Circular saw recommendations?

Fairly easy to do, since you're using your fingers to feed the wood into the blade.

Only if you're stupid enough to put your fingers in front of the blade.

See above: the RAS rides on rails. Keep your fingers away from the path of the rails, and there's no problem.

Reply to
Doug Miller
Loading thread data ...

I borrowed one my clients' Bosch spade bits the other day when I couldn't find my set in my truck. Hayseuss Crisco, what a difference! I didn't know a spade bit could cut like that. Scary fast, smooth sides, super-aggressive feed. I'm completely sold.

Bosch Daredevil. Here's one source:

formatting link
merely took the energy it takes to pout and wrote some blues. --Duke Ellington

Reply to
Larry Jaques

Like the 12 to 16-inchers at the lumber yard?

I wonder what this local (?) yard uses...

formatting link
merely took the energy it takes to pout and wrote some blues. --Duke Ellington

Reply to
Larry Jaques

Hell, that's happened before. But what have here, is someone (you) who defends the RAS from the vantage point of having a rugged, rigid industrial 16" and my beef is with the far less secure crap that is in the majority.

Oh hell, yes. A shaper is probably the nastiest piece of gear out there...jointers can eat a hand right to the wrist and blow a cloud of pink mist all over the shop.

And that's another factor. A RAS requires thought, skill, experience. Joe Blow, who buys one on Saturday morning, assembles it hastily in order to build that dream piece of furniture and a RAS is the perfect tool to teach him that there are no short cuts, and second chances only come to a lucky few. Same as a 16-year old with a license he got 2 days prior, who climbs on a 150HP crotch-rocket. Is that the motorcycle's fault? Your argument is that it isn't. (Work with me here). Is it the kid's fault?......in fact, it is the combination of the two which causes all the grief.

As long as one throws qualifiers at the risk factors involved, all tools would end up being safe. We know that that isn't true. The RAS requires a disproportionate amount of caution, especially if it is a wobbly piece of crap.

I agree. Underpowered saws are more dangerous.

You, your experience, smarts, and a fine tool, make that combination as safe as it can be. The rest of the RAS's and their operators are at a higher risk.

Reply to
Robatoy

12 or 16 inchers ARE good. I've seen a lot of big crap over the years

- and I've seen some beautiful, simple, crude, and accurate swinging cutoff saws at lumber yards that are certainly not "radial arm saws" that do that job just fine - but I wouldn't want to try to cut cove moulding with them.

Reply to
clare

If you will reread what I said, given the way "most" are set up...

Reply to
Leon

Well, _most_ TS are sitting on their own, too, and you wouldn't say that makes them unsuited for use...it's a selective criticism against the RAS owing to your bias against it, not a real issue.

--

Reply to
dpb

...

I really don't see how the RAS is any riskier than the cheap homeowner TS the same Joe Blow could put in the trunk of his car and carry home for the same purpose...many of them are too small a table, critically underpowered and flimsy just as does the cheap RAS.

As for the comparison, yes, I do tend to blame the operator as being the culprit over the tool as a general precept. I suppose being a farm-bred and raised kid who grew up around large and often far more perilous equipment(+) gives me an attitude, not to mention having reached official geezer status. :)

(+) I'm such an old f--- that I predate the advent of required fully-enclosed PTO shafts, chain shields were generally as minimal as possible and open platforms. One didn't expect the gear to look out for you; you knew to respect it and to be the cautious one yourself.

Now, things aren't the way they used to be and it does seem as I assist at Farm Bureau safety events for kids (they're required to have a course and certificate to work off their own farmstead now) that there isn't the awareness that we used to have and an expectation that somehow they should be protected against whatever happens instead of ensuring that something bad does _not_ happen. Equipment _is_ safer and that's _a_good_thing_ (tm) but expectations are so different in societal blame-shifting it shows up even at this. I do not think that is a good trend.

--

Reply to
dpb

The whole point is, and you your self have made the comment that the DeWalt/B&D style RAS's are less than desirable. Most users use that style saw if using a RAS and the users have a valid point about the problems that are inherent with RAS's.

Because you use a "Tank of a RAS does not mean that there are not deficiencies in the design.

Reply to
Leon

On 8/9/2011 9:04 AM, Leon wrote: ...

But the same thing is true about the sorry POS benchtop or contractor wannabe TS's, too...

It's not the RAS per se, just like it's not the TS; it's the implementation if anything.

The old DeWalt of Dad's is still here; it would be perfectly adequate as a hobbyist tool w/ one thing--a more powerful motor. At one time one could, in fact, swap out the components and do so; I tried to talk Dad into doing it but he was almost done w/ the house remodel so didn't think it was worth fooling with and so it's still as it was. I brought my shop from TN when came back, of course, so it's still out there. I've not gone to trouble of trying to sort out what have so many duplicates of or which of the combined set is the better to cull the herd but at some point really should; I've got stuff in every corner of every outbuilding on the place... :(

Somehow the RAS has become the same emblem of the down and out to be kicked around just like the BORGs; it's a popular position but is mostly just reiterating the refrain.

I'll retire from the thread; I think I've made my position clear. The RAS is a fine tool for the purposes to which it is best suited and is a worthy complement to the TS in almost any shop. I would still recommend a _good_ TS as the first acquisition for most folks but I'll never accept the blanket condemnation of the RAS as a device. Criticism of a specific tool is something different.

--

Reply to
dpb

On 8/8/2011 8:46 PM, dpb wrote: ...

[in connection w/ ripping on RAS]

One last comment re: your experience w/ overfeeding...

NB that the reason for the tendency of the RAS to do so (and probably the prime reason for the naysayers is a failure to fully comprehend the nature of the beast in operation and allow for it) is that in normal crosscutting of starting w/ the head behind the fence and the material in front for a cross cut, one _is_, in fact, climb cutting. That means the blade will want to pull the material in but since the fence restrains it, the head instead tends to want to accelerate towards you so one must have some restraining force to prevent it from overfeeding beyond the capacity of the particular saw.

Again, it's just the nature of the beast but it isn't terribly unsafe; just disconcerting since the path of the blade and the material are constrained. Just like one shouldn't feed a rip cut on a TS w/ the hand in front of the blade or put the fingers on the miter box near the location of the cut, one shouldn't have one's off hand in the way of where the RAS blade travels on the carriage.

In fact, since moving the carriage on the RAS requires one hand on it and therefore off the table, one could make the case that the risk of losing a digit is reduced by at least half in comparison to the TS since there are only half the number of candidates even potentially in harm's way. :)

--

Reply to
dpb

"Infeed" and "outfeed" are meaningless terms when talking about cross- cutting on a RAS. It's a lot easier to lay the thing on the RAS table and prop up the ends with saw horses or stools or a rope tied to the ceiling than it is to work out some kind of movable or low friction support for the ends as is needed with a table saw.

Reply to
J. Clarke

Why were there only the two choices you mentioned?

I would have taken the $120 and bought a new decent saw rather the a new cheap saw. Metal casings can be a shock hazard.

Reply to
Nova

Well, Pshaw! I'm goin' out tomorrow and get me one of them 16 inchers. How much do they cost?

Max

Reply to
Max

On 8/9/2011 3:42 PM, J. Clarke wrote: ...

I never talked about "infeed" or "outfeed" (intentionally, anyway; I won't say I didn't write something confusingly inadvertently :) ); there I was indending the directions to be those when ripping.

It may be easier for a one-time deal, surely; but the solution (and imo which isn't so humble :) ) the only way to have a RAS workstation is to have it in a long table that supports the largest majority lengths of material used for both crosscutting and ripping. Mine sits in a 20' section w/ roughly equal distances both directions. Now granted that's a little more than most have room for but it now sits in the alleyway of the barn that's 66 ft unobstructed so it's not a problem. The 20' is because it fit the full length of the garage wall shop in TN and I've not enlarged it.

Again, of course, this is a 16" puppy and I had it that size owing to doing mostly ante- and early post-bellum renovations in Lynchburg, VA, and surrounding counties when I got it to handle the sizes of materials we were finding in them.

I'd have been happy w/ a 14 or even 12 but got lucky and an acquaintance working at the old Lane furniture (then the new production facility was almost new) got me a deal on this one out of the old facility in Alta Vista.

--

Reply to
dpb

He who is plonked is a little slow and prides himself when he can find a statement that can be understood in a way. Helps him think of himself as an expert. They are in feed and out feed tables as you mentioned, making the comparison to the TS. As you well know they don't change names because you happen to use them for cross cutting also.

Did I just say that? ;~0

Reply to
Leon

On 8/9/2011 5:17 PM, Max wrote: ...

If you have to ask... :)

No idea, as mentioned in another thread, I got lucky on this from an acquaintance working at Lane.

It looks like Delta makes nothing but the 10" any more; Original Saw Company still makes industrial-strength (and priced) RAS up to at least

20". If I had to guess I'd say a 16" would run $5K any way, these days new. Seems like last time I happened to notice a new blade was roughly $1500...

--

Reply to
dpb

At the time a GOOD saw was still considereably more than I paid for the part - and a metal housing saw, with a properly grounded cord, is no more of a shock danger than a cheap plastic saw. A GOOD plastic saw isn't much better. The BIGGEST shock danger with ANY saw is cutting the cord.

Reply to
clare

On 8/9/2011 7:26 PM, Leon wrote: ...

...

Chuckles...speak clearly into the microphone, please...

Reply to
dpb

$1500 just for a blade. I could get a Saw Stop for that much and then I wouldn't have to worry about ripping, crosscutting or anything 's' okay. I just realized I don't have enough room for it anyway. ;-)

Max

Reply to
Max

HomeOwnersHub website 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.