Thin kerf if you must (marginally powered saw)
Full kerf if you can. I really do think the cut is better.
I think the "uses less wood argument is pretty weak. I also think the an
exactly 1/8" kerf is handly for measuring. Sometimes I make a cut, for
instance a rabbet, where the cut measurement includes the kerf. It's much
more handy to have a round number when adding the kerf to the TS scale.
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
I don't see any particular extra flutter during cut that is significant,
but do notice it on startup. (Of course, the PM66 flings it to speed a
heck of a lot quicker than do many smaller ts's or contractors' models.)
I've gotten a few dings in the blade insert from that w/ them that
doesn't happen otherwise.
I only use the thin kerf rip version when I double-gang them for cutting
tenons--they work fine as far as the quality goes. If I'd had the
opportunity to try it first, I'd have gone w/ a regular thickness to
avoid the above issue, but I didn't have a pair of identically matched
and so for the purpose when I made the purchase seemed a reasonable
While many promote the savings of wood that the thin kerf saves I would
imagine for the normal user it may save you wood 1% of the time when ripping
if the waste is still useable. For the length of the board probably never.
The thin kerf will not necessarily gibe you a rougher cut but then cutting
thinker materials, harder materials, and a miter or bevel the cut will not
be as true as the of one made with a regular kerf blade assuming equal
The first thin kerf blade that I used on my TS was in the early to mid 80's
and man did that saw blade cut fast. The cuts however were not true. A few
years later I bought a good quality Systematic regular kerf combo blade and
it cut much better and only slightly slower than the thin kerf, and that was
on a TS with a 1 hp motor.
If you buy a good to premium quality regular kerf blade you should benefit
more over a thin kerf.
I have a Forrest WWII thin kerf.
Love it. If I had a 3hp or more cabinet saw instead of the contractor
saw I would go with the 1/8 blade.
I don't think of it as saving wood, but allowing me to cut the wood with
less power, and more easily. With the large stabilizer on it doesn't
vibrate , at least that I can tell. With it off, it may, I don't see a
difference in the cut.
As always you mileage may vary.
On Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:20:46 -0700, "Kevin"
Try each type in your operation. Then from you own experience select
what works best for you, use it, and let the excess verbiage,
prejudices, and irrelevant opinions pass by ignored.
I don't think so. If there is a common ancestry, it predates the War
of Northern Aggression.
About 40 years ago, I was close to getting my Engineering degree and
was putting out employment feelers. I noted the commonality of names
and, more out of curiosity than anything else, sent them a letter.
Never received a reply. Guess they weren't into nepotism.
| The argument for TK was less wood, less dust, thicker wood capacity
| My thoughts is TK is also going to wobble more, cut rougher.
I use the cheapo Oldham 60T thin kerf blades from Home Depot (about $20) for
alot of my ripping only and my cuts are fairly smooth; for crosscutting I
have been using the Amana Melamine blade ($80). Just works for me. I use
a couple of Freud blades also, but these are more than adequate and are cost
effective. I don't have the cheap blades sharpened, but pile them up for
steel scrap. I do sharpen the Amanas and Freuds.
My feeble opinion
woodstuff, have a good day.
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.