J wrote:

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

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.

If in fact the blade is damaged. Does the current version of the
Sawstop
damage the blade?

When I looked at it the answer was yes.

Is that still the case?

I did my research. Your turn.


If you blow a fuse, you do not have a breaker to flip.

Right. This is why I replaced my fused electrical service with a set of
circuit breakers. I still have a box of fuses. If you want them let me
know.

You have to unscrew
or unplug the old fuse and put a new one in. If you don't have a
replacement fuse you have to go get one. If this happens on your car at
midnight in a blizzard on a rareley travelled road, then you're screwed.

Actually, since fuses are a dime a piece and there are always some extras
included in the fuse compartment this isn't much of an issue unless you
forget to replace them a number of times. And in the situation where you
really truly don't have a fuse you just take one from something that you
don't need. Power windows for example. I have done this on more than one
occasion. On another occasion I blew a big starter fuse which was unusual
enough that I didn't have a spare and that most auto parts stores don't
carry. I fashioned one out of some wire I had in the trunk.

In none of these cases was I carrying around a spare part which cost a
substantial fraction of the car's original cost.

So you don't carry a spare tire, which costs about the same as a Sawstop
cartridge?

The point is that if you know you might need the cartridge and you don't
have one reasonably accessible, that is your choice to make and your error.

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.

So they put the in themselves. Nobody has said anything about
"waiting
for
service".

You disagree with me. That is OK. I'm just glad I don't HAVE to buy one
if
I don't want one.

I don't particularly like the product or the company and probably would
not
make it a consideration in purchasing a saw. I was merely speculating on
a
way that the company might persuade saw manufacturers to use their
product.

But your objections for the most part do not appear to be valid.

Then why didn't the saw makers buy into this device?

This may come as a shock to you but the fact that _your_ objections are not
valid does not mean that there are not other objections that _are_ valid.
Presumably the saw manufacturers did not buy into it because they saw no
good reason to do so.

Why didn't the CPSC approve their petition?

Perhaps because they felt that it was not adequately supported? Or perhaps
during the public comment period enough people said "over my dead body" or
words to that effect that they decided that the public did not want such a
regulation to be implemented?

Why aren't people lining up to buy this saw?

Because they don't want it?

Can it all just be conspiracy?

Maybe it can be that we just don't want the thing.

Go ask Occam.

-j

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)