People had the same worries about airbags in cars. False discharges,
failure to discharge, injuries from discharges... all happened
sometimes. But the odds were (and still are) that they save enough in
injuries to be worthwhile. The big problem for manufacturers is that you
can not retrofit these easily on existing designs. There is a big cost
to redesign to accommodate SawStop.

That being said, if the technology works and is, when in wide use, under
$150 in extra cost, it will be on the large majority of saws within 10
years. The case for reducing the risk of disfiguring, disabling,
painful, expensive injuries would be too compelling for manufacturers or
the feds to ignore.


J wrote:
"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...

It just occurred to me that the replacement parts for the Sawstop could be

a

profit center for saw manufacturers. Especially if it falses

occasionally.

Probably be able to make as much margin on those as on a blade.

Wonder if he tried to sell it that way? The razor and blades approach.
Give away the sawstop and figure enough people are hamfingered enough to
make up the cost in consumables?

Be interesting to see some market research on that.

If there are 30,000 table-saw related injuries that require a hospital

visit

every year (and presumably most of those would have triggered the sawstop
if it was present) how many more were there that did not require a

hospital

visit but would have triggered the sawstop? There seem to be about ten
non-amputations for every amputation, if that carries through to
non-hospital then there would be about 300,000 Sawstop activations a year.
So what is that in terms of percentage of the installed base of saws?

--
--John


If there were 300,000 saws that required re-activation and new blades every
year (and you are talking US only) at a cost of several hundred dollars
each, you would see the price of pre-sawstop saws go through the roof.

You would also likely see a class action suit from users of expensive
sawblades for damage due to false positives. I'm not sure how users on a
remote site would take to having their saw shut down because someone screwed
up and used it to cut a ham sandwich. Would you be willing to wait for
either the saw to be shipped to an authorized service center, fixed and
returned (and you still have to buy a new blade) or wait for someone to come
out and fix it (and you still have to buy a new blade)?. Or would you rather
wrap your knuckle in a starbucks napkin and run a few layers of masking tape
over it and get on with your work?

Sure it is an interesting idea, but it doesn't have practicallity on it's
side. Saw manufacturers want to sell saws. They do not want to have to deal
with servicing saws. Saw buyers want to use saws. They do not want to wait
for service which they can not perform themselves.

-j