The Milwaukee Super Sawzall 6537-22 is what my local hardware store carries
but is there a better one? Would orbital action be better? I'm looking at a
120V corded unit with smooth cuts, minimal vibration, good power and good
reliability. I burn up about 2 reciprocating saws (not Milwaukees) about
every 5 years so heavy duty and reliability is a must.
I don't use mine all the time, but my Milwaukee Super-sawzall has been
in use for my entire home construction project, and other than the cord
needing to be re-terminated twice, has been rock solid. The longer
stroke can be hard on blades for the novice user, but sounds like you're
past the "bend blades all the time" stage. If this one ever goes out,
I'll probably replace it with the same thing, I'm quite happy with it.
Milwaukee just introduced a new, more powerful SawzAll, the 6523-21 Super
SawzAll. It is now 12Amps instead of 7, has a 1-1/4" stroke, and orbital
action at up to 3000 strokes per minute. If my old SawzAll wasn't doing as
well as it is, I'd jump on this in a heartbeat!
Jim Ray, President
McFeely's Square Drive Screws
(We do not carry Milwaukee tools, BTW. But if you are looking for Festool,
come see us)
I own a a heavy duty sawzall model 6507 that I got second hand. It's
corded. It sure has come in handy. I usually buy 3rd party blades 'cause
they're cheaper and I've only broken one so far. I use mine for pruning
and hack sawing. I would buy another.
You'll be happy too.
If it can help you... I spoke with the Milwaukee representative in
Quebec and he told me there is no need at all to go for the orbital
action or a more powerful model.
Milwaukee do make more powerful models but it has a lot more to do with
catching up with the competition on the specs side than genuine
technical requirement. Just claiming that you've got the "most
powerful" reciprocating saw on the market is usually enough to gain
substancial market shares... so Milwaukee don't want to be left behind.
I have the Super Sawzall 6537-22 and I've been very satisfied with it.
I would buy the same model again tomorrow in a blink of an eye.
The brand you mention is called the best, and I know of no better.
Even the Sazall has some vibration, and not as smooth of a cut as a
jigsaw. I really like the way the blade is held in place with the
Milwaulkee brands. My Sawzall has been used for 15 years and still
The trick IMHO, is the blade, not the saw.
Stick with bi-metal blades or carbide if you cut fiberglass like I do.
Stick a good blade in almost any the the "SawZall" products out there
and you will be happy.
There is a reason they are called sawzalls. My kid once went to an old
hardware store in Boston and asked if the Sawzall would cut cast iron pipe.
The grizzled old yankee fart said; "Kid, it ain't a Sawzsomething. It
ain't a Sawzmostthings. It's a SawzALL, now get to work." The kid was
house manager at his frat and now owns his own.
On one of my early assignements as a Westinghouse field maintenance
engineer, we discovered an electric utility generator that had been
installed incorrectly. This was not your garden variety generator. It
was 500 megawatt capacity and supplied the city of Corpus Christi,
Texas. the fix was to cut three holes through 4" thick steel plate.
We put a crew on it with a Milwaukee sawzall running round the clock
for most of the weekend. In the end the generator was fixed and the
sawzall was still running strong. The name has stuck with me ever
But it isn't the same Circle-W--in mid-90s the Nuclear Division was sold
to BNFL plc and although they use the Westinghouse name, what was
Westinghouse has morphed into CBS...there's a timeline at
http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/A1a.asp# which documents the demise.
As I recall, somewhere in the early 90s was when all the other
components not associated w/ the nuclear division were parceled off...
While always a competitor, in a way sad to see the loss of a straight
line from George's babies to the present...
There was no rhyme nor reason to their pricing strategy.
If they needed to fill a factory, they would buy the job.
If they didn't need to fill a factory, they either wouldn't bid or else
bid very high.
You could never predict which way, so you just ignored them.
Well, there was a lot of that in the nuclear industry...we (one of the
competitors) considered selling the reactor basically as Gillete thinks
of razors--you could basically give the razor away in order to sell
blades/shaving cream, etc., forever. Refueling and services was
intended to be the long-term cash cow. The only requirement was to not
lose <too> much money on the nuclear island.
Can't comment on anything having to do with the nuclear industry since
my employer walked away early and left it to people like circle W.
It looks like the electric utility industry is trying to get the public
to pay for the clean up costs which were suppossed to have already been
Oh well, what else is new?
There is no one other than the public to pay for it. We either
pay for it now out of ratepayer funds, or pay for it later as a
consequence of using capital that otherwise would be spent
on expansion or improvement, including improvements that would
LOWER future rates.
I'm not clear on how government action, by Carter or any other
adminstration created a problem the utilities need to clean up.
Perhaps you could explain via email, or followup to an appriate
newsgroup as that would no longer be a woodworking topic.
Perhaps I could, but your address doesn't appear to be a valid one so
I'll just post as OT response...I guess if you want to followup you
could go to alt.engineering.nuclear.
Re the question, I wasn't totally clear what was meant either, hence the
multiple question marks. I thought I'd take a chance however and was
alluding to the cessation of consideration for review and ultimate
approval/licensing by the NRC of reprocessing which was one of Mr
Jimmy's edicts and which ultimately ended up in monitored retrieval and
the snafu at spent fuel pools...
As for your apparent wish for an unspecified something else, I'll simply
note the investment in environmental cleanups for fossil isn't
inconsequential, either, and aren't over. That ratepayers will pay for
power costs is a given in a market economy. I'm not sure exactly what
your contention is here in order to actually respond....
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.