I am in the market for a table saw. This will be my first saw, and for that
matter my first stationary tool. My first project will be to build some
cabinets to clean up my shop space. In the future I intend to continue on
with my hobby of furniture making.
I am looking at this as my first saw, one that will get me through the first
5 or 6 years... long enough for me to decide if this is a life-long hobby.
I want a quality saw that will not frustrate me or be an un-necesarry danger
to me. I do not have the shop location wired for 220, and at this time I
don't intend to do it anytime soon. The saw will have to be somewhat mobile
as I have to share the 'shop' with a car during the cold Canadian winters...
I had initially decided on the General 185 Contractor Saw. I have read good
reviews about it, and it came recommended by a much more knowledgeable
friend. Recently I noticed the General 220 'Hybrid' Saw being offered.
Does anybody have any working experience with this saw? Does anybody
reccomend one over the other?
I have read various negative postings regarding the AMPs on the motor and
the 2HP claim, and was wondering what the opinion here was. My
understanding was the General uses a two pulley system which accounts for
the greater horsepower rating....
The reason for my shift in thought here is that (correct me if I'm wrong)
the 220 being in a cabinet should have less vibration and of course have
better dust collection. If the motor is indeed 2HP, then the 220 should be
a supperior saw? Even if the saw is slightly less than 2HP is it worth the
Any help would be great.
The General sounds like a winner.
I have had a Jet contractor saw for about five years now and have been very
pleased with it. It has a great fence and plenty of power. We use the saw in
our vintage trailer restoration business. I think I paid about $475.00 for
I usually encourage people to buy inexpensive or used equipment if they are
new to woodworking.
However, I get the sense that you can afford the difference. Then yeh, the
extra HP and the better DC make life much more pleasant.
I'd suggest the Delta Contractor's saw complete with a Unifence and the
wheeled dolly option, which I have found does as good a job as i need
none; however, you have products available in Canada that may be equally
as good or better.
A word of advice.
Any saw on the face of the earth that you drive under a Unifence will
get the job done.
The fence is the most important part.
Buster might care to look at my web site - Circular Sawbench Safety - Buying
a Circular Sawbench.
Above all, I think I would try to establish how well the crown guard (hood,
Murricans) automatically lifts as work is fed to the saw, suspecting that
this could be the prime reason why people become frustrated and fail to use
this vital part of the machine.
Jeff Gorman, West Yorkshire, UK
email : Username is amgron
I believe we call it a blade guard over here, your lordship. If you
need to resort to provincial name-calling to get attention, you might at
least have the courtesy to expand your vocabulary of American terms to
equal your vocabulary of offensive slang. But I've heard that courtesy
isn't what it used to be over there, something which you so aptly
Actually, what the Yurpeans use on table saw blades is properly called
a crown guard, both for its shape and for its action, which is far more
precise and efficient than the U.S./Canadian "blade guard".
Geeze, what an uncalled for ad hominem driveby. FYI, IMHO Jeff has
more courtesy and grace in his pinkie than most Murricans have
altogether, including me. A visit to his website and a google of his
posts on the wreck will demonstrate to any thinking person that he is
willing to share in a thoughtful and meaningful way his wealth of
experience, and if you don't get his sense of humor as expressed in his
OP above, then why not just leave it alone and stop giving Murricans a
bad name by bashing this particular gent.
Speak for yourself. I fail to see how his corruption of the word does
anything for our good name, or his for that matter. We don't have a
vast lexicon of annoying slang for the British, but if I was to pick
through the sewer and find some, would you find that humorous? Maybe
Mr. Gorman has yet to be reminded that such comments aren't always
welcome. In that case his knowledgeable woodworking posts can only be
improved by the omission of the provincial jabs. If he was just doing a
little innocent trolling, then he got what he was looking for. You see,
it's all good.
I thought I was speaking for myself; last time I checked, the slang
IMHO meant In my Humble Opinion......
While I'm at it, IMHO, (oh, sorry, speaking for myself) I don't find
the word "Murricans" the least bit offensive.
Balderstone might have gotten it right. You might want to check your
corn flakes daily.
Well, Pig, (does that make you a Murrican Pig? ;)) I didn't know that I
was supposed to be offended by "Murrican" either! Heck, I had to DAGS
- I had NO CLUE as to what it meant, and why Hax was so upset.
Apparently, you and I both need to study more the things that are
supposed to offend us (BIG wrap, be careful):
p.s. Mutt, I agree w/ the entire content of your original reply to
Canadians are "Murkins", too. So are Argentinians. The continents are
"America", not the country. We live in The United States ***OF*** America.
We get a couple Canadian stations here, & it always cracks me up when they
interview someone who says something derogatory about "Americans". YOU ARE
I doubt very much that you'd find many (any?) Canadians or Argentinians who
would agree with you. :-)
I'd like to point out, also, that the official name of our neighbor
immediately to the south is, in English, the United States of Mexico. And to
the best of my knowledge, citizens of that nation refer to themselves as
United States of Mexico --> Mexicans.
United States of America --> Americans.
There used to be several others in South America as well, but the official
names have since changed. Here's what they used to be:
United States of Brazil --> Brazilians.
United States of Venezuela --> Venezuelans.
United States of Colombia --> Colombians.
To sum it up, you're just flat wrong. Citizens of Canada are Canadians;
citizens of the United States of Mexico are Mexicans; citizens of the United
States of America are Americans. All are _North_Americans. Similarly, citizens
of Argentina are Argentinians, and _South_Americans. But Canadians, Mexicans,
and Argentinians are not "Americans" by _their_own_ definition.
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)
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.