If you mean "several decades" as "very briefly", then yes.
Automatic front seatbelts, _or_ airbags, became mandated in 1988 or so.
Airbags suck much less than automatic front seatbelts - the ones mounted
to the doors were particularly useless, since if the doors popped open,
just when you needed the seatbelt to keep you in the car, it wasn't
Well, if they get the technology solid, then let's talk. I'm not
holding my breath.
You don't. But that's not in their business model, so they don't care.
Same way you do it with the expensive saw, only cheaper. Look around you at
anything electronic, many appliances, etc. They are much cheaper now that
the were some years ago. My first bedroom size 6000 Btu AC was over $150 40
years ago. Today I can buy one for $99. Standard features in an economy
car today are better than luxury cars of the past.
Improved design, higher volume to justify new tooling and the price will
come down quite a bit in a few years.
Although their initial marketing approach was a bit (!) antagonistic,
our marketplace IS based on capitalism. This was a small group of
individuals who wanted to make a few bucks on their idea. They
initially approached other manufacturers and were turned down.
Admittedly, I don't know the figures they requested for the license on
their device - perhaps they were just to greedy. It's not even a new
technology, per se - only it's application to tablesaws.
But Imagine the flack if you tried to deny Thomas Edison or Steven
Jobs a profit on their 'inventions'.
It was derived from this statement, which was snipped:
Your comparison of mentalities implies that they should have donated
the idea to the market in a good-will effort rather than obtain a
patent and earn a profit. I doubt they have the resources of MB or
Saab, or for that matter, Delta/Pentair - only an idea they wanted to
And no, I don't own one, and probably never will.
And I agree that their marketing technique was heavy handed.
Avarice rules - even under the guise of public safety.
OK, one of us is missing the other's point, and I'm not sure who. What
I was trying to get at, is that Mercedes didn't then patent crumple
zones and lobby the government to force all cars sold to have crumple
zones. The effect would have been to force everyone to buy Mercedes
cars. They didn't do that.
Yup. Luckily it wasn't mandated and we have the choice.
Different but basically the same. I was thinking that it was indeed
different but it still comes up from the back and covers the blade. Can't
be used when cutting dado's.
I do see however that the newly designed saw comes with a riving knife.
OK, I see what you're after now.
Since I don't feel the need to use a guard when cutting dados or using
a sled, I hadn't thought of that aspect. But since dados are not
through cuts, it would require an over-arm type, like the Beisemeyer
and others - or an overhead mount. They're prolly never going to
include those types as standard equipment.
But they should ALL include a pop-out riving knife that tracks the
Having a tire blowout or getting wiped out by some airhead chatting on a
cell phone while piloting her SUV 20 MPH over the speed limit is not in
the same category as a usually self-inflicted wound at a table saw.
While woodworking YOU are in charge of what you are doing. On the open
road you are at the mercy of others, as well as a mechanical failure. I
don't know of many (if ANY) finger loses due SOLELY to mechanical
failure of a table saw. If I'm wrong, enlighten me. I'll stick with my
Unisaw for now...
I think it is unrealistic to expect any safety device to *prevent*
accidents. Airbags, brakes, fire extinguishers--they all fail or go off
prematurely under certain conditions.
A more realistic view is that the purpose of the sawstop is to reduce
the likelihood/severity of accidental injury when flesh contacts the blade.
Viewed in this light, I think it's a great idea.
That said, I don't think it should be mandatory, and I don't think it's
worth the current premium for myself as a hobbyist.
I think it is. It has its acute problem right now but that is to be
expected. So far the problem is a nusence.
I bet Joe would beg to differ with you since the saw just saved one of his
employees thumbs by working as advertised.
If the safety feature never works correctly to prevent an injury again Joe
is ahead of the game.
Critical components in aerospace applications are required to be a LOT
more reliable that a mere 99.9999%
I worked with a company that made internetworking backbone equipment.
Our customers demanded a better level of reliability than that. And
these devices are a LOT more complex than a Sawstop.
I have a 50 year old tractor that seems that reliable. And it sits on
a very, very, old concrete pad that is at least 99.9999% effective and
I'm sure the Sawstop electronics and mechanism can be made reliable,
however, if the fundamental concept is flawed, (ie, it cannot reliably
discriminate between wet woood and dry hands) then it has a bigger
In the event of spurious tripping, do they offer free cartridges and
new blades forever? I could be interested then.
Look into "6 Sigma" - here's a FAQ:
to achieve 6 sigma quality, you need 3.4 defects per 6 million
Thousands of businesses are using this data-driven methodology to
improve quality and profit.
GE, for instance, claims to have saved $10 billion because of this.
They really needed to, because their quality was low at the time. I
heard of a story where some city was going to buy a $5 million
generator, and when the boss found out that they were planning to by a
GE generator - he said "No way. My wife bought a GE refrigerator, and
it was a piece of crap."
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.
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.