Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.

"BoyntonStu" wrote in message
...
Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.

I think the only safe answer from anyone here is to suggest you get a
conventional saw and not use your setup. We tend to try to suggest safe
practices.

On Apr 18, 5:59 pm, "Leon" wrote:
"BoyntonStu" wrote in message

...

Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.

I think the only safe answer from anyone here is to suggest you get a
conventional saw and not use your setup. We tend to try to suggest safe
practices.

OK Conventional saw are perfectly safe and operators never experience
kickback.

No need for improvement.

I got your drift.

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:20:56 -0700 (PDT), BoyntonStu
wrote:

Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.


Set up your table saw CORRECTLY and it will never kick back, even with
no splitter, no pawls, and NO SAFETY GUARDS.

Look up thesawshop.com
Dave Wooland is THE table saw expert and a real nice guy.
He can tell you how to set up ANY table saw (unless it is REAL CRAP)
so it will cut perfectly and predictably every time - with NO
KICKBACKS.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

BoyntonStu opin'd thus:

Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.

Didn't you already ask that question? I seem to recall something like
it, that was already answered. Lessee:

--------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Edwin Pawlowski"
Newsgroups: rec.woodworking


"BoyntonStu" wrote in message
...
Pawls are useful after the cut on a table saw.

Would adding another set of pawls on the infeed side of the blade be
of any use to prevent kickback?

No, the kicking is done by the back part of the blade. Eliminate it
by
using a splitter, proper technique, and standing to the side just in
case it
happens anyway.

You use a push block/stick too, right? And never use the miter with
wood
against the fence.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Yup. Looks like the same question. Didn't like the answer the first
time??

-Don

--
If you don't pay your exorcist you can get repossessed.

In article , clare at
snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote:

Set up your table saw CORRECTLY and it will never kick back, even with
no splitter, no pawls, and NO SAFETY GUARDS.

Look up thesawshop.com
Dave Wooland is THE table saw expert and a real nice guy.
He can tell you how to set up ANY table saw (unless it is REAL CRAP)
so it will cut perfectly and predictably every time - with NO
KICKBACKS.

Yeah, I've seen Dave at the shows. He does a great demo, and sells a
decent after market fence.

How much is he paying you?

I invite Dave, the next time he's in Saskatoon (which should be this
summer) to accept a piece of wood of my choice to rip on his perfectly
tuned saw without splitter, pawls or guards, and have the insurers of
the venue allow him to rip it.

Ain't gonna happen.

Dave's a helluva showman, and a great pitchman for his fence, but let's
be real here.

My name's real, Dave can look me up in the Saskatoon phone book,
provide me with proof of insurance, and I'll be happy to bring a board
for him to rip without splitter, pawls or guards.

djb

--
Help improve usenet. Kill-file Google Groups.
http://improve-usenet.org/

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:20:56 -0700 (PDT), BoyntonStu

wrote:

Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.


Set up your table saw CORRECTLY and it will never kick back, even
with
no splitter, no pawls, and NO SAFETY GUARDS.

And how exactly does "correct setup" keep a piece of reaction wood
from clamping down on the blade?

Look up thesawshop.com
Dave Wooland is THE table saw expert and a real nice guy.
He can tell you how to set up ANY table saw (unless it is REAL CRAP)
so it will cut perfectly and predictably every time - with NO
KICKBACKS.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:14:34 -0600, Dave Balderstone
wrote:

In article , clare at
snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote:

Set up your table saw CORRECTLY and it will never kick back, even with
no splitter, no pawls, and NO SAFETY GUARDS.

Look up thesawshop.com
Dave Wooland is THE table saw expert and a real nice guy.
He can tell you how to set up ANY table saw (unless it is REAL CRAP)
so it will cut perfectly and predictably every time - with NO
KICKBACKS.

Yeah, I've seen Dave at the shows. He does a great demo, and sells a
decent after market fence.

How much is he paying you?

I invite Dave, the next time he's in Saskatoon (which should be this
summer) to accept a piece of wood of my choice to rip on his perfectly
tuned saw without splitter, pawls or guards, and have the insurers of
the venue allow him to rip it.

Ain't gonna happen.

Dave's a helluva showman, and a great pitchman for his fence, but let's
be real here.

My name's real, Dave can look me up in the Saskatoon phone book,
provide me with proof of insurance, and I'll be happy to bring a board
for him to rip without splitter, pawls or guards.

djb
He's not paying me a cent.
I've seen and used saws that were poorly set up. I've used saws that
were properly set up. I've used the same saw both ways. NO COMPARISON.
A poorly set up saw is dangerous no matter how you use it.
A properly set up saw is dangerous if you are stupid in the way you
use it, but infinitely less dangerous then the properly set up saw.

And I'm sure Dave will take you up on your offer if you contact him
(easy enough to do)

He seems to enjoy a challenge!!
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 22:24:47 -0400, clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada
wrote:
Set up your table saw CORRECTLY and it will never kick back, even with
no splitter, no pawls, and NO SAFETY GUARDS.

Wrong!
Change "will never" to "should never". I and I'm sure at least a few
others here worked with wood under tension, usually wet, that will kick
back without a kerf splitter sometimes even with a kerf splitter. I would
agree that good dry stock doesn't kick back when rip-cut, cross-cut or
angle-cut with a well tuned saw. I re-check my saw alignment because I
normally do small precision angle cuts. I got injured when a rip-cut of
wet cherry closed up after the kerf splitter and kicked-back. It did not
close at the start of the cut, rather it closed up about a third of way
after cutting through a knot that must have changed the grain direction.
If you get hurt, believe me, you want to have all available safety
devices and a safe work environment to challenge your insurance company.

Safety devices shouldn't give you a false sense of security but I see no
reason to recommend to the public that they not use kerf splitters and
safety guards. Do this with employees and you open the door to an OSHA/
CCOHS/worker's compensation lawsuit.

A few moments spent removing and re-installing the blade guard as needed
as well as using kerf splitters, push sticks, feather boards and other
safety devices is well worth the safety in the long run.

When you say "Dave Wooland is THE table saw expert and a real nice guy"
are you implying that he's a hypocrite and is ripping people off by
selling unneeded table saw safety devices on thesawshop.com website?
I see zero clearance inserts, push blocks, feather boards, safety glasses
and a table saw with kerf splitter and blade guard for sale on his site.
I would hope that his site reflects his opinions on safety devices a
little better than you. I also see that in his saw tune-up tips and other
postings on the web nowhere does he advocate not using safety devices.
On the contrary, he clearly states that tuning the table saw is for
safety as well as precision.


Always use appropriate safety devices, tune and align your equipment
before production use, learn and use safe cutting procedures and don't
work with dangerous machinery while under the influence. Be extra careful
when working around people that think safety is a waste of time and
money.

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 22:24:47 -0400, clare at snyder dot ontario dot
canada wrote:

Set up your table saw CORRECTLY and it will never kick back, even with
no splitter, no pawls, and NO SAFETY GUARDS.

True!

I do use a shop made splitter in my zero clearance insert for ripping,
though. Some wood can create a kerf that closes regardless of how
well set up the saw is.

I never had a use for those silly pawls put on some factory splitters.

---------------------------------------------
** http://www.bburke.com/woodworking.html **
---------------------------------------------

"BoyntonStu" wrote in message
...
On Apr 18, 5:59 pm, "Leon" wrote:
"BoyntonStu" wrote in message

...

Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.

I think the only safe answer from anyone here is to suggest you get a
conventional saw and not use your setup. We tend to try to suggest safe
practices.

OK Conventional saw are perfectly safe and operators never experience
kickback.

No need for improvement.

I got your drift.


No, you apparently do not get my drift. Conventional is "not" perfectly
safe and your contraption is much less safe.

clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote:
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:20:56 -0700 (PDT), BoyntonStu
wrote:

Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.


Set up your table saw CORRECTLY and it will never kick back, even with
no splitter, no pawls, and NO SAFETY GUARDS.

....

To think that is simply to ignore the possibilities.

--

clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote

Set up your table saw CORRECTLY and it will never kick back,
even with no splitter, no pawls, and NO SAFETY GUARDS.

My, my ... you have effectively elevated the practice of destroying
credibility in 25 words or less to heights rarely seen hereabouts.

But we do heartedly thank you for the advance warning that anything further
you have to say can be _safely_ ignored ... no pun intended.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 3/27/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Apr 19, 8:34 am, "Leon" wrote:
"BoyntonStu" wrote in message

...



On Apr 18, 5:59 pm, "Leon" wrote:
"BoyntonStu" wrote in message

...

Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.

I think the only safe answer from anyone here is to suggest you get a
conventional saw and not use your setup. We tend to try to suggest safe
practices.

OK Conventional saw are perfectly safe and operators never experience
kickback.

No need for improvement.

I got your drift.

No, you apparently do not get my drift. Conventional is "not" perfectly
safe and your contraption is much less safe.

A reason as to why you believe that an infeed pawl is less safe would
be reasonable.

Perhaps you can elaborate?

In article , clare at snyder dot ontario dot canada wrote:
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:20:56 -0700 (PDT), BoyntonStu
wrote:

Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.


Set up your table saw CORRECTLY and it will never kick back, even with
no splitter, no pawls, and NO SAFETY GUARDS.

Nonsense.

To make that claim have even a passing resemblance to the truth, it's
necessary to add these few clauses at a minimum:

Set up your saw correctly ...
*and* never cut anything freehand
*and* never use both the miter gauge and the rip fence as guides
*and* always use stock that has been properly jointed
*and* never rip boards with any internal stresses ...

Starting to get the picture yet?

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

Download Nfilter at http://www.milmac.com/np-120.exe

"BoyntonStu" wrote in message
No, you apparently do not get my drift. Conventional is "not" perfectly
safe and your contraption is much less safe.

A reason as to why you believe that an infeed pawl is less safe would
be reasonable.

Perhaps you can elaborate?

If you read my first reply, you'd already know that the infeed pawls are
useless at best. They would probably get in the way also and would not
allow you to pull the wood back once you reached a certain point and that
would make them unsafe. Why don't you just want to believe your idea is not
a good one?

Doug Miller wrote:
....
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:20:56 -0700 (PDT), BoyntonStu
wrote:
....
Set up your table saw CORRECTLY and it will never kick back, even with
no splitter, no pawls, and NO SAFETY GUARDS.

Nonsense.

To make that claim have even a passing resemblance to the truth, it's
necessary to add these few clauses at a minimum:

Set up your saw correctly ...
*and* never cut anything freehand
*and* never use both the miter gauge and the rip fence as guides
*and* always use stock that has been properly jointed
*and* never rip boards with any internal stresses ...
....
and the most important one of all:

_never_, _ever_, make a human error or slip up or lose attention or get
distracted, or ...

--

On Apr 19, 11:58 am, "Edwin Pawlowski" wrote:
"BoyntonStu" wrote in message
No, you apparently do not get my drift. Conventional is "not" perfectly
safe and your contraption is much less safe.

A reason as to why you believe that an infeed pawl is less safe would
be reasonable.

Perhaps you can elaborate?

If you read my first reply, you'd already know that the infeed pawls are
useless at best. They would probably get in the way also and would not
allow you to pull the wood back once you reached a certain point and that
would make them unsafe. Why don't you just want to believe your idea is not
a good one?

"They would probably get in the way". Not at all with my push stick.

"and would not allow you to pull the wood back once you reached a
certain point and that
would make them unsafe. " I don't get that. Are you saying that
pulling stock back towards the infeed is safe?

How do you pull stock back that has gone beyond the outfeed pawls.

However, one can easily retract the infeed pawls should you wish to
pull the stock back.

Cars have seat belts and airbags. Dual pawls should make kickback
less likely and as an extra bonus they could be designed to be used as
infeed hold downs.

No, you apparently do not get my drift. Conventional is "not"
perfectly
safe and your contraption is much less safe.

A reason as to why you believe that an infeed pawl is less safe would
be reasonable.

Perhaps you can elaborate?

If you read my first reply, you'd already know that the infeed pawls are
useless at best. They would probably get in the way also and would not
allow you to pull the wood back once you reached a certain point and that
would make them unsafe. Why don't you just want to believe your idea is
not
a good one?

"They would probably get in the way". Not at all with my push stick.

"and would not allow you to pull the wood back once you reached a
certain point and that
would make them unsafe. " I don't get that. Are you saying that
pulling stock back towards the infeed is safe?

How do you pull stock back that has gone beyond the outfeed pawls.

However, one can easily retract the infeed pawls should you wish to
pull the stock back.

Cars have seat belts and airbags. Dual pawls should make kickback
less likely and as an extra bonus they could be designed to be used as
infeed hold downs.

And you've asked and now you don't like the answer...go ahead and do
whatever it is you want to do with as many or as few kick-back pawls as you
want. The rest of us will stick with the usual set AFTER the cut, where it
will do the best job.

And by the way, just why DID you ask this twice in less than 24 hours?

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 22:24:47 -0400, clare at snyder dot ontario dot
canada wrote:

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:20:56 -0700 (PDT), BoyntonStu
wrote:

Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.


Set up your table saw CORRECTLY and it will never kick back, even with
no splitter, no pawls, and NO SAFETY GUARDS.

Look up thesawshop.com
Dave Wooland is THE table saw expert and a real nice guy.
He can tell you how to set up ANY table saw (unless it is REAL CRAP)
so it will cut perfectly and predictably every time - with NO
KICKBACKS.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **


I'd be LOL if this wasn't such a serious matter. When Dave can tell
us how to "set up" the wood perfectly then maybe a case can be made.

Frank

"BoyntonStu" wrote in message
"and would not allow you to pull the wood back once you reached a
certain point and that
would make them unsafe. "

I don't get that. Are you saying that
pulling stock back towards the infeed is safe?


It is perfectly safe if it has not reached the blade. If grabbed by a pawl,
you are stuck.



How do you pull stock back that has gone beyond the outfeed pawls.

You don't (at least not easily). At that point you are commited and the cut
has been started, maybe finished, and the splitter kept it from grabbing on
the blade and kicking back. They worked as designed.



However, one can easily retract the infeed pawls should you wish to
pull the stock back.

Cars have seat belts and airbags. Dual pawls should make kickback
less likely and as an extra bonus they could be designed to be used as
infeed hold downs.

As stated, dual pawls won't do crap. Put them on if you want, but if it was
the safety device of the century, they would be available already and in
use. They are useless for what you want. Pawls won't make kickback less
likely. Evidently you don't understand the process. Learn what makes it
happen, then decide. People here are trying to educate you but you are
still insisting your idea is a good one, even if useless, but that is your
right.

FWIW, seatbelts and air bags have different functions and work together in
many cases. Pawls in front of the blade have about the same effects on
safety as putting a Venetian blind on the windshield.

major snippage

FWIW, seatbelts and air bags have different functions and work together in
many cases. Pawls in front of the blade have about the same effects on
safety as putting a Venetian blind on the windshield.

I REALLY like that one!

Mind if I borrow that line???

Mike

On Apr 19, 2:50 pm, "Edwin Pawlowski" wrote:
"BoyntonStu" wrote in message
"and would not allow you to pull the wood back once you reached a
certain point and that
would make them unsafe. "

I don't get that. Are you saying that

pulling stock back towards the infeed is safe?

It is perfectly safe if it has not reached the blade. If grabbed by a pawl,
you are stuck.



How do you pull stock back that has gone beyond the outfeed pawls.

You don't (at least not easily). At that point you are commited and the cut
has been started, maybe finished, and the splitter kept it from grabbing on
the blade and kicking back. They worked as designed.



However, one can easily retract the infeed pawls should you wish to
pull the stock back.

Cars have seat belts and airbags. Dual pawls should make kickback
less likely and as an extra bonus they could be designed to be used as
infeed hold downs.

As stated, dual pawls won't do crap. Put them on if you want, but if it was
the safety device of the century, they would be available already and in
use. They are useless for what you want. Pawls won't make kickback less
likely. Evidently you don't understand the process. Learn what makes it
happen, then decide. People here are trying to educate you but you are
still insisting your idea is a good one, even if useless, but that is your
right.

FWIW, seatbelts and air bags have different functions and work together in
many cases. Pawls in front of the blade have about the same effects on
safety as putting a Venetian blind on the windshield.

"Pawls won't make kickback less likely."

Where they put there instead of Venetian blinds?

On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 12:00:10 -0600, Dave Balderstone
wrote:

And you claim that a correctly set-up saw will totally eliminate
kickback.

You're a fool, sir. And a dangerous fool, at that.


I think you guys, not just to pick on Dave, but I had to reply to
someone... are a tad harsh. Let's not pile on to a regular poster.

Before I go on, I think the one error is the lack of a splitter. I
agree that with most solid wood stock a splitter is a necessary part.
Personally, I use splitters during all solid wood rips.

However, if a woodworker mainly works with plywood, MDF, composites,
or selected, straight grained, kiln dried S4S stock, I think a
properly set up saw will not kick back, even without the splitter.


---------------------------------------------
** http://www.bburke.com/woodworking.html **
---------------------------------------------

On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 13:08:43 -0700 (PDT), BoyntonStu
wrote:

Where they put there instead of Venetian blinds?

Seems you have put blinders on incorrectly also.

Mark

B A R R Y wrote:
....
Before I go on, I think the one error is the lack of a splitter. I
agree that with most solid wood stock a splitter is a necessary part.
Personally, I use splitters during all solid wood rips.

However, if a woodworker mainly works with plywood, MDF, composites,
or selected, straight grained, kiln dried S4S stock, I think a
properly set up saw will not kick back, even without the splitter.

For the most part that's so; but that relies again on a lot of factors
the most important of which is still operator attention.

I'd only be so harsh because of the (apparent) claims of "never" are,
imo, simply foolhardy if believed for the poster himself.

In 30 years or so, I can only recall a couple of real incidents
personally and both of them were attributable to operator error -- but
while we all may like to think we're good and only do safe things, on
occasion everybody is going to make a mistake--one can only hope the
results aren't disastrous when one does. So far, I've still all digits
and other pieces-parts, but I've seen enough who don't to remind me.

(Working post-accident review teams at power plants is enough to remind
one of what consequences can be also, even if not directly OT here.)


--

"B A R R Y" wrote

However, if a woodworker mainly works with plywood, MDF, composites,
or selected, straight grained, kiln dried S4S stock, I think a
properly set up saw will not kick back, even without the splitter.

Maybe I've just been unlucky, but that's not been my experience.

IME, one of the most kickback prone cuts, at least on a 3-5 hp saw, is when
a lone operator is making those often awkward, initial cuts on large
sheetgood panels, sans splitter. (DAMHIKT, and one of the reasons there is
always a splitter on my TS )

Do it on an underpowered saw and you might be able to overpower the
kickback, have it happen on a saw in the 3HP + range, no matter how well
setup, and you may well be unpleasantly surprised.

Not to mention that to "properly" set up a table saw, then declare it safe
from kickback as a result does not bespeak of much experience in the
declarer.

Just my tuppence, however ..

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 3/27/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

BoyntonStu wrote:
On Apr 18, 5:59 pm, "Leon" wrote:
"BoyntonStu" wrote in message

...

Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.
I think the only safe answer from anyone here is to suggest you get a
conventional saw and not use your setup. We tend to try to suggest safe
practices.

OK Conventional saw are perfectly safe and operators never experience
kickback.

No need for improvement.

I got your drift.


The problem with you is that you refuse to get any drift. I'm trying to
decide if you're a troll or not.

If you are, you're semi-busted. If you're not, think of why I even
considered that you might be.

You're coming into a forum that has a wide range of experience, but many
of the answers you're getting are from the guys that have been around a
long long time and either intuitively know when something is wrong, or
have been down the road and learned a lesson. You don't seem to be able
to benefit from their accumulated experiences. Almost all of the answers
you've been getting on your various questions have said that they
wouldn't do what you're suggesting.

As always, there are a variety of ways of interpreting answers like
that. One is the "we don't do that cause we've always done it this way"
POV. The implication is that whoever says that has his head up his ass
and would never consider something that isn't tried and true. For some
people in here, that may be true. For most, they are open-minded enough
to realize that there are many ways to do a job, as long as it's safe.

Another way of interpreting the answers is that these guys simply don't
know what the **** they're talking about. If that's true, why even
bother asking them?

Yet a third way of looking at the answers you're getting is that they're
just pulling your pecker and of course you've come up with something
that is patentable and will make you a fortune.

Or, maybe they're just right.

I"m still thinking troll.

--


Tanus

This is not really a sig

http://www.home.mycybernet.net/~waugh/shop/

"BoyntonStu" wrote in message
...

No, you apparently do not get my drift. Conventional is "not" perfectly
safe and your contraption is much less safe.

A reason as to why you believe that an infeed pawl is less safe would
be reasonable.

Perhaps you can elaborate?

Sure, your contraption is not what I would call safe. A splitter on the
back of the blade and on the front blade is no more safe than a stick of
dynamite with a fuse on both ends rather than only on one end. The problem
is not so much the splitter/fuses as what they are attached to.

"BoyntonStu" wrote in message
...
Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.

I the last two and a half months or so, you've posted
questions/statements/whoknowswhat about different ways to make chips...

....dual fences posted on 2/2/2008
....some sled arrangement for a dead RAS that you think oughta save the world
....some goofy circular saw extension handle gizmo...three times
....and now, some BS about kickback pawls ahead and behind the cut on a table
saw.

Out of eight posts, one made sense...wondering about how uniform a rip cut
should be. However, that one makes me wonder if you've ever even MADE a rip
cut on a table saw, because I'm thinking that if you had, you likely would
have been able to answer that one all by yourself.

In the rest of these posts, your ideas were, I believe correctly, shot down
by people who know how to make sawdust and generally keep fingers attached
to the hand. And you argue that the collective MUST be wrong. Never seems to
occur to you that you might be wrong. Ever.

Now, I'm not going to say that I never have a weird idea...but if I ask
about it and have as many people tell me that it's a dumb idea, I'll at
least think to myself "Self, they may have a point....let us rethink our
position on this."

I'm also not going to tell you that we, the collective, is/are always
right...but if you never hear a dissenting opinion other than your own,
either there is a vast conspiracy to get your ideas to sell and make
millions without you getting your due, or you're wrong.

Now, which do YOU think the right answer to that one is?

So if you're a troll, go back under the bridge you crawled out from under.

If you're not a troll and truly want input and advice, feel free, but maybe,
just maybe try to not argue juts because someone says something that doesn't
fit your conclusion.

Mike

"The Davenport's" wrote in message
...


If you're not a troll and truly want input and advice, feel free, but
maybe, just maybe try to not argue juts because someone says something
that doesn't fit your conclusion.

Mike

LOL!
It really sucks when people don't agree with your train of thought! Then it
is very convenient to have your own little world to live in, where everyone
is happy, your ideas are always best, and nothing ever goes wrong!
Greg

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 10:34:37 -0700 (PDT), BoyntonStu
wrote:

You're coming into a forum that has a wide range of experience, but

I never had a use for those silly pawls put on some factory splitters.


One can really learn a lot from the above.


Had you read the lines ABOVE my comment about the pawls, maybe you
would have learned something. Visit a pro shop and notice that those
pawls won't be present . Look at a riving knife equipped saw. No
pawls! Heck, I've even put photos and pictures on the web to help
less experienced folks learn

You're looking less like someone trying to learn, and more like a
troll every day.

Perhaps you can start a woodworking club down there at "La Boca Vista,
Phase II (since Phase 1 is sold out!)" , and find your answers there.

Have a nice day!

---------------------------------------------
** http://www.bburke.com/woodworking.html **
---------------------------------------------

"B A R R Y" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 10:34:37 -0700 (PDT), BoyntonStu
wrote:

You're coming into a forum that has a wide range of experience, but

I never had a use for those silly pawls put on some factory splitters.


One can really learn a lot from the above.


Had you read the lines ABOVE my comment about the pawls, maybe you
would have learned something. Visit a pro shop and notice that those
pawls won't be present . Look at a riving knife equipped saw. No
pawls! Heck, I've even put photos and pictures on the web to help
less experienced folks learn

You're looking less like someone trying to learn, and more like a
troll every day.

Perhaps you can start a woodworking club down there at "La Boca Vista,
Phase II (since Phase 1 is sold out!)" , and find your answers there.

Have a nice day!

Isn't it "DEL" Boca Vista?

B.

On Apr 18, 5:20 pm, BoyntonStu wrote:
Use another set of pawls on the infeed side to prevent kickback.

Stand clear of the line of fire like everyone else does.