Rigid table saw recall

[mjmwallace]

Saw this today on Rigid's website:

Name of product: Ridgid 10=94 Table Saws Units: About 3,000 Distributor: One World Technologies Inc., of Anderson, S.C.

Hazard: The table saw=92s arbor shaft can fail when used with a stacked blade set (commonly known as a =93stacked dado set=94 and used to cut grooves). The stacked blade set can be ejected from the saw, posing a potential laceration hazard to consumers.

Incidents/Injuries: One World Technologies has received three reports of shafts failing when used with a stacked dado set. No injuries have been reported.

Description: This recall involves Ridgid 10=94 table saws, model R4511. The recalled saws have manufacturing date codes between CD0829 and CD0837. The model number and manufacturing date code can be located on a metal plate on the rear of the cabinet. Products with an =93Arbor Inspected=94 sticker directly above the plate or an orange square on the outside of the package are not included in the recall.

[Chris Friesen]

Oops!

Chris

[Ed Edelenbos]

YIKES!

[Greg Neill]

You left off the part of the notice that includes the remedy and contact info.

. Sold exclusively at: Home Depot stores nationwide from January 2009 . through July 2009 for about $600. . . Manufactured in: China . . Remedy: Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled table . saw and contact One World Technologies to schedule a free on-site . repair. . . Consumer Contact: For additional information, contact One World . Technologies toll-free at [phone] between 8 a.m. and . 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday or visit

The fact that they'll provide free on-site repair speaks well of their commitment to their customers.

[Leon]

Name of product: Ridgid 10? Table Saws Units: About 3,000 Distributor: One World Technologies Inc., of Anderson, S.C.

Hazard: The table saw?s arbor shaft can fail when used with a stacked blade set (commonly known as a ?stacked dado set? and used to cut grooves). The stacked blade set can be ejected from the saw, posing a potential laceration hazard to consumers.

Snip

Jeeez, You would think that if there was a strongest part to a TS it would be the arbor. Makes you wonder about other parts on the saw.

[d.williams]

Makes a good case for registering any tool with the manufacturer, I know it's something that I don't always do. I wonder how many of the 3000 owners will never have a clue about the potential danger because they never registered the tool with Rigid.

[CW]

And when you register, they sell your name to the junk mail people. Not always but it happens often enough.

[Lew Hodgett]

And?????????????????

Isn't that why circular files were invented?

Lew

[CW]

Why should I pay to dispose of their garbage?

[Lew Hodgett]

Ever hear of Recycle?

Lew

[LD]

I get one bill. Pays garbage and recycling and I don't have the option of saying I'll do my own recycling for a cut in the bill.

[Lew Hodgett]

Sounds like recycling is already included.

Lew

[LD]

Then, I'm paying to dispose of Junk Mail.

[Dave Balderstone]

I get a lot of junk mail that has a postage-paid reply envelope in it. I tear up whatever offer they've sent me, along with what ever other crap I happened to get that day, and mail it back to them.

Petty, perhaps, but it puts a smile on my face for a short time.

djb

[Lew Hodgett]

Doubt it.

You are probably paying a flat fee for total service.

Do you get a assessed a premium to recycle your junk mail?

Lew

[LD]

Which includes recycling junk mail, Hence I am paying to get rid of it.

As is everyone else in a similar situation.

[Ed Pawlowski]

Many towns you pay by the bag. A bag full of junk mail will cost you $2

[J. Clarke]

We need legislation enacted to force the post office to deliver a cinder block with a business reply envelope attached.

Junk mail is out of hand.

[Doug Miller]

We need legislation enacted to force people to deal with their own problems, instead of expecting the government to enact legislation to deal with them.

I have a garbage can in the garage, which I walk past on the way back in from the mailbox. The junk mail never makes it inside the house.

And I didn't need legislation enacted to figure out how to do that, either.

[Steve Turner]

Those junk mailers pay money to send that stuff out, so it's most likely a source of revenue for the post office, correct? I presume that outlawing it would cause them to lose money. However, the post office is a government agency supported by tax dollars, and my understanding is that the cost of postage is held artificially low as a result. The junk mailers are most certainly getting a sweet deal here, so how much of my tax money am I receiving back in the form of junk mail that I throw in the trash? I don't recall ever receiving any junk mail delivered by FedEx, UPS, or any other private courier.