Frank Boettcher wrote:
....

And, of course, there is very little serious evaluation in most reviews
at least of what these measurements _really_ mean in a quantitative
sense of how the machine actually will perform on a comparative basis.
Your contention is that most do not already know how a particular
feature measurement translates into real world comparitive
performance? Do you?
For a lot of these measurements reported, no, I don't

Well that's too bad, maybe you should study up a little, or better
yet, use your machines to get some practical experience.

(and certainly
don't believe the general audience for which such reviews might be of
real value do either).

Then there is probably no basis for continuing this discussion. I
believe the vast majority do. I base my conclusion on talking with
literally thousands of end user woodworkers at shows and directly
resolving issues as quality manager for a number of years. And your
belief is based on...
....

That there is no direct correlation of the magnitude of a measurement of
the vertical post alignment to the actual misalignment of the guide
blocks for an adjustment on the height into an actual performance
statistic for the saw as just one example. The last review in FWW
mentions the misalignment can cause a need for readjustment as a general
reason for looking at it but gave no guidelines at all on how much is
too much or would be considered acceptable.

That "smaller is better" is a given, but whether 3 or 10 or 30 is
really, really bad isn't clear to a general audience who is looking to
buy a saw for the first time, certainly, which is a large part of the
target audience of such reviews.

I'd be terribly surprised if you could take a sample of the readers of
any of the general circulation magazines and have even 5% of those who
are owners of a bandsaw and could come anyways close to telling either
what their saw measured for that statistic or had ever actually measured
it or thought to.

And it still doesn't address the issue of how the distribution of
individual machine measurements correlate to the measurements of the
population of machines of which the tested one was a single sample.

All I'm pointing out is that w/o some context, the reviews have some
merit but could be more informative than they are but recognizing there
are limitations to the format.

Don't know what you're seemingly so angry over or feel the need to
denigrate, but whatever you say...

--

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:16:37 -0500, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
...

And, of course, there is very little serious evaluation in most reviews
at least of what these measurements _really_ mean in a quantitative
sense of how the machine actually will perform on a comparative basis.
Your contention is that most do not already know how a particular
feature measurement translates into real world comparitive
performance? Do you?
For a lot of these measurements reported, no, I don't

Well that's too bad, maybe you should study up a little, or better
yet, use your machines to get some practical experience.

(and certainly
don't believe the general audience for which such reviews might be of
real value do either).

Then there is probably no basis for continuing this discussion. I
believe the vast majority do. I base my conclusion on talking with
literally thousands of end user woodworkers at shows and directly
resolving issues as quality manager for a number of years. And your
belief is based on...
...

That there is no direct correlation of the magnitude of a measurement of
the vertical post alignment to the actual misalignment of the guide
blocks for an adjustment on the height into an actual performance
statistic for the saw as just one example. The last review in FWW
mentions the misalignment can cause a need for readjustment as a general
reason for looking at it but gave no guidelines at all on how much is
too much or would be considered acceptable.

That "smaller is better" is a given, but whether 3 or 10 or 30 is
really, really bad isn't clear to a general audience who is looking to
buy a saw for the first time, certainly, which is a large part of the
target audience of such reviews.

I'd be terribly surprised if you could take a sample of the readers of
any of the general circulation magazines and have even 5% of those who
are owners of a bandsaw and could come anyways close to telling either
what their saw measured for that statistic or had ever actually measured
it or thought to.

And it still doesn't address the issue of how the distribution of
individual machine measurements correlate to the measurements of the
population of machines of which the tested one was a single sample.

All I'm pointing out is that w/o some context, the reviews have some
merit but could be more informative than they are but recognizing there
are limitations to the format.

Don't know what you're seemingly so angry over or feel the need to
denigrate, but whatever you say...


And absolutely nothing in that answer had anything to do with any
statistical supporting basis for your belief that most end users
don't know. As I thought, strictly an opinion. That's fine. I
believe most do. My sample is large, and the vast majority could
discuss those things clearly.

However, as I recall, you're the same guy who believes that end user
woodworkers are relatively dumb and are clamoring for a 10% lower
price to get chinese junk. Your stated belief from an earlier thread,
is that is what is causing the flight to china rather than the
manufacturers "corporate whiz kids", who by the way share your belief,
that is, those woodworkers are dumb, cut the cost by 25%, cut the
price by 10%, give them junk and they'll be happy as clams and we'll
clean up.

Not angry, just know BS when I see it.

Frank

Frank Boettcher wrote:
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:16:37 -0500, dpb wrote:

Frank Boettcher wrote:
...

And, of course, there is very little serious evaluation in most reviews
at least of what these measurements _really_ mean in a quantitative
sense of how the machine actually will perform on a comparative basis.
Your contention is that most do not already know how a particular
feature measurement translates into real world comparitive
performance? Do you?
For a lot of these measurements reported, no, I don't
Well that's too bad, maybe you should study up a little, or better
yet, use your machines to get some practical experience.

(and certainly
don't believe the general audience for which such reviews might be of
real value do either).
Then there is probably no basis for continuing this discussion. I
believe the vast majority do. I base my conclusion on talking with
literally thousands of end user woodworkers at shows and directly
resolving issues as quality manager for a number of years. And your
belief is based on...
...

That there is no direct correlation of the magnitude of a measurement of
the vertical post alignment to the actual misalignment of the guide
blocks for an adjustment on the height into an actual performance
statistic for the saw as just one example. The last review in FWW
mentions the misalignment can cause a need for readjustment as a general
reason for looking at it but gave no guidelines at all on how much is
too much or would be considered acceptable.

That "smaller is better" is a given, but whether 3 or 10 or 30 is
really, really bad isn't clear to a general audience who is looking to
buy a saw for the first time, certainly, which is a large part of the
target audience of such reviews.

I'd be terribly surprised if you could take a sample of the readers of
any of the general circulation magazines and have even 5% of those who
are owners of a bandsaw and could come anyways close to telling either
what their saw measured for that statistic or had ever actually measured
it or thought to.

And it still doesn't address the issue of how the distribution of
individual machine measurements correlate to the measurements of the
population of machines of which the tested one was a single sample.

All I'm pointing out is that w/o some context, the reviews have some
merit but could be more informative than they are but recognizing there
are limitations to the format.

Don't know what you're seemingly so angry over or feel the need to
denigrate, but whatever you say...


And absolutely nothing in that answer had anything to do with any
statistical supporting basis for your belief that most end users
don't know. As I thought, strictly an opinion. That's fine. I
believe most do. My sample is large, and the vast majority could
discuss those things clearly.

However, as I recall, you're the same guy who believes that end user
woodworkers are relatively dumb and are clamoring for a 10% lower
price to get chinese junk. Your stated belief from an earlier thread,
is that is what is causing the flight to china rather than the
manufacturers "corporate whiz kids", who by the way share your belief,
that is, those woodworkers are dumb, cut the cost by 25%, cut the
price by 10%, give them junk and they'll be happy as clams and we'll
clean up.

Not angry, just know BS when I see it.

I guess it depends then entirely on who you think the prospective
audience is -- I do think the general audience of the ww'ing magazines
have quite a lot larger proportion of those who are casual as opposed
those who aren't than you apparently do. I don't know that either of us
has anything other than opinion to substantiate that belief.

All I know about the Chinese junk syndrome is what I see about what is
being manufactured and being advertised and reviewed along w/ the
better. If there weren't a market, why are they building it and where's
it going???

Still don't see that any of that answers in any regards the simple
suggestion that more data rather than less is a bad idea for anybody in
a review, expert or not--the more expert, the more valuable I think.

But, again, to each his own...

--

"Dave in Houston" wrote in message
...

"Jim" wrote in message
et...

"Bob" wrote in message
...

"Jim" wrote in message
...
Jet contracts with a Chinese company to make their equipment.

When did they stop making them in Taiwan?

I was just using Chinese as a synonym for Taiwanese.


I don't see why the OP bothered to ask; it seems his mind is already
made up.
--
NuWave Dave in Houston

Don't pout, it makes your lip stick out funny.

As a matter of fact I haven't decided, but then I haven't read anything in
this entire thread that has answered my question unambiguously. Although
Jim's post helped tremendously. Personally I don't associate Taiwan with
China - two entirely different countries and standards of living, perhaps
you do. If the particular model I'm interested in is made in Taiwan, then
I'm sold.

"Eigenvector" wrote in message
...
Is JET a decent company for making bandsaws, or are they a cheap chinese
knockoff company? Or heck are they a cheap American knockoff company.

I don't know that we can answer the question about whether they are a decent
company per se. However, their tools are of good quality at a moderate price
point. I've got the following Jet tools: 3 HP cabinet saw, 13" floor model
planer/molder, 18" band saw, floor model drill press, air cleaner, and
shaper. The only tool I've had any problems with is the air cleaner--burned
out the 1/8 hp (?) motor at about 6 years. I also have a few Delta tools,
DJ-20 jointer and dust collector.

The Jet band saw is an early 18" model and despite the alleged "fatal flaws"
others have written of (aluminum trunnions, frame flex) the saw has been a
stellar performer, has NO drift regardless of what blades I've used, and has
been used to saw 8-10" wide 3/32" slices. I've also sawn relatively small
logs on it with no problems. Whether you can cut large wet logs on it all
day and expect it to last is probably questionable... especially compared to
an associate of mine's 36" 10 hp vertical band saw. ;~)

John

On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:53:30 -0400, "John Grossbohlin"
wrote:


"Eigenvector" wrote in message
...
Is JET a decent company for making bandsaws, or are they a cheap chinese
knockoff company? Or heck are they a cheap American knockoff company.

I don't know that we can answer the question about whether they are a decent
company per se. However, their tools are of good quality at a moderate price
point. I've got the following Jet tools: 3 HP cabinet saw, 13" floor model
planer/molder, 18" band saw, floor model drill press, air cleaner, and
shaper. The only tool I've had any problems with is the air cleaner--burned
out the 1/8 hp (?) motor at about 6 years. I also have a few Delta tools,
DJ-20 jointer and dust collector.

I've got the Jet mini lathe, the Jet 1440vs lathe and the ceiling air filter...
all work well and have met expectations..

The motor in the mini burnt up about 6 months after I bought it, but not only
was it replaced free of charge, but I'll be the first to admit that not only did
I push to lathe to it's limits but I probably put 2 or 3 years of "normal" use
on it be the time it smoked the motor..

I recently blew the starting condenser in the same lathe by running it on a
generator.. my fault...
Jet shipped me a new one for about $12 and I was back in business within a
week..

I'm happy with them and don't really care where the tools are made or who makes
them..


mac

Please remove splinters before emailing

"John Grossbohlin" wrote in message
...

"Eigenvector" wrote in message
...
Is JET a decent company for making bandsaws, or are they a cheap chinese
knockoff company? Or heck are they a cheap American knockoff company.

I don't know that we can answer the question about whether they are a
decent company per se. However, their tools are of good quality at a
moderate price point. I've got the following Jet tools: 3 HP cabinet saw,
13" floor model planer/molder, 18" band saw, floor model drill press, air
cleaner, and shaper. The only tool I've had any problems with is the air
cleaner--burned out the 1/8 hp (?) motor at about 6 years. I also have a
few Delta tools, DJ-20 jointer and dust collector.

The Jet band saw is an early 18" model and despite the alleged "fatal
flaws" others have written of (aluminum trunnions, frame flex) the saw has
been a stellar performer, has NO drift regardless of what blades I've
used, and has been used to saw 8-10" wide 3/32" slices. I've also sawn
relatively small logs on it with no problems. Whether you can cut large
wet logs on it all day and expect it to last is probably questionable...
especially compared to an associate of mine's 36" 10 hp vertical band saw.
;~)

John

Thanks, I appreciate the answer.

I alsoi have a Jet 18 incher and am generally quite satisfied with it. My
only complaint is with the power switch/motor starter. I replaced it once,
and the second is starting to go. When it does, I will replace it with
something better.

On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 16:34:07 -0700, "Eigenvector"
wrote:

Is JET a decent company for making bandsaws, or are they a cheap chinese
knockoff company? Or heck are they a cheap American knockoff company.

I noticed on their webpage that they list themselves as JET Europe, so
presumably they are European. Are they made in Europe or somewhere else?

Well, I have a Jet Mini-Lathe, a Jet Gold Overhead AFS-1000B Air
Filter, a Jet 1.5 HP DC1100CK dust collector with the cannister, and a
Jet 14DX 1.25HP 14" with a 6" extender, Kreig fence, and upgraded
Iturra springs. No complaints whatsoever but I'm a very amateur
woodworker and not a production shop. I do believe that most Jet
castings and components are from Taiwan and not mainland China.

I don't think buying Jet power tools is a mistake, but like anything
else when you have some variables... there's always some tweaking that
can improve the quality of performance.


On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 00:23:50 -0400, Bradford Chaucer
wrote:

I alsoi have a Jet 18 incher and am generally quite satisfied with it. My
only complaint is with the power switch/motor starter. I replaced it once,
and the second is starting to go. When it does, I will replace it with
something better.

On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 16:34:07 -0700, "Eigenvector"
wrote:

Is JET a decent company for making bandsaws, or are they a cheap chinese
knockoff company? Or heck are they a cheap American knockoff company.

I noticed on their webpage that they list themselves as JET Europe, so
presumably they are European. Are they made in Europe or somewhere else?