Makes as MUCH sense as comparing ALL 10in cabinet saws, from 1.5hp to
5hp in the same article vbg!. Unless they narrow the field as to
HP AND wheel size, you are always going to get this type of review,
and if they narrow it down too much it may be a one horse race, or
maybe a 2 horse race

However, resaw capability is often contingent on wheel size (as well
as design), and one would expect to be able to do most things on ALL
machines with the same size wheels, just maybe easier/faster on those
with the bigger motors

John

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:26:11 -0800, "Brett A. Thomas"
wrote:

So my recent article on the Jet 18" caused me to go back and pick up FWW
170, where they reviewed 18" bandsaws. And it got me thinking - does it
make any sense *at all* to rate these things on wheel size? They do a
head-to-head comparison of (among others) a $1,200 Jet with a 1.5 HP
motor and 10" cutting capacity against a $2,900, 5 HP, 18" capacity
Laguna machine. GUESS WHICH WON? Why did they even need to write an
article to figure that one out? How is it useful to even _compare_
these machines? They're obviously in completely different leagues!
It's like grouping tablesaws by miter gauge width, or something...
Wouldn't it make more sense to compare bandsaws by cutting capacity,
since there seems to be such a wide variation in the capabilities of
machines that are the same wheel size? Or am I just showing my bandsaw
ignorance, here?

-BAT