Nonsense? Not quite. I would say it is settled science that a thin kerf blade requires much less energy to cut the same board. Every review and study I have seen published, regardless of the wobble issue, shows that lower powered saw can cut boards easily with a thin kerf that they cannot cut or only burn bog cut with a full width blade. Pretty simpel to visualize removing less material with each bite. Ever spend much time on the business end of a shovel?
I always hold onto the handle to operate a shovel.
wrote
I have only one question. Have you tried an eight tooth blade for use in cutting hard to cut wood, so hard to cut that it is close to the limit of what your saw can cut at decent feed rates?
If the answer is no, you are only guessing about what I have written about.
If you don't buy that, then that is your loss.
I know of what I speak. So do a few others.
So, come back and say you don't buy it after you have tried it. Until then, well....
"SonomaProducts.com" wrote
Nonsense? Not quite. I would say it is settled science that a thin kerf blade requires much less energy to cut the same board. Every review and study I have seen published, regardless of the wobble issue, shows that lower powered saw can cut boards easily with a thin kerf that they cannot cut or only burn bog cut with a full width blade. Pretty simpel to visualize removing less material with each bite. Ever spend much time on the business end of a shovel?
******************************All good and well, until you start cutting thick wood, hard wood, wet wood (treated) of if the blade starts to get dull.
Then they can get hot, and can wobble, flex, and turn into more of a bowl shape than anything else. I have seen that happen.
The original should have read "Fewer teeth = less HP required." Happy?
The rotational mass of the motor is decoupled from the rotational mass of the blade due to the elasticity of the belt. The extra mass (regardless of how small it may be as we are not discussing HOW much extra mass) will help smooth out the vibrations set up by the chopping action of the the teeth of the saw blade. The issue here is mechanical impedance. Then again, the guys at Harley Davidson don't know dick about decoupling rotational masses either, right? OR the guys at Thorens.
The more linear the tooth's attack speed is, the better the cut will be.... and please stop throwing variables as if they're apples and oranges. The more mass, the smoother the cut...even though it might be minuscule in results, it bloody well is a fact. And to bring the width and the rake of the tooth into the discussion just muddies the waters. I clearly stated "everything else being equal". The amount of teeth have nothing to do with the quality of the cut assuming the feedrate is adjusted accordingly, and if your blade has only one tooth, best you feed slowly or make that tooth go really fast. Case in point, I can make a really nice, clean cut with a one- toothed cutter at 25,000 RPM.
Don't feed the troll.
Go f*ck yourself.
Oops. I focused in on ("saw") "less HP". Sorrreeee.
I did not say dull, not all new blades are equally sharp.
And going a bit farther on the subject, ;~)
I was building several drawers today and got to use my "Kerf Maker", drive by. Any way it occurred to me again why I have better results with thick kerf vs. thin kerf. I use 1/4" plywood for the bottoms and cut snug dado's for them to fit in to. Cheap 1/4" plywood is about 7/32" thick and the outer and inner blades on a dado set are too wide. So I make two passes with my thick kerf blade. With a think kerf blade that requires three passes instead of two and also I recall when I did this long ago with a thin kerf blade the dado width would not be constant. I suspect that because only the outer side of the blade is cutting on the final pass the thinner blades will deflect.
If anything, I'd expect less wear on a thin-kerf. They use less power to cut, so they shouldn't get as hot. Less mass, too, but the surface area is the same (and any dissipation through the hub, trunion,....
I suspect equal wear, but where do you get the idea that less power needed from the motor would equate to "should not get hot"?
Actually I often over heated a thin kerf blade, for what ever reason. It warped enough to see, as it cooled it straightend back up some what.
I have a Diablo for my 6-1/2" 18V Dewalt cordless circular saw. Nice blade.
Jeez, If had been a snake it would'a bitten us. :~)
Right, but "all things being equal"...
Neat tool, eh?
Wouldn't it be better to cut the outsides first and then clean the center? I just bought a Freud Glue Line (standard kerf) rip blade. I haven't had a chance to try it though (too hot!).
Less power == less heat. Assuming the power needed to turn the saw is proportional to the kerf width, the heat generated is also proportional to the kerf width. The dissipation will be proportional to the surface area and the dissipation through the bearings is a constant (with temperature), so a thin-kerf should run at a *lower* temperature.
Yes, it's understandable that a thin-kerf will warp more easily since it's not as rigid. That likely goes both ways, though. It'll more likely recover than a standard kerf.
I think I have used it on every project that I have worked on in my shop. Really, I have used it more that I thought I would.
Well, no. Cutting with a regular kerf blade, you do cut the outsides first so to speak. There is nothing left in the center of a 7/32" dado like there would be using a thin kerf. Otherwise, yes, with the aid of the KerfMaker on wider dado's.
When I did this with a thin kerf I would make multiple passes until the width was correct. If you made the outer two cuts first they had better be right, the KerfMaker did not exist back then. I found that sneaking up on the final was less wastful than from unusable results trying to get the two outer cuts precicely positioned. You really could not set this up in advance by testing with scraps unless you did not mind the chance of gaps.
Yeah, I ain't buying it, ;~) I agree with some of what you said, but I still dont agree that less power needed from the motor =''s less heat from the blade. A thin kerf blade is 1/32" thinner than a regular kerf blade. Still the teeth have approximately the same side surface area on both sides. So friction is not really 1/3 less over all, it is 1/3 less on the top of the tooth. Basically they have the same contact area on the side of the teeth.
And ture teeth are cut so the sides do not touch the wood under optimum circumstances but in little time pitch builds up behind the cutting edge of the tooth and rubs the wood.
You will like it.
...
But, a few ounces as compared to the rest of the mass isn't going to be noticeable. I've never been able to tell any difference of note between the two on the PM66. On a small contractor saw one might have a better chance...
Oh, I know. I was splitting hairs.
Think of it this way, all of the power the motor delivers is turned into heat eventually. Some of it is transferred to the sawdust, some is retained by the blade. The more power needed for the cut, the more heat needs to be dissipated elsewhere (some of it by the blade).
Sure, that friction against the sides would be independent of the kerf width. Making more sawdust takes more energy. More energy => more heat
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.