On Aug 11, 2:19*pm, RicodJour wrote:
On Aug 11, 1:52*pm, DerbyDad03 wrote:





On Aug 11, 1:06*pm, RicodJour wrote:

On Aug 11, 12:55*pm, DerbyDad03 wrote:

On Aug 11, 12:28*pm, RicodJour wrote:

Trot on over to rec.woodworking and ask how many people over there
have been bitten by a saw.

Then ask them if they have replaced the saw that bit them with a SawStop.

You're missing my point, DD. *The price premium is high - now. *It'll
come down. *The price is immaterial to the fact that it is a user-
selectable safety system that actually works, doesn't get in the way
of cuts, and is invisible in use. *It's better technology.

A better question to ask over at the wreck would be, if you had a
choice of paying $2000 now and getting the tip of your finger back,
would you?

R

"The price premium is high - now. It'll come down."

When? Here's a thread from 2003 in which lot's of people are
complaining about the price.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.w...hread/thread/5...

I believe the device hit the market right around then. Since that
time, to my knowledge not one manuafacturer has adopted (and paid for)
the technology.

As long as only one company controls the patent, then I don't see why
the price would come down.

Because the inventor is either a smart businessman, or he has good
people running it. *He's been trying to squeeze the market into buying
them at his price by trying to get legislation passed. *With most
inventions there's essentially zero chance that that will happen, but
with something that has such great whiz bang demonstrations, and with
something that is obviously so much safer, it's probably just a
question of time. *It's a game of chicken.

I didn't say the price would come down overnight, but it will, and I
don't think it will be all that much longer. *More money is made
selling lots of units at a lower price than a few at an exorbitant
price. *The margin won't be as great, but the total income will be far
more. *The most likely scenario is he'll sell the company to a big
manufacturer that is willing to take the risk and pay up front to get
a jump on the competition.

R- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

"Because the inventor is either a smart businessman, or he has
good people running it. "

I'm not so sure. First he tried to get the major manufacturers to
purchase his technology and they all showed him the door. That's when
he played the safety card and tried to get the government involved.

If the device is mandated across all manufacturers, I doubt the price
will come down because they'll all push back and say "We can't do it
cheaply. We'll have to re-tool, we'll have to re-train, we'll have to
re-lawyer in case the device fails. We'll do it, but the cost will be
prohibitive."

I don't recall if it's in the thread I posted the link to or in
another, but there was mention of a school district that cancelled
it's shop program because the board mandated that they purchase
SawStops for their schools. I paraphrase: "If a safety device exists
that can protect our kids, we must use it." The schools couldn't
afford to buy all new table saws and the program was cancelled out of
fear that the "older technology" would make them liable if someone got
injured.

A "smart businessman" would have donated a bunch of SawStops to the
schools as a means to get them seen in the market and garner a bunch
of goodwill. His "good people" should have caught wind of the
situation and taken care of it.

If I suffered from "Conspiracy Theory Syndrome" I'd say they didn't
want to get involved for fear of the device failing and some kid
losing a finger or two. Read on...

A r.w poster supposedly wrote to SawStop and asked if they ever tested
the device with a human finger. Here is a snippet from the post and an
additional comment from another poster:

*** Begin Included Text ***

"I received the following reply from Stephen Gass, President of
SawStop (posted (t)here with his permission):

'However, before we first showed the system at the Altanta IWF 2000
Tradeshow, I tested the system with my own finger and just a tiny nick
was the result. Of course, I wasn't shoving it into the blade quickly
or anything like that, but it did prove the point. We don't do this on
a regular basis for two reasons. First, even a small cut on a table
saw hurts a lot. Second, no system is perfect and sometime I'm sure it
won't go off, just like airbags sometimes fail. I don't want to push
my luck. '

(snip)

Another poster's comment:

"This could be one of the reasons (besides the cost of redesign and
retooling, and the resultant price increase) why the big manufacturers
passed on this system. From a liability standpoint, it's a lot less
risky to market a dangerous tool when there is no implied "fail-safe"
finger protector. A small percentage of SawStops will fail, just as
airbags will. However, the bags are designated a "supplemental
restraint" to be worn with seat belts, while the SawStop has no other
system to act as a partner. If someone is hurt as Mr. Gass implies may
happen, then the entire liability could become the manufacturer's and
the potential costs would be very high. I'd guess that SawStop's
literature will be phrased very carefully to remove any implied
warranty."

*** End Included Text ***

Should this system ever be mandated by the government, who would be
ultimately responsible should it begin to fail more often once it
begins to see wide spread use?