Mark Wells said:

It doesn't sound to me like your problem has anything to do with the
fact that the blades are carbon vs. silicon steel. They are just
poorly welded. I got some no-name carbon steel blades locally that
were welded on-site. The weld looked terrible and wasn't very well
aligned. Even those welds held up just fine.

That's what I thought as well - poor welds. I can't say anything
about the blade's actual lifespan, 'cause they break too easily!

After trying Timberwolf, I've had better luck with Lenox blades. They
are much less expensive than Timberwolf and seem to stay sharp just as
long. I think this "thin kerf, low tension silicon steel" label is
just marketing. The kerf doesn't seem any smaller than any other
blade I've used. The tension seems to be about the same as any other
blade. I have no idea why they think silicon helps. There's not some
kind of magic steel that the Swedes discovered that makes Timberwolf
blades a lot better than everybody else. What Timberwolf has done is
made ordering blades easy. They also provide a lot of information on
the web about using those blades.

Suffolk's web site IS informative, but I agree that much of what a
manufacturer presents in oftentimes marketing B.S.
Never having used one, voicing this option was based upon the many
recommendations here in the Wreck.

Here's a price comparison for Timberwolf (from suffolkmachinery.com)
versus Lenox (from carbide.com):
Timberwolf 105" 1/2" 3tpi - $17.42
Lenox 105" 1/2" 3tpi - $10.72

Attractive Prices!

It's amazing how much hype costs. A Timberwolf blade will definitely
not last 63% longer than a Lenox blade. In fact, in my experience,
the Timberwolf blades dull pretty quickly. In terms of the quality of
the cut, they seem to be the same.

Well, another option thrown into the ring. Maybe I'll order some of
each type and draw my own conclusions.

Thanks for the info!


Greg G.