In article 3102061f-816c-4c65-9463-888a76fc1f48
@z19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com, says...

On Jan 19, 2:04*am, "SonomaProducts.com" wrote:
*And I really

don't fault the sawstop inventor. He was turned down by all the companies.

The whirlwind may succeed, since the manufactures missed the boat once.
They won't twice.
- Show quoted text -

Actually the Sawstop inventor had the deck stacked against him,
somewhat by himself.

3. The current manufacturers lawyers killed any consideration because
if you add this, you are admitting the thousands of saws you sold
without it are dangerous. And if you offer it on one saw and not
another, even worse when you get sued from someone who bought the one
without it.

I seriously doubt if this is accurate. Automakers offered anti lock
brakes on many cars, luxury, before offering it on all cars. And it
was an option on cars, not mandatory. I'm pretty sure there are many
tests showing anti lock brakes are safer than non anti lock brakes.
They stop you quicker.

No, they don't. At least not on dry pavement--there's no discernible
distance between typical stopping distances for ABS and no ABS. They
can beat most drivers most of the time on wet pavement though.

But ABS was not initially sold as a safety feature, it was a performance
enhancement.

Automakers were not sued out of existence
because they sold some cars that were safer than other cars.

J. Clarke wrote:
....

No, they don't. At least not on dry pavement--there's no discernible
distance between typical stopping distances for ABS and no ABS. They
can beat most drivers most of the time on wet pavement though.
....

As long as the driver can exert maximum braking force and not lock them
up, anyway...

--

In article ,
says...

J. Clarke wrote:
...

No, they don't. At least not on dry pavement--there's no discernible
distance between typical stopping distances for ABS and no ABS. They
can beat most drivers most of the time on wet pavement though.
...

As long as the driver can exert maximum braking force and not lock them
up, anyway...

Google "ABS dry stopping distance" and you will find the results of
numerous tests in which it was shown that ABS does not significantly
reduce dry stopping distance. Doesn't matter if the diver locks them
up, he still hits about the same number as ABS. Sometimes ABS is a
couple of feet shorter, sometimes it's a couple of feet longer, there's
no consistent pattern of reduced stopping distance.

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:09:38 -0600, "Leon"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:51:43 -0800 (PST), "SonomaProducts.com"
wrote:


At some point, sawstop will do an official fast feed rate demo video or
one from a show will pop up on youtube.


bout a million on Yuotube. Gotta love it. Here is one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9OLIzMa4Oo

Imagine yourself in front of a saw where the floor had not been swept
and there was sawdust on the top of the saw as well as the floor. You
turn on the saw and slip in the sawdust and are falling into the saw
blade. Your right hand slips off the top and your other flails out to
catch yourself. It goes right into the spinning blade at a very fast
rate, about 30 times faster than the demo cut. NOW what happens?
We've only seen feed rates of 1 foot per minute and one inch per
second. What about 80ips, hmm?

What about 80ips????

May I spell it out for you? I'm using a SWAG to estimate an 80ips
speed. Perhaps someone can actually -time- the speed of a flailing
hand as a person slips and tries to catch himself. Then have Sawstop
test a wiener at that speed instead of in slow-mo, as they do now.


What happens is one hell of a lot less damage than if the saw was other than
a SawStop. I'd still be much happier that I got a bad cut than loose a
whole finger, hand, arm, or internal body part.

Very likely true, but we won't know until we see the experiment
performed. What I'm saying is that the demo is deficient, showing
only the best-case scenarios. Let's see worst-case!

--
Live in the sunshine, swim the sea, drink the wild air...
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"Larry Jaques" wrote

May I spell it out for you? I'm using a SWAG to estimate an 80ips
speed. Perhaps someone can actually -time- the speed of a flailing
hand as a person slips and tries to catch himself. Then have Sawstop
test a wiener at that speed instead of in slow-mo, as they do now.


Very likely true, but we won't know until we see the experiment
performed. What I'm saying is that the demo is deficient, showing
only the best-case scenarios. Let's see worst-case!



Shall I spell it out for you?
If the blade guard is in place as it should be (and I might add will most
likely be in the case of an owner who thinks he/she needs the safety margin
the SawStop is supposed to provide) the damage will likely be less than you
suggest. or not?

Max

On 1/20/11 9:56 PM, Max wrote:
Shall I spell it out for you?
If the blade guard is in place as it should be (and I might add will
most likely be in the case of an owner who thinks he/she needs the
safety margin the SawStop is supposed to provide) the damage will likely
be less than you suggest. or not?

Max

What blade guard would stop ones hand from sliding forward into the blade.
If it doesn't stop wood, how is a hand any different?


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:09:38 -0600, "Leon"
wrote:
What about 80ips????

May I spell it out for you? I'm using a SWAG to estimate an 80ips
speed. Perhaps someone can actually -time- the speed of a flailing
hand as a person slips and tries to catch himself. Then have Sawstop
test a wiener at that speed instead of in slow-mo, as they do now.


What happens is one hell of a lot less damage than if the saw was other
than
a SawStop. I'd still be much happier that I got a bad cut than loose a
whole finger, hand, arm, or internal body part.

Very likely true, but we won't know until we see the experiment
performed. What I'm saying is that the demo is deficient, showing
only the best-case scenarios. Let's see worst-case!


Ok, that sounds reasonable but only if you yourself start the experiment
with the saw of your choice including the SawStop. which one are you going
to choose......?

"-MIKE-" wrote On 1/20/11 9:56 PM,
Max wrote:
Shall I spell it out for you?
If the blade guard is in place as it should be (and I might add will
most likely be in the case of an owner who thinks he/she needs the
safety margin the SawStop is supposed to provide) the damage will likely
be less than you suggest. or not?

Max

What blade guard would stop ones hand from sliding forward into the blade.
If it doesn't stop wood, how is a hand any different?

-MIKE-


Um.....well.....You pose a difficult question. I may be supposing a blade
guard like mine where one would have to be in a rather unique position to
slide his hand under the guard and into the *teeth* of the spinning blade.
Not that it couldn't happen but.............
I guess I would have to agree with those who propose that "nothing is fool
proof". G

Max

On 1/20/11 10:18 PM, Max wrote:
"-MIKE-" wrote On 1/20/11 9:56 PM, Max wrote:
Shall I spell it out for you? If the blade guard is in place as
it should be (and I might add will most likely be in the case of
an owner who thinks he/she needs the safety margin the SawStop is
supposed to provide) the damage will likely be less than you
suggest. or not?

Max

What blade guard would stop ones hand from sliding forward into the
blade. If it doesn't stop wood, how is a hand any different?

-MIKE-


Um.....well.....You pose a difficult question. I may be supposing a
blade guard like mine where one would have to be in a rather unique
position to slide his hand under the guard and into the *teeth* of
the spinning blade. Not that it couldn't happen but............. I
guess I would have to agree with those who propose that "nothing is
fool proof". G

Max

Is your guard not tapered on the front like most?
Doesn't it get lifted up by the stock pushing into the front of it?
Again, how is that different from a hand slipping off the wood, or
someone slipping forward and pushing their hand forward to catch
themselves. Both are pretty common causes of table saw injuries.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

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

No, they don't. At least not on dry pavement--there's no discernible
distance between typical stopping distances for ABS and no ABS. They can
beat most drivers most of the time on wet pavement though.
...

As long as the driver can exert maximum braking force and not lock them
up, anyway...

--

Actually ABS brakes do indeed work better on dry pavement. One might think
incorrectly that dry pavement would make all tires lock up at the same time
and there fore "fool" the ABS into thinking that the vehicle was stopped.
In real life the rear wheels will typically lock up first as the weight
shifts to the front of the vehicle and the rear tires then lock up while the
front tires are still spinning. And then there are instances when there is
an accumulation of sand or dirt on the street that causes a wheel or wheel
to lock up. Add to that list rough pavement that would cause a tire to
bounce off the ground during breaking and lock up. I have experienced all
three of those examples in my Tundra and the ABS brakes faithfully engaged.

"SonomaProducts.com" wrote in message
...

At some point, sawstop will do an official fast feed rate demo video or
one from a show will pop up on youtube.


bout a million on Yuotube. Gotta love it. Here is one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q9OLIzMa4Oo


Almost looks like a magic trick.

--
"He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! "
Brian's Mum

On Jan 20, 2:00*pm, -MIKE- wrote:

I suspect the results would be *identical* even if they shoved a dog in
there at "slip speed." *I just wish someone would post a video to shut
up all the members of the tin-foil hat club.

A few years ago I went to a Woodcraft demo days event, and the Sawstop
guy was there. He was tired of listening to the kind of prattle he
was hearing about "not trying to injure himself" the "right way" or in
any way the audience could imagine for him.

We were his last stop on demo days. He had a pile or cartridges, so
he decided to show us how fast the saw would stop and how easy it was
to replace a cartridge.

He SLAPPED the blade with a Hebrew National wiener (I know some here
would probably like to know the exact product for their research
rebuttals but all I saw was the package) and it stopped like a shot.

That thing stops so fast it is almost scary. With the SLAP (imagine
you are falling backwards out of your attic through sheetrock onto a
spinning saw left running by the neighbor's teenage prankster) trying
to duplicate the unexpected, he was able to scratch the surface of the
wiener. I think it might have drawn blood, but nothing to worry
about.

I was sold. My next saw will probably be a Sawstop for the safety
reason, but having used one in my friend's shop, I found them to be
excellent pieces of equipment.

Robert

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 22:17:48 -0600, "Leon"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:09:38 -0600, "Leon"
wrote:
What about 80ips????

May I spell it out for you? I'm using a SWAG to estimate an 80ips
speed. Perhaps someone can actually -time- the speed of a flailing
hand as a person slips and tries to catch himself. Then have Sawstop
test a wiener at that speed instead of in slow-mo, as they do now.


What happens is one hell of a lot less damage than if the saw was other
than
a SawStop. I'd still be much happier that I got a bad cut than loose a
whole finger, hand, arm, or internal body part.

Very likely true, but we won't know until we see the experiment
performed. What I'm saying is that the demo is deficient, showing
only the best-case scenarios. Let's see worst-case!

Ok, that sounds reasonable but only if you yourself start the experiment
with the saw of your choice including the SawStop. which one are you going
to choose......?

Mean cuss, ain't ya? Telling a consumer advocate to go maim himself.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself, Leon.

I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

--
Live in the sunshine, swim the sea, drink the wild air...
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson

On Jan 21, 4:00*am, "
wrote:
On Jan 20, 2:00*pm, -MIKE- wrote:

I suspect the results would be *identical* even if they shoved a dog in
there at "slip speed." *I just wish someone would post a video to shut
up all the members of the tin-foil hat club.

A few years ago I went to a Woodcraft demo days event, and the Sawstop
guy was there. *He was tired of listening to the kind of prattle he
was hearing about "not trying to injure himself" the "right way" or in
any way the audience could imagine for him.

We were his last stop on demo days. *He had a pile or cartridges, so
he decided to show us how fast the saw would stop and how easy it was
to replace a cartridge.

He SLAPPED the blade with a Hebrew National wiener (I know some here
would probably like to know the exact product for their research
rebuttals but all I saw was the package) and it stopped like a shot.

That thing stops so fast it is almost scary. *With the SLAP (imagine
you are falling backwards out of your attic through sheetrock onto a
spinning saw left running by the neighbor's teenage prankster) trying
to duplicate the unexpected, he was able to scratch the surface of the
wiener. *I think it might have drawn blood, but nothing to worry
about.

I was sold. *My next saw will probably be a Sawstop for the safety
reason, but having used one in my friend's shop, I found them to be
excellent pieces of equipment.

Robert

I watched that Tony MacDonald wood thing on PBS for the first time, in
HD no less. ( and likely last time as it is too Dane Cook without any
humour...just a little too slick and overproduced.)
I'm thinking that's a Sawstop he's got there AND a big stack of
Festools.
And why not? Sawstop is THE saw to own and use. I'd have one in a
heartbeat.
I wonder where Tony is going to park his TimeSaver?

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

And when you cut something off, some asshole attorney is going to be your
painful best friend.

I'd buy the Sawstop too, except for one thing. A standard tablesaw is too
high for me to safely use. The only option for me is the Access model
General 650. Considering it cost as much or a little more than the Sawstop,
the factor of money doesn't really come into play, not unless I'd be willing
to spend some $10,000 or more for a computer controlled saw. And yes, I
inquired if there was enough space inside the Sawstop cabinet to possibly
lower the saw and there isn't, not even close. Not to mention the voiding of
any warranty.

In article , lcb11211
@swbell.dotnet says...

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

No, they don't. At least not on dry pavement--there's no discernible
distance between typical stopping distances for ABS and no ABS. They can
beat most drivers most of the time on wet pavement though.
...

As long as the driver can exert maximum braking force and not lock them
up, anyway...

--

Actually ABS brakes do indeed work better on dry pavement. One might think
incorrectly that dry pavement would make all tires lock up at the same time
and there fore "fool" the ABS into thinking that the vehicle was stopped.
In real life the rear wheels will typically lock up first as the weight
shifts to the front of the vehicle and the rear tires then lock up while the
front tires are still spinning. And then there are instances when there is
an accumulation of sand or dirt on the street that causes a wheel or wheel
to lock up. Add to that list rough pavement that would cause a tire to
bounce off the ground during breaking and lock up. I have experienced all
three of those examples in my Tundra and the ABS brakes faithfully engaged.

But did you stop shorter than you would have without ABS and if so how
did you determine this? And why does every test comparing ABS with no
ABS on dry pavement conclude that it does not stop shorter?

On Jan 21, 8:23*am, "Upscale" wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

And when you cut something off, some asshole attorney is going to be your
painful best friend.

I'd buy the Sawstop too, except for one thing. A standard tablesaw is too
high for me to safely use. The only option for me is the Access model
General 650. Considering it cost as much or a little more than the Sawstop,
the factor of money doesn't really come into play, not unless I'd be willing
to spend some $10,000 or more for a computer controlled saw. And yes, I
inquired if there was enough space inside the Sawstop cabinet to possibly
lower the saw and there isn't, not even close. Not to mention the voiding of
any warranty.

Would it be possible to lower the saw into an elevated platform with
gentle ramps? How much of a height difference are we talking about?

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 06:22:30 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
wrote:

On Jan 21, 8:23*am, "Upscale" wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

And when you cut something off, some asshole attorney is going to be your
painful best friend.

It's funny to see an post to me from someone who has been in my twit
filter for several years now. What he doesn't realize is that good
people don't need nor use attorneys for self-inflicted wounds. They
take responsibility for their actions, unlike the liberal idiots in
Uppy's small circle.


I'd buy the Sawstop too, except for one thing. A standard tablesaw is too
high for me to safely use. The only option for me is the Access model
General 650. Considering it cost as much or a little more than the Sawstop,
the factor of money doesn't really come into play, not unless I'd be willing
to spend some $10,000 or more for a computer controlled saw. And yes, I
inquired if there was enough space inside the Sawstop cabinet to possibly
lower the saw and there isn't, not even close. Not to mention the voiding of
any warranty.

Would it be possible to lower the saw into an elevated platform with
gentle ramps? How much of a height difference are we talking about?

A wheelchair-height workspace is usually 24-26", so lowering would
probably be about 10 inches.

--
Live in the sunshine, swim the sea, drink the wild air...
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson

On 1/21/2011 10:00 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 06:22:30 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
wrote:

On Jan 21, 8:23 am, wrote:
"Larry wrote in message
I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

And when you cut something off, some asshole attorney is going to be your
painful best friend.

It's funny to see an post to me from someone who has been in my twit
filter for several years now. What he doesn't realize is that good
people don't need nor use attorneys for self-inflicted wounds. They
take responsibility for their actions, unlike the liberal idiots in
Uppy's small circle.


I'd buy the Sawstop too, except for one thing. A standard tablesaw is too
high for me to safely use. The only option for me is the Access model
General 650. Considering it cost as much or a little more than the Sawstop,
the factor of money doesn't really come into play, not unless I'd be willing
to spend some $10,000 or more for a computer controlled saw. And yes, I
inquired if there was enough space inside the Sawstop cabinet to possibly
lower the saw and there isn't, not even close. Not to mention the voiding of
any warranty.

Would it be possible to lower the saw into an elevated platform with
gentle ramps? How much of a height difference are we talking about?

A wheelchair-height workspace is usually 24-26", so lowering would
probably be about 10 inches.

For the amounts of money you are talking about, would raising the floor
10 inches around and in the vicinity of the saw be unthinkable? Or,
IIRC, are you working in a smallish interior room?

Bill



--
Live in the sunshine, swim the sea, drink the wild air...
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson

On Jan 20, 7:19*pm, dpb wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:

...

No, they don't. *At least not on dry pavement--there's no discernible
distance between typical stopping distances for ABS and no ABS. *They
can beat most drivers most of the time on wet pavement though.

...

As long as the driver can exert maximum braking force and not lock them
up, anyway...

--

ABS offers one difference under the following, and often encountered
conditions:

Place the right side of the car on something slippery, like ice...the
left side of the car on dry pavement....go 50 MPH and slam on the
brakes full engagement.

Do this with ABS and do this with regular brakes. Compare.

or

Slam on the brakes in a tight curve..on snow...try to steer while
braking.

Do this with ABS and do this with regular brakes. Compare.

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 22:17:48 -0600, "Leon"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:09:38 -0600, "Leon"
wrote:
What about 80ips????

May I spell it out for you? I'm using a SWAG to estimate an 80ips
speed. Perhaps someone can actually -time- the speed of a flailing
hand as a person slips and tries to catch himself. Then have Sawstop
test a wiener at that speed instead of in slow-mo, as they do now.


What happens is one hell of a lot less damage than if the saw was other
than
a SawStop. I'd still be much happier that I got a bad cut than loose a
whole finger, hand, arm, or internal body part.

Very likely true, but we won't know until we see the experiment
performed. What I'm saying is that the demo is deficient, showing
only the best-case scenarios. Let's see worst-case!

Ok, that sounds reasonable but only if you yourself start the experiment
with the saw of your choice including the SawStop. which one are you
going
to choose......?

Mean cuss, ain't ya? Telling a consumer advocate to go maim himself.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself, Leon.

I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

OK, I'll go with the SawStop. Now we are going to shove our hands up under
the guard as fast as we can like we are playing hand ball. We'll see who
has the bigger cut. Better yet, you can do yours with your saw turned off,
I'll let the SawStop run to give you an advantage, maybe.

IIRC the Whirlwind blade simply stops, the speed of your hand will probably
produce a pretty good cut when it hits that stationary blade. The SawStop
blade of course instantly stops spinning AND drops below the table.

A- hole attorney or not, I am going with what offers ME the most protection.

The Whirlwind will make all of this type technology become more reasonably
priced but so far it's a "me too" that does not offer the same amount of
protection.

On Jan 18, 12:43*pm, RicodJour wrote:
On Jan 18, 1:30*pm, "SonomaProducts.com" wrote:


Methinks that design will eat SawStop's lunch. *The SawStop inventor
may have outsmarted himself with the way he went bringing it to
market. *I don't know anyone that would think that destroying a blade
and having to buy a replacement brake cartridge would be preferable to
pressing a button to restart.


Sawstop is a passive safety system. You don't have to do anything but
contact the blade to make it work. Ideally, you would use the saw and
system your entire life and never activate the brake system. If that
happens, repair is a minor cost considering the alternative.

This is a neat idea but it is active, vs passive. The guard has to be
on the saw, not hanging on the wall. Also, it is not usable for a lot
of tablesaw operations (Miter, vertical fence use, jigs and fixtures,
etc.) But the dust collection is a pretty nice add in.

RonB

"Robatoy" wrote in message
Would it be possible to lower the saw into an elevated platform with
gentle ramps? How much of a height difference are we talking about?

It would be possible with ramps as I've talked about previously, but it
would be a ramp for the saw only. Ramps in themselves are inherently
dangerous for wheelchairs because they contribute to a change of balance and
equilibrium while you're using them. I'd be much more likely to tip my
wheelchair and break a leg or something while going up or down a ramp than I
would ever be cutting a finger off with a tablesaw. And in this case, we're
talking about a 6"-8" difference needed for a ramp to equalize the
difference between a standard height Sawstop and an Access model General
650.

"Bill" wrote in message
For the amounts of money you are talking about, would raising the floor 10
inches around and in the vicinity of the saw be unthinkable? Or, IIRC,
are you working in a smallish interior room?

You're talking about a much larger area. It would be a number of feet around
the saw to accomodate the wheelchair rolling safetly around the saw and not
unwittingly going over an edge. I'd suggest that a safe zone would be in
excess of 200' square feet. An average wheelchair requires an approximate
minimum of 5 feet for a turning radius. So, think of a five foot wide border
around a saw. Add onto that infeed and outfeed tables and the space needed
grows exponentionally.

In article ,
says...

On 1/21/2011 10:00 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 06:22:30 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
wrote:

On Jan 21, 8:23 am, wrote:
"Larry wrote in message
I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

And when you cut something off, some asshole attorney is going to be your
painful best friend.

It's funny to see an post to me from someone who has been in my twit
filter for several years now. What he doesn't realize is that good
people don't need nor use attorneys for self-inflicted wounds. They
take responsibility for their actions, unlike the liberal idiots in
Uppy's small circle.


I'd buy the Sawstop too, except for one thing. A standard tablesaw is too
high for me to safely use. The only option for me is the Access model
General 650. Considering it cost as much or a little more than the Sawstop,
the factor of money doesn't really come into play, not unless I'd be willing
to spend some $10,000 or more for a computer controlled saw. And yes, I
inquired if there was enough space inside the Sawstop cabinet to possibly
lower the saw and there isn't, not even close. Not to mention the voiding of
any warranty.

Would it be possible to lower the saw into an elevated platform with
gentle ramps? How much of a height difference are we talking about?

A wheelchair-height workspace is usually 24-26", so lowering would
probably be about 10 inches.

For the amounts of money you are talking about, would raising the floor
10 inches around and in the vicinity of the saw be unthinkable? Or,
IIRC, are you working in a smallish interior room?

He's been over this before--in a word no, it won't work for him. Think
about it--you're on the raised floor, there's something you need that's
three feet away, but you have to go down the ramp in the opposite
direction and then wheel around to it to get it. Not to mention having
to have railings on the raised area to keep from accidentally rolling
off and mangling yourself . . .

If the whole shop floor could be raised it would likely be another
story, but then headroom for people who are not in chairs (or just for
handling stock) could be an issue.

It occurs to me though that a rather baroque but workable approach, if a
pit can be made for the saw, is to make the pit with a jacking mechanism
so that the saw can be lowered into it at need and lifted to be rolled
off on its mobile base when it's not needed, and the jacking mechanism
would raise the floor to level when the saw is not in use. The details
would require either a commercial product of some sort (I can't even
think of good keywords for such a thing) or the services of an engineer
to design the thing.

It occurse to me that it could probably be cobbled with some threaded
rod, sprockets and chain (or cog belt), appropriate structural members,
and a crank, essentially making a huge router lift. If you wanted to
get fancy it could probably be motorized.

Probably wouldn't be cheap but should be _doable_. I suspect that
McMaster can provide all the parts you need that aren't Home Depot or
hardware-store items.

On 1/21/11 11:56 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 1/21/2011 10:00 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 06:22:30 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
wrote:

On Jan 21, 8:23 am, wrote:
"Larry wrote in message
I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

And when you cut something off, some asshole attorney is going to be your
painful best friend.

It's funny to see an post to me from someone who has been in my twit
filter for several years now. What he doesn't realize is that good
people don't need nor use attorneys for self-inflicted wounds. They
take responsibility for their actions, unlike the liberal idiots in
Uppy's small circle.


I'd buy the Sawstop too, except for one thing. A standard tablesaw is too
high for me to safely use. The only option for me is the Access model
General 650. Considering it cost as much or a little more than the Sawstop,
the factor of money doesn't really come into play, not unless I'd be willing
to spend some $10,000 or more for a computer controlled saw. And yes, I
inquired if there was enough space inside the Sawstop cabinet to possibly
lower the saw and there isn't, not even close. Not to mention the voiding of
any warranty.

Would it be possible to lower the saw into an elevated platform with
gentle ramps? How much of a height difference are we talking about?

A wheelchair-height workspace is usually 24-26", so lowering would
probably be about 10 inches.

For the amounts of money you are talking about, would raising the floor
10 inches around and in the vicinity of the saw be unthinkable? Or,
IIRC, are you working in a smallish interior room?

He's been over this before--in a word no, it won't work for him. Think
about it--you're on the raised floor, there's something you need that's
three feet away, but you have to go down the ramp in the opposite
direction and then wheel around to it to get it. Not to mention having
to have railings on the raised area to keep from accidentally rolling
off and mangling yourself . . .

If the whole shop floor could be raised it would likely be another
story, but then headroom for people who are not in chairs (or just for
handling stock) could be an issue.

It occurs to me though that a rather baroque but workable approach, if a
pit can be made for the saw, is to make the pit with a jacking mechanism
so that the saw can be lowered into it at need and lifted to be rolled
off on its mobile base when it's not needed, and the jacking mechanism
would raise the floor to level when the saw is not in use. The details
would require either a commercial product of some sort (I can't even
think of good keywords for such a thing) or the services of an engineer
to design the thing.

It occurse to me that it could probably be cobbled with some threaded
rod, sprockets and chain (or cog belt), appropriate structural members,
and a crank, essentially making a huge router lift. If you wanted to
get fancy it could probably be motorized.

Probably wouldn't be cheap but should be _doable_. I suspect that
McMaster can provide all the parts you need that aren't Home Depot or
hardware-store items.

Probably doing all that in his condo would get him in trouble.
Remember, he also doesn't have a traditional shop space either.

--
Froz...


The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.

On 1/21/2011 11:03 AM, Leon wrote:
"Larry wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 22:17:48 -0600,
wrote:


"Larry wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:09:38 -0600,
wrote:
What about 80ips????

May I spell it out for you? I'm using a SWAG to estimate an 80ips
speed. Perhaps someone can actually -time- the speed of a flailing
hand as a person slips and tries to catch himself. Then have Sawstop
test a wiener at that speed instead of in slow-mo, as they do now.


What happens is one hell of a lot less damage than if the saw was other
than
a SawStop. I'd still be much happier that I got a bad cut than loose a
whole finger, hand, arm, or internal body part.

Very likely true, but we won't know until we see the experiment
performed. What I'm saying is that the demo is deficient, showing
only the best-case scenarios. Let's see worst-case!

Ok, that sounds reasonable but only if you yourself start the experiment
with the saw of your choice including the SawStop. which one are you
going
to choose......?

Mean cuss, ain't ya? Telling a consumer advocate to go maim himself.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself, Leon.

I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

OK, I'll go with the SawStop. Now we are going to shove our hands up under
the guard as fast as we can like we are playing hand ball. We'll see who
has the bigger cut. Better yet, you can do yours with your saw turned off,
I'll let the SawStop run to give you an advantage, maybe.

IIRC the Whirlwind blade simply stops, the speed of your hand will probably
produce a pretty good cut when it hits that stationary blade. The SawStop
blade of course instantly stops spinning AND drops below the table.

A- hole attorney or not, I am going with what offers ME the most protection.

The Whirlwind will make all of this type technology become more reasonably
priced but so far it's a "me too" that does not offer the same amount of
protection.

I don't yet have a TS, but I intuitively keep my hands away from things
spinning at 4000 RPM. A normal blade guard appears to offer "good"
protection. I will increase my level of protection when it's cost is
more modest. Until then I will exercise due caution--like I do when I
use my chain saw. Seems like a chain saw is more dangerous, no? At
least the TS blade is fixed in 2 dimensions. I am watching the
technology, and this discussion, with interest.

Bill

On 1/21/2011 11:23 AM, Upscale wrote:
wrote in message
For the amounts of money you are talking about, would raising the floor 10
inches around and in the vicinity of the saw be unthinkable? Or, IIRC,
are you working in a smallish interior room?

You're talking about a much larger area. It would be a number of feet around
the saw to accomodate the wheelchair rolling safetly around the saw and not
unwittingly going over an edge.

Yes, but I would not leave an edge. You seem to be working well with a
benchtop TS, no? I commend you for your devotion to the craft.

Bill


I'd suggest that a safe zone would be in
excess of 200' square feet. An average wheelchair requires an approximate
minimum of 5 feet for a turning radius. So, think of a five foot wide border
around a saw. Add onto that infeed and outfeed tables and the space needed
grows exponentionally.

"Robatoy" wrote in message
...
On Jan 21, 8:23 am, "Upscale" wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

And when you cut something off, some asshole attorney is going to be your
painful best friend.

How so?

On 1/21/2011 11:56 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
In ,
says...

On 1/21/2011 10:00 AM, Larry Jaques wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 06:22:30 -0800 (PST), Robatoy
wrote:

On Jan 21, 8:23 am, wrote:
"Larry wrote in message
I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

And when you cut something off, some asshole attorney is going to be your
painful best friend.

It's funny to see an post to me from someone who has been in my twit
filter for several years now. What he doesn't realize is that good
people don't need nor use attorneys for self-inflicted wounds. They
take responsibility for their actions, unlike the liberal idiots in
Uppy's small circle.


I'd buy the Sawstop too, except for one thing. A standard tablesaw is too
high for me to safely use. The only option for me is the Access model
General 650. Considering it cost as much or a little more than the Sawstop,
the factor of money doesn't really come into play, not unless I'd be willing
to spend some $10,000 or more for a computer controlled saw. And yes, I
inquired if there was enough space inside the Sawstop cabinet to possibly
lower the saw and there isn't, not even close. Not to mention the voiding of
any warranty.

Would it be possible to lower the saw into an elevated platform with
gentle ramps? How much of a height difference are we talking about?

A wheelchair-height workspace is usually 24-26", so lowering would
probably be about 10 inches.

For the amounts of money you are talking about, would raising the floor
10 inches around and in the vicinity of the saw be unthinkable? Or,
IIRC, are you working in a smallish interior room?

He's been over this before--in a word no, it won't work for him. Think
about it--you're on the raised floor, there's something you need that's
three feet away, but you have to go down the ramp in the opposite
direction and then wheel around to it to get it.

If it was a 20 by 24 foot garage like I have now, it may be plausable.
If fact, entering from the kitchen, where there are currently two steps,
and you would already be 12 inches above the ground (concrete).
Reducing from 8.5 feet leaves enough head space for everyone else, as
far as I would be concerned. Doesn't seem as thought the price would be
exorbitant. May as well thread a bunch of wires underneath, at the
same time, for convenient electrical.

Bill




Not to mention having
to have railings on the raised area to keep from accidentally rolling
off and mangling yourself . . .

If the whole shop floor could be raised it would likely be another
story, but then headroom for people who are not in chairs (or just for
handling stock) could be an issue.

It occurs to me though that a rather baroque but workable approach, if a
pit can be made for the saw, is to make the pit with a jacking mechanism
so that the saw can be lowered into it at need and lifted to be rolled
off on its mobile base when it's not needed, and the jacking mechanism
would raise the floor to level when the saw is not in use. The details
would require either a commercial product of some sort (I can't even
think of good keywords for such a thing) or the services of an engineer
to design the thing.

It occurse to me that it could probably be cobbled with some threaded
rod, sprockets and chain (or cog belt), appropriate structural members,
and a crank, essentially making a huge router lift. If you wanted to
get fancy it could probably be motorized.

Probably wouldn't be cheap but should be _doable_. I suspect that
McMaster can provide all the parts you need that aren't Home Depot or
hardware-store items.

On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 22:22:52 -0600, -MIKE- wrote:

Is your guard not tapered on the front like most? Doesn't it get lifted
up by the stock pushing into the front of it? Again, how is that
different from a hand slipping off the wood, or someone slipping forward
and pushing their hand forward to catch themselves. Both are pretty
common causes of table saw injuries.

As Max says, nothing is foolproof. But what you're positing is a
situation where the hand is pushing a piece of wood under the guard. Not
the case under discussion where someone is falling into the blade at high
speed. In that case their hand would hit the top of the guard.

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

"Bill" wrote in message
...
On 1/21/2011 11:03 AM, Leon wrote:
"Larry wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 22:17:48 -0600,
wrote:


"Larry wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:09:38 -0600,
wrote:
What about 80ips????

May I spell it out for you? I'm using a SWAG to estimate an 80ips
speed. Perhaps someone can actually -time- the speed of a flailing
hand as a person slips and tries to catch himself. Then have Sawstop
test a wiener at that speed instead of in slow-mo, as they do now.


What happens is one hell of a lot less damage than if the saw was
other
than
a SawStop. I'd still be much happier that I got a bad cut than loose
a
whole finger, hand, arm, or internal body part.

Very likely true, but we won't know until we see the experiment
performed. What I'm saying is that the demo is deficient, showing
only the best-case scenarios. Let's see worst-case!

Ok, that sounds reasonable but only if you yourself start the
experiment
with the saw of your choice including the SawStop. which one are you
going
to choose......?

Mean cuss, ain't ya? Telling a consumer advocate to go maim himself.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself, Leon.

I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

OK, I'll go with the SawStop. Now we are going to shove our hands up
under
the guard as fast as we can like we are playing hand ball. We'll see who
has the bigger cut. Better yet, you can do yours with your saw turned
off,
I'll let the SawStop run to give you an advantage, maybe.

IIRC the Whirlwind blade simply stops, the speed of your hand will
probably
produce a pretty good cut when it hits that stationary blade. The
SawStop
blade of course instantly stops spinning AND drops below the table.

A- hole attorney or not, I am going with what offers ME the most
protection.

The Whirlwind will make all of this type technology become more
reasonably
priced but so far it's a "me too" that does not offer the same amount of
protection.

I don't yet have a TS, but I intuitively keep my hands away from things
spinning at 4000 RPM. A normal blade guard appears to offer "good"
protection. I will increase my level of protection when it's cost is more
modest. Until then I will exercise due caution--like I do when I use my
chain saw. Seems like a chain saw is more dangerous, no? At least the TS
blade is fixed in 2 dimensions. I am watching the technology, and this
discussion, with interest.



A good point of view to have BUT you may eventually progress past cutting
2x4's and start to build more complicated/detailed projects. You may need
to cut smaller pieces. There comes a point where a standard blade guard
becomes a problem because of it's inherent design. You have heard of kick
back, a piece gets trapped between a stationary object, usually the fence,
and the spinning blade. The guard is a stationary object and small cut off
pieces can and do get trapped up inside the guard and the spinning blade.
Some what like a bullet the piece gets thown out. Bigger pieces can shoot
out the side of the guard if trapped under and the guard is setting on top
of the waste piece.
IMHO it is a "blade guard" not a person guard. It does a good job at
keeping things from falling on and damaging the blade.
Yes I have been hit by small pieces while using the blade guard, don't
recall small pieces setting free on the table top ever getting caught and
thrown.

On 1/21/11 11:56 AM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 22:22:52 -0600, -MIKE- wrote:

Is your guard not tapered on the front like most? Doesn't it get lifted
up by the stock pushing into the front of it? Again, how is that
different from a hand slipping off the wood, or someone slipping forward
and pushing their hand forward to catch themselves. Both are pretty
common causes of table saw injuries.

As Max says, nothing is foolproof. But what you're positing is a
situation where the hand is pushing a piece of wood under the guard. Not
the case under discussion where someone is falling into the blade at high
speed. In that case their hand would hit the top of the guard.


I believe my situation is the exact scenario we're discussing.
Who's going to fall straight down onto a running saw?
Are guy turning your saw on and then changing your light bulbs or what? :-)

The real life scenario is one on which someone's hand slips forward in
the same direction one is feeding stock into the blade. Several things
could happen.
You're leaning forward over the saw, feeding a board or plywood, there's
sawdust on the floor, your feet go back, your arms go forward.
You're feeding stock forward into the blade, there is kick back, your
hands slip forward.
You're using a lousy push stick that breaks or slips on sawdust, whoosh!
You're feeding stock, your dog jumps on your back because you didn't put
him on a leash and he's not don't playing. (real life scenario... I'm
not working with that guy anymore)

All of these are situations in which one's hand would go straight
forward, much faster than normal feed rate, under a flip-up blade guard.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 10:03:38 -0600, "Leon"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 22:17:48 -0600, "Leon"
wrote:


"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 16:09:38 -0600, "Leon"
wrote:
What about 80ips????

May I spell it out for you? I'm using a SWAG to estimate an 80ips
speed. Perhaps someone can actually -time- the speed of a flailing
hand as a person slips and tries to catch himself. Then have Sawstop
test a wiener at that speed instead of in slow-mo, as they do now.


What happens is one hell of a lot less damage than if the saw was other
than
a SawStop. I'd still be much happier that I got a bad cut than loose a
whole finger, hand, arm, or internal body part.

Very likely true, but we won't know until we see the experiment
performed. What I'm saying is that the demo is deficient, showing
only the best-case scenarios. Let's see worst-case!

Ok, that sounds reasonable but only if you yourself start the experiment
with the saw of your choice including the SawStop. which one are you
going
to choose......?

Mean cuss, ain't ya? Telling a consumer advocate to go maim himself.
You ought to be ashamed of yourself, Leon.

I'd choose the saw which didn't have the asshole attorney attached to
it, the Whirlwind licensed machine, of course.

OK, I'll go with the SawStop. Now we are going to shove our hands up under
the guard as fast as we can like we are playing hand ball. We'll see who
has the bigger cut. Better yet, you can do yours with your saw turned off,
I'll let the SawStop run to give you an advantage, maybe.

IIRC the Whirlwind blade simply stops, the speed of your hand will probably
produce a pretty good cut when it hits that stationary blade. The SawStop
blade of course instantly stops spinning AND drops below the table.

A- hole attorney or not, I am going with what offers ME the most protection.

The Whirlwind will make all of this type technology become more reasonably
priced but so far it's a "me too" that does not offer the same amount of
protection.

I'd like to see the engineering figures on just what that extra 114
milliseconds of time means in the travel of the blade.

What we still don't know, however, is the result of a high-speed hand
into a Sawstop machine. That should have been one of his selling
points...unless it renders the mechanism somewhat useless. That's my
guess, anyway.

But even if I had the money for a new Sawstop, I don't think I'd buy
one because of the principle. I don't want to knowingly feed greed and
arrogance, wherever they exist, if I can possibly help it.

--
Live in the sunshine, swim the sea, drink the wild air...
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"-MIKE-" wrote in message
...
On 1/21/11 11:56 AM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 22:22:52 -0600, -MIKE- wrote:

Is your guard not tapered on the front like most? Doesn't it get lifted
up by the stock pushing into the front of it? Again, how is that
different from a hand slipping off the wood, or someone slipping forward
and pushing their hand forward to catch themselves. Both are pretty
common causes of table saw injuries.

As Max says, nothing is foolproof. But what you're positing is a
situation where the hand is pushing a piece of wood under the guard. Not
the case under discussion where someone is falling into the blade at high
speed. In that case their hand would hit the top of the guard.


I believe my situation is the exact scenario we're discussing.
Who's going to fall straight down onto a running saw?
Are guy turning your saw on and then changing your light bulbs or what?
:-)

The real life scenario is one on which someone's hand slips forward in
the same direction one is feeding stock into the blade. Several things
could happen.
You're leaning forward over the saw, feeding a board or plywood, there's
sawdust on the floor, your feet go back, your arms go forward.
You're feeding stock forward into the blade, there is kick back, your
hands slip forward.
You're using a lousy push stick that breaks or slips on sawdust, whoosh!
You're feeding stock, your dog jumps on your back because you didn't put
him on a leash and he's not don't playing. (real life scenario... I'm
not working with that guy anymore)

All of these are situations in which one's hand would go straight
forward, much faster than normal feed rate, under a flip-up blade guard.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)


Time for Darwin.

Max

"Larry Jaques" wrote

But even if I had the money for a new Sawstop, I don't think I'd buy
one because of the principle. I don't want to knowingly feed greed and
arrogance, wherever they exist, if I can possibly help it.



And *I* wouldn't buy one because when the time comes that my common sense,
agility, and attention to safety factors are so badly deteriorated that I
feel the need for the device I will discontinue using a table saw.

Max

On 1/21/11 1:28 PM, Max wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote

But even if I had the money for a new Sawstop, I don't think I'd buy
one because of the principle. I don't want to knowingly feed greed and
arrogance, wherever they exist, if I can possibly help it.



And *I* wouldn't buy one because when the time comes that my common
sense, agility, and attention to safety factors are so badly
deteriorated that I feel the need for the device I will discontinue
using a table saw.

Max

Yeah, because no one has ever followed safety procedures and still
gotten injured.


--

-MIKE-

"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com

---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply

On 1/21/2011 1:33 PM, Leon wrote:
Bill wrote:
I don't yet have a TS, but I intuitively keep my hands away from things
spinning at 4000 RPM. A normal blade guard appears to offer "good"
protection. I will increase my level of protection when it's cost is more
modest. Until then I will exercise due caution--like I do when I use my
chain saw. Seems like a chain saw is more dangerous, no? At least the TS
blade is fixed in 2 dimensions. I am watching the technology, and this
discussion, with interest.



A good point of view to have BUT you may eventually progress past cutting
2x4's and start to build more complicated/detailed projects. You may need
to cut smaller pieces. There comes a point where a standard blade guard
becomes a problem because of it's inherent design. You have heard of kick
back, a piece gets trapped between a stationary object, usually the fence,
and the spinning blade. The guard is a stationary object and small cut off
pieces can and do get trapped up inside the guard and the spinning blade.
Some what like a bullet the piece gets thrown out. Bigger pieces can shoot
out the side of the guard if trapped under and the guard is setting on top
of the waste piece.
IMHO it is a "blade guard" not a person guard. It does a good job at
keeping things from falling on and damaging the blade.
Yes I have been hit by small pieces while using the blade guard, don't
recall small pieces setting free on the table top ever getting caught and
thrown.

Just curious, does anyone else share this experience/point of view--that
blade guards are unsafe due to a greater likelihood of small pieces
being thrown?

Bill

Most of us never plan our accidents. It would be an oxymorin

Most of the saw accidents I have heard of get the fingers on a knee-jerk
reaction to a sudden event...like kickback or pieces flying and the human
overreacts pulling their baby finger and next one past the blade backwards.

http://tablesawaccidents.com/table-s...y-pictures.htm

Saw guards are hardly ever there when needed except for safety checks.


"Max" wrote in message
b.com...
And *I* wouldn't buy one because when the time comes that my common sense,
agility, and attention to safety factors are so badly deteriorated that I
feel the need for the device I will discontinue using a table saw.

Max

Interesting that a particular type of machine accident has it's own website
dedicated to it.

http://tablesawaccidents.com/