just on sale for 10% off. Not much, but it *was* a discount.

...and a OH1400 (router).
I can buy this stuff partially because I chose not to spend $3500 on a table saw. My Unisaw works just fine.

Yeah, I know all about FesteringTools. Your point?

Sure.

Your point? Why don't you have a SawStop. OMG! You're going to DIE!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The "predatory lending" portion of your post could have been left out, since it wasn't really relevant to the discussion, but since you brought it up...
"Predatory lending" came about as a result of laws interfering with banks doing business. No one in their right mind lends money to someone who can't pay it back unless they are given sufficient reason to do so. Laws, and regulatory agencies who go after banks for discrepancies in loan approvals provided that reason. In order to stay in business making loans to people who *could* pay them back, lending institutions began making loans based upon social factors rather than business factors. To do otherwise would cost too much in the form of defense against litigation for "redlining". But when you are reactng to an artificial factor in the market, you lose the eficiency of the market. There came more dead weight than could be borne by the lending institutions, and here we are. Because of government interference and then bailouts in that instance. If businesses are allowed to do things like have limits on what can be collected by knuckleheads who harm themselves acting foolishly, insurance premiums would go down as well.
As for the Saw Stop device, I like the idea, and I am happy to see an innovation of its kind making money. I have a tremendous amount of respect for someone who takes the initiative and risk to invent and patent a device which many find useful. What I *don't* respect is (if true as presented earlier in this thread) someone attempting to make their invention a legal requirement. If that were to become the case, I would hope that the companies being held to this are able to bypass his patent with another device.
If enough people feel his saw is superior and worth the extra money, he will succeed. In fact, it appears that he is succeeding. It is unfortunate that it seems to have taken his failing at the "legal requirement" shortcut after he was unable to sell the technology to the companies in existence when he invented the device. But he now was forced to compete on the open market. He's doing well, and it shows what being forced to compete can accomplish.
I agree that the reaction to new safety devices of this sort are - well, reactionary. Some are certainly based upon the new and different, some are "tough guy" responses, some are people who don't like the idea of the added expense. I think a good many, though, are reacting to the feeling of being pushed into safety without their consent and the ability to weigh the pros and cons for themselves. They kind of steel their jaws to it because they would prefer to make determinations of the relative values of safety, convenience, cost, and a thousand other unseen factors that may play a role in their decision process.
My reaction to the Saw Stop device was "Wow, that's great. I'd like to have one." Then I saw the price, and thought "Perhaps an acceptable level of safety can be reached in some other, less costly way." Bear in mind that the acceptable level of safety for me in part is accomplished by relatively minimal use of the table saw, but if I were making my living as a carpenter, the cost-benefit analysis would change, and I might see the price as more reasonable in relation to my purposes. But that would be one of the thousands of unseen factors that I would be in the best position to determine for myself.
The important component to this would be that the cost of my decisions would be borne by me as well. While I have a vested interest in keeping all of my digits and avoiding the attendant pain of a traumatic amputation, when the scenario includes society (or an insurance collective) sharing the long-term cost of my mistakes, I am more likely to make those mistakes than if I have to bear the long- range consequences myself.
Therefore,I think it is in some sense the idea of rugged individualism which fuels reactionary responses to such safety devices. For my part, I think the Saw Stop is phenomenal. I wil let the richer among us vet the product at a higher cost, as they typically do, before I get one. I bear no ill will toward them, nor do I toward those who make safety devices of this sort. I will, in fact, join their ranks when I am able, either as a rich guy (not likely) or as a guy who waited for the price to come down. I do, however, confess to being one who reacts quite negatively to the concept of someone else determining that I must pay for safety in a manner decided by someone else, applying weight to factors perhaps quite differently than I might given my own personal circumstances.
In short, Bully for the Saw Stop guy, but not for an attempt to do an end around and essentially require that his product be bought.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Woof! This has been a very articulate and long thread of repetition of claimed "facts" that has ever been repeated. I did a speed-read of the whole thread without coming across any new or even lesser known facts which, BTW were given adnauseum without the faintest hint of verifiability. The time spent on these large opines is certainly questionable.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 8/29/2010 7:03 PM, Twayne wrote:

One thing I have learned from all of this discussion, your hot dog is safe around one of those saws.
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Say again? Either English isn't your first language or it was written after more than your first drink, or, as your "woof" implies "No one on the internet really knows if you're a dog or not."

Very thorough, I am sure, and not missing any items like:
"Power saws may cause severe lacerations and fractures. Nerve, tendon, vascular injury and amputation are possible as well. Fingertip injuries are the most common with the thumb being the most commonly injured digit. An injury sustained from a power saw could quickly and suddenly have devastating consequences. It has been determined that a circular table saw can sever a human forearm 6 centimeters in diameter in just 40 - 60 milliseconds depending upon the feeding power of the saw."
http://www.handctr.com/power_saw_injury_of_the_hand.htm "
So you're expecting us to believe you at your word, that you knew JUST how fast you could get you forearm cut off and which finger gets cut off the most? Those, among others, were new facts to me, along with the other citations I posted. Are we expected to believe you knew about the stats concerning children and power saw injuries at the site below, too?
http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics ;107/6/e106

Are you SURE you were reading the thread about the hot dog saw and not some other newsgroup? We do see some spectacular mis-posts from time to time. Your post was completely free of any words related to the topic, so I have to ask . . .

Tell the man who's forcing you to read the thread with a gun to your head that you'd like to renegotiate your contract.
Who but a troll would post such a message in a newsgroup that exists to promote discussion of various topics? In addition, it's a) our time to waste and b) don't your think your post is actually the most guilty of being a fact-free waste of time? Flanigan's Law: A man will accuse others of what he is most guilty of himself.
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 8/11/2010 11:55 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:

I'd be willing to bet, no woodworker worth his salt would have one of these pieces of shit in their shop.
--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, I'd take your money, but I didn't see you put up any cash, sailors are worth their salt, not woodworkers, and it's interesting that you, with no firsthand experience, just a mouth and an opinion, know all about what every woodworker would have in their shop. I'll tell you what - why don't you post your list of the tools in your shop and we can have all of the other manufacturer's just close their doors so people won't waste their money buying them. Will that suit you?
If, by the remotest chance, you'd like to learn instead of just spouting an opinion based on your imagination, remember to read then post. The order is important.
http://www.consumersearch.com/table-saw-reviews That's a review aggregation site and they don't make an opinion, they just report what others' have written. Silly publications like Fine Woodworking, American Woodworker, etc., etc. seem to like the SawStop just fine. I'm sure they'd appreciate you posting your opinion on why the saw is a POS and how you arrived at that conclusion. Everyone needs a laugh now and again. Thanks.
R
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 8/11/2010 3:00 PM, RicodJour wrote:

article there.
--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.