mac davis wrote:

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 10:21:40 -0600, Duane Bozarth
wrote:

Doug Winterburn wrote:
...good comparative points between RAS and SCMS...

I'd only add that to get anyways close to the precision of a decent
miter saw in a RAS will entail getting a much more expensive RAS.
They're really two completely different animals for differing purposes.
While some functions can overlap, choice of which to get should be
driven by need/usage.

Duane.. I'd agree with your statement, except that the OP was asking about a
SLIDING CMS.. I've heard lots of complaints about the sliding saws regarding
accuracy and "twist" of the saw..

OTOH, the RAS took me a lot more getting used to and had more to learn than the
CMS.. it still feels weird to have the work on the bottom and the blade on top,
moving.. but both of the above do that..
....

My comparison was basically on the relative cost of the two for roughly
equivalent "precision" (for lack of better short description)--my
experience has been the RAS will be significantly more expensive to get
similar performance than the CMS--not that there aren't junk CMS's. The
number of RAS being made now makes some of my past experience not so
applicable though as there aren't as many on the low end. I tend to
write off Craftsman stuff any more so theirs could be now more
substantial than I think. As noted, I keep watching for an Original for
a price, but they're not many of them anybody lets go! Of course
I've seen quite a number of large older Delta/Rockwell/other, but w/
integrable motors the 3-phase is a pita as I really don't want to go the
converter route (expense, almost exclusively).

Using either CMS or RAS is, indeed a different beastie! As in all, care
and most of all, thinking of what one is doing are crucial. W/ time,
like w/ any other activity, it becomes much more natural. Having mine
for 30 years or so now, I've become quite accustomed to it although I no
longer use it for everything as I did initially.