"Tom Watson" wrote in message = news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com... | On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 03:03:28 GMT, snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) | wrote: |=20 | >I'm always mystified at the prejudice displayed toward RASs by those = who have=20 | >never owned and rarely used one. |=20 | Well, I've owned three of them, used them a lot in the past, and I | think they suck. | >
| >Radial arm saws are WAAAAAY safer than table saws. |=20 | An interesting claim but one not carefully supported by data. |=20 | > When operating the RAS, one=20 | >hand is *always* on the handle of the saw and it is therefore = impossible to=20 | >amputate that hand or any of its digits |=20 | Are you suggesting that most table saw accidents result in double | amputation? |=20 | >- and to keep the other hand safe, all=20 | >you have to do it put it someplace that isn't in the path of the = blade, and=20 | >keep it there. |=20 | Well, Golly Gee, isn't that the whole game with any tool? | >
| >Kickback is a rare event, and if it occurs, the workpiece is thrown =
*away*=20 | >from the operator, not
*toward* him as with a TS. |=20 | It is not the workpiece that must be feared but the whirling blade | that self feeds towards the operator, perhaps not by intent, but | surely by design. | >
| >Crosscutting long boards on a table saw is insane by comparison with = doing the=20 | >same on a radial arm saw. |=20 | Are you not available to the joy and safety of cutting with a sled and | outfeed table? | >
| >Ripping looks scary... but think about it - there's less blade = exposed during=20 | >rip operations on a RAS than on a TS (assuming you haven't done = something=20 | >stupid like removing the guard). |=20 | In the act of ripping with a table saw the work is directed down and | towards the table, whereas the work is naturally thrown up when using | a radial arm saw. |=20 | In what way do you think that having the work directed away from the | table is more safe than having it inherently directed towards it? |=20 | >
| >I know I'm coming perilously close to violating the Usenet Prime = Directive by=20 | >attempting to inject a dose of reality into a discussion |=20 | Not so far. |=20 | >, but, please, let's=20 | >at least attempt to be a little bit objective here. |=20 |=20 | I agree totally with Robatoy on this and I will be glad to tell you, | in the spirit of objectivity, that you will never see one of these | widowmaker pieces of shit in a professional shop, excepting the | instances where it is dedicated to crosscutting, usually close to the | lumber rack, so that it can buck things up into rough lengths. And | that is only the case because they already owned the pig and did not | want to sell it for scrap to have a down payment on a SCMS. |=20 | Radial Arm Saws are the Swiss Army Knives of the amateur wooddorking | world and suffer from the same affliction as their referent; they | don't do anything well but are often asked to do many things poorly. |=20 | If radial arm saws had a corkscrew, I might consider putting one back | in my shop. |=20 | I long ago traded a RAS, allegedly capable of cutting 25" in crosscut, | for a 12" SCMS. The reason was that what was alleged did not prove | true, to a usable accurate degree, under daily use, and that work went | back to the TS. |=20 |=20 | A careful thinking about the geometry and stresses under load of a | contraption such as the RAS would inevitably lead a thoughtful and | prudent person to give theirs away to their dearest enemy. |=20 |=20 |=20 |=20 |=20 |=20 | Tom Watson - WoodDorker | tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (email) |
formatting link
(website)
Being as objective as one can, I must honestly declare that I have both = in my shop. I started with a RAS and added a "cabinet" saw shortly = after I discovered the thrill(?) of a RAS RIP. I later added a slider.
Anyone in the London ON area like a really good, hardly used RAS?
--=20 PDQ