On Aug 20, 3:24 pm, "
wrote:
On Aug 20, 9:15 am, Charlie Self wrote:

I'd love to get one of the
DeWalt's for a comparison.
My guess, though, is that all the mags already have that lined up.

Not exactly on topic, but I would like to see someone like you get a
hold of that thing myself.

I am pretty sick of "product testers" checking out new tools in these
magazines. Guys that might be testing screwdrivers one week, blenders
and toasters the next, are testing tools for specific use when most
have no knowledge of the tool in general.

As tool costs rise for quality tools, I want to see in depth,
practical use tests for the tools, not tests set up by a committee
after talking to the manufacturers to see what their specific design
parameters addressed.

Many times "field guys" have a different set of specific requirements
than "shop guys". For example, I am all for huge battery life, but
not if the tool is so flimsy that if it falls off the tailgate it
smashes into a million pieces. Yet how many times, other than tools
that were specifically designed and sold with this as a feature, do
they drop the tools on concrete? How waterproof are the workings?

They have been doing those tests with laptops for years, and I'd bet
money more people are careful with their laptops than they are with
their cordless tools.

And while I am glad table saws are tested with Forester blades and
their equivalents, I want to see how saws test out with a simple good
quality blade on it, one you can buy at a local machine shop.
Forester blades can make just about any saw look good.

Same with sanders. I would love to have a $500 disk sander, but how
much actual difference would you see if I took my $250 Swiss made
Bosch with super premium paper in it as a comparison? No matter how
premium it is, $250 difference will buy you a stack of sandpaper.

Before someone starts up, I want to make it clear I am not bagging on
someone's sander, the tool was used for purposes of illustration
only. Same with the saw.

The point is that most of the nitwits that design and test the tools
in these reviews have no more business doing so than I do building a
moon rocket.

I just want practical tests, that's all. How about taking two sanders
and clicking the retaining button on the trigger closed and let them
run all out for an hour, rest an hour, run an hour, rest an hour,
etc., for a month and THEN test the output? After all that's only 80
hours of work time based on an 8 hour day in the lab. Even for a home
shop guy, that's pretty low mileage for a sander, maybe replicating a
year or so work.

To me, that would constitute a more valid test since you would know
how much tool you will have in the long run.

But you know... they just don't ask me.

Anyway, back to work.

Robert

Robert,

To pick a couple nits: I'm not sure that high speed running for
however long would be a really valid test. What might work is some
weighted device to hold the sander in contact with a surface being
sanded for 10-15 minutes per occasion, with repeats for xxx times,
plus stops to change sandpaper. Then take the sander and have the same
person, over a period of days with different sanders, test how
comfortable it feels in use, horizontally, vertically, maybe even
overhead. See how long it takes someone to change paper. See how
effective the dust collection is--overhead sanding is a great test
here, IMO. With drills, it's easier, especially if you can figure a
way to automate the testing. But I'd just run each drill until the
fully charged battery stopped doing its job. Do the same with each
drill. Zing. You got the holes per charge, at least for that
particular size hole. Your arm falls off the next day, of course.

I've got one of the new Delta 17" drill presses. That's a solid
pleasure to use, with a table designed for woodworking. One day, I may
even hook the laser up. I'd like to see some comparisons with old
types, as well as checks of drill speed, etc. Run out, of course.
That's a quick and easy check. Drill presses tend to be exceptionally
useful, and, often, awkward, but it seems to me this one is less
awkward than older units I've used. Maybe that's just me.

If one saw is to be used with a Forrest blade, then all saws need to
be used with the same, or similar, blades. In fact, a Forrest (or
similar) blade can improve saw performance. It can't do a thing to
help poor runout on the arbor, a lousy fence or an uneven table
unevenness, among other problems. I'm all for testing saws with blades
OTHER than the ones they come with, because, unlike contractors, most
woodworkers ditch the original blades on tablesaws, bandsaws and such
as quickly as they can. It also evens out the tests. Everyone gets off
from the same set of starting blocks. Too, Tools of the Trade may be
doing destruction testing. That's a magazine I never seemed to have
any luck with, but it does, or did, do good work the last time I
looked (late '90s).

Some kind of basics need to be set up when a test is begun, but a lot
of questions are answered with tool selection, right at the outset.
Specs? All 3HP table saws should produce, within fairly tight limits,
the same amount of power. All 5/8" arbors should accept any good blade
punched for 5/8" use, something that's not always true. Saw tables
should be flat within .xxx, but there's really nothing like a
consensus here, among testers or manufacturers. Fit, finish, overall
appearance. It doesn't seem as if those should matter much, especially
the last two, but over the years, I've found that most of the
manufacturers who provide a good looking saw with a well done finish
also provide other quality features.

I'd love to test the Bosch against the Festool. I have both. But I'm
not going to. Why? I try not to beat up my tools. I'll still use a
screwdriver to open a paint can, and even to stir the paint, but I am
not going to wreck tools, or even add excessive wear to them, that I
might have to replace, tax deductible or not. Some one once asked me
why I didn't buy more camera lenses, because they're all tax
deductible. Big problem: earning the money from which you can take the
deductions.

Speaking of which, I need to do that. Earn some money. I'm writing an
article on rental garages---at road racing tracks.