some time ago i read an article on a metal lathe manufacturer and they
talked a little about seasoning the large metal parts of the large lathes

there is probably a more suitable term than seasoning but the idea
is that they would leave the material outside for months and more
in the elements and exposed

then later they would check it for trueness and check for any internal
stress
based on the analysis the part would either get used or recycled

i wonder if this is done with woodworking equipment

Electric Comet wrote in news:mqdl3a$oq9$5
@dont-email.me:

some time ago i read an article on a metal lathe manufacturer and they
talked a little about seasoning the large metal parts of the large lathes

there is probably a more suitable term than seasoning but the idea
is that they would leave the material outside for months and more
in the elements and exposed

Seasoning is the normal term. In days of yore it was common
for big castings - the thinking being, that the surface of a
casting cools faster than the insides, creating a stressed skin,
and then when the casting is machined (and the skin cut) the
stress releases in undesirable ways.

Now-a-days I think castings are usually destressed by thermal
cycling them thru ovens and chillers a few times. So the only
cast iron that gets seasoned now is frying pans.

John

Electric Comet wrote:
some time ago i read an article on a metal lathe manufacturer and they
talked a little about seasoning the large metal parts of the large
lathes

there is probably a more suitable term than seasoning but the idea
is that they would leave the material outside for months and more
in the elements and exposed

then later they would check it for trueness and check for any internal
stress
based on the analysis the part would either get used or recycled

i wonder if this is done with woodworking equipment

Indeed. Leave all of your woodworking tools outside for at least 3 months -
depending on where you live, of couse, and then see if they work better
after that. You just can't rush this stuff...

--

-Mike-

Subject

Just finished reseasoning my cast iron chicken fryer.

Lew

On 8/11/15 4:35 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
Electric Comet wrote:
some time ago i read an article on a metal lathe manufacturer and they
talked a little about seasoning the large metal parts of the large
lathes

there is probably a more suitable term than seasoning but the idea
is that they would leave the material outside for months and more
in the elements and exposed

then later they would check it for trueness and check for any internal
stress
based on the analysis the part would either get used or recycled

i wonder if this is done with woodworking equipment

Indeed. Leave all of your woodworking tools outside for at least 3 months -
depending on where you live, of couse, and then see if they work better
after that. You just can't rush this stuff...


OAK RUST!!!!!!


--

-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 Tue, 11 Aug 2015 21:30:08 +0000 (UTC)
John McCoy wrote:

Seasoning is the normal term. In days of yore it was common
for big castings - the thinking being, that the surface of a
casting cools faster than the insides, creating a stressed skin,
and then when the casting is machined (and the skin cut) the
stress releases in undesirable ways.

are mill and lathe bedways cast or extruded
maybe they were talking about only castings

i need to try to find that article but they were doing this with parts
that had already been partially machined

Now-a-days I think castings are usually destressed by thermal
cycling them thru ovens and chillers a few times. So the only

i would think with a casting you would just let it cool more slowly
and control the cool down

On 08/11/2015 5:33 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 21:30:08 +0000 (UTC)
John wrote:

Seasoning is the normal term. In days of yore it was common
for big castings - the thinking being, that the surface of a
casting cools faster than the insides, creating a stressed skin,
and then when the casting is machined (and the skin cut) the
stress releases in undesirable ways.

are mill and lathe bedways cast or extruded
maybe they were talking about only castings

i need to try to find that article but they were doing this with parts
that had already been partially machined

Now-a-days I think castings are usually destressed by thermal
cycling them thru ovens and chillers a few times. So the only

i would think with a casting you would just let it cool more slowly
and control the cool down
....

Years ago, ca. 1980 I purchased a Powermatic 66 TS with pickup at the
factory in McMinnville, TN, being as lived not far away in Oak Ridge
area. As part of the treat got a tour through the facility and one of
the areas they showed me was the seasoning piles -- mounds of raw
castings for jointers, saws, planers, etc., etc., 20 and 30 ft high
where they were just piled out in the yard for 6 months or so before
being brought in for final milling and assembly. I was totally
unprepared for the sight...

--

Electric Comet wrote in news:mqdta4$1fp$1
@dont-email.me:

Now-a-days I think castings are usually destressed by thermal
cycling them thru ovens and chillers a few times. So the only

i would think with a casting you would just let it cool more slowly
and control the cool down

Apparently the expansion and contraction is beneficial in
working the stresses out. They used to say you couldn't
properly season castings in the south because the winters
weren't cold enough (there are very few foundrys in the
south, altho I doubt that's the reason).

John

On 8/11/2015 4:13 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
some time ago i read an article on a metal lathe manufacturer and they
talked a little about seasoning the large metal parts of the large lathes

there is probably a more suitable term than seasoning but the idea
is that they would leave the material outside for months and more
in the elements and exposed

then later they would check it for trueness and check for any internal
stress
based on the analysis the part would either get used or recycled

i wonder if this is done with woodworking equipment












That process is for cast iron, and cast steel.

And yes, otherwise it would not be true. Most all get machined once the
parts have settled down.

--
Jeff

I have a metal lathe that is lab quality. 60+ years old - Dad and I
bought it together one day.

If you want to use it - check out the ways for level all around.

If you move it - plan on leveling 2 or 3 times. As the steel and joints
find their position.

My shop thermally moves 20 or 30 degrees a day. Metal expands and
contracts and expands again. Best to check level if good work is to be
done.

Martin

On 8/11/2015 3:13 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
some time ago i read an article on a metal lathe manufacturer and they
talked a little about seasoning the large metal parts of the large lathes

there is probably a more suitable term than seasoning but the idea
is that they would leave the material outside for months and more
in the elements and exposed

then later they would check it for trueness and check for any internal
stress
based on the analysis the part would either get used or recycled

i wonder if this is done with woodworking equipment

On 8/11/2015 3:13 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
some time ago i read an article on a metal lathe manufacturer and they
talked a little about seasoning the large metal parts of the large lathes

there is probably a more suitable term than seasoning but the idea
is that they would leave the material outside for months and more
in the elements and exposed

then later they would check it for trueness and check for any internal
stress
based on the analysis the part would either get used or recycled

i wonder if this is done with woodworking equipment



I believe the "old" Powermatic and Delta stationary machines were
seasoned. And most likely the likes of Northfield.

On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 19:54:07 -0500
dpb wrote:

Years ago, ca. 1980 I purchased a Powermatic 66 TS with pickup at the
factory in McMinnville, TN, being as lived not far away in Oak Ridge
area. As part of the treat got a tour through the facility and one
of the areas they showed me was the seasoning piles -- mounds of raw
castings for jointers, saws, planers, etc., etc., 20 and 30 ft high
where they were just piled out in the yard for 6 months or so before
being brought in for final milling and assembly. I was totally
unprepared for the sight...

that would have been a sight to see for sure

i wonder if they make anything in the states anymore
must be so difficult to compete with the low quality jet and grizzly and
others

On 08/13/2015 10:51 AM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 19:54:07 -0500
wrote:

Years ago, ca. 1980 I purchased a Powermatic 66 TS with pickup at the
factory in McMinnville, TN, being as lived not far away in Oak Ridge
area. As part of the treat got a tour through the facility and one
of the areas they showed me was the seasoning piles -- mounds of raw
castings for jointers, saws, planers, etc., etc., 20 and 30 ft high
where they were just piled out in the yard for 6 months or so before
being brought in for final milling and assembly. I was totally
unprepared for the sight...

that would have been a sight to see for sure

i wonder if they make anything in the states anymore
must be so difficult to compete with the low quality jet and grizzly and
others
....

Looked like nothing so much as a scrap yard with piles of rusty cast iron...

There's a typo above; the 6 months was intended as 16 altho I forget
whether they had a specific time or not...the piles were a given age of
castings and I think were produced in large number at a given time and
then were used up over a period of time altho the visit was so long ago
now as to have forgotten most of the specifics...

Jet, Powermatic, Performax, Wilton, and I don't know who all else are
now all owned by a conglomerate call JPW Industries. AFAIK nothing is
manufactured in the US; some of it is assembled in La Vergne, TN (near
Smyrna, SE of Nashville a little ways) from Taiwanese parts. I don't
know if they've outsourced some of the castings to other foundries or
not, either. I just looked on the satellite thru google maps and the
old facility in McMinnville has been razed entirely it appears; down to
nothing but some piles of rubble and a few walls standing.

Sad, but "global economics rules"...

--

On 8/13/2015 10:51 AM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 19:54:07 -0500
dpb wrote:

Years ago, ca. 1980 I purchased a Powermatic 66 TS with pickup at the
factory in McMinnville, TN, being as lived not far away in Oak Ridge
area. As part of the treat got a tour through the facility and one
of the areas they showed me was the seasoning piles -- mounds of raw
castings for jointers, saws, planers, etc., etc., 20 and 30 ft high
where they were just piled out in the yard for 6 months or so before
being brought in for final milling and assembly. I was totally
unprepared for the sight...

that would have been a sight to see for sure

i wonder if they make anything in the states anymore
must be so difficult to compete with the low quality jet and grizzly and
others


The company that owns Jet, owns Powermatic. Some parts will
interchange. FWIW you can do a lot worse than Jet and avoiding Jet for
that sake is often a waste of money simply to have a different color and
name on the tool.

On 8/13/2015 2:29 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/13/2015 10:51 AM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 19:54:07 -0500
wrote:

Years ago, ca. 1980 I purchased a Powermatic 66 TS with pickup at the
factory in McMinnville, TN, being as lived not far away in Oak Ridge
area. As part of the treat got a tour through the facility and one
of the areas they showed me was the seasoning piles -- mounds of raw
castings for jointers, saws, planers, etc., etc., 20 and 30 ft high
where they were just piled out in the yard for 6 months or so before
being brought in for final milling and assembly. I was totally
unprepared for the sight...

that would have been a sight to see for sure

i wonder if they make anything in the states anymore
must be so difficult to compete with the low quality jet and grizzly and
others
...

Looked like nothing so much as a scrap yard with piles of rusty cast
iron...

There's a typo above; the 6 months was intended as 16 altho I forget
whether they had a specific time or not...the piles were a given age of
castings and I think were produced in large number at a given time and
then were used up over a period of time altho the visit was so long ago
now as to have forgotten most of the specifics...

That's definetly how it would be done, the foundary would run them off,
then move on.
And 16 months sounds better than 6. But knowing how everyone wants to
make a buck quickly 6 could have been the number

Jet, Powermatic, Performax, Wilton, and I don't know who all else are
now all owned by a conglomerate call JPW Industries. AFAIK nothing is
manufactured in the US; some of it is assembled in La Vergne, TN (near
Smyrna, SE of Nashville a little ways) from Taiwanese parts. I don't
know if they've outsourced some of the castings to other foundries or
not, either. I just looked on the satellite thru google maps and the
old facility in McMinnville has been razed entirely it appears; down to
nothing but some piles of rubble and a few walls standing.

Sad, but "global economics rules"...

--



--
Jeff

On 08/13/2015 3:26 PM, woodchucker wrote:
On 8/13/2015 2:29 PM, dpb wrote:
....

There's a typo above; the 6 months was intended as 16 altho I forget
whether they had a specific time or not...the piles were a given age of
castings and I think were produced in large number at a given time and
then were used up over a period of time altho the visit was so long ago
now as to have forgotten most of the specifics...

That's definetly how it would be done, the foundary would run them off,
then move on.
And 16 months sounds better than 6. But knowing how everyone wants to
make a buck quickly 6 could have been the number
....

At that time PM was still independent and ran the way they had,
essentially, from the git-go where the product was the thing. The
import market hadn't yet become a threat to their market; that came
somewhat later when things got really tough.

--

On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 13:29:40 -0500
dpb wrote:

Looked like nothing so much as a scrap yard with piles of rusty cast
iron...

right but to think they are to become final product is not all the expected
for most people

There's a typo above; the 6 months was intended as 16 altho I forget
whether they had a specific time or not...the piles were a given age
of castings and I think were produced in large number at a given time
and then were used up over a period of time altho the visit was so
long ago now as to have forgotten most of the specifics...

yes 6 sounds short the article i read was for high tolerance machine lathes
and the time frame was years
and as you said they too just dumped them out into the field

they also mentioned that the seasoning process was very limiting for the
business when sales shot up because new product had to be planned
for far in advance


Jet, Powermatic, Performax, Wilton, and I don't know who all else are
now all owned by a conglomerate call JPW Industries. AFAIK nothing

was just looking at powermatic
their prices don't seem to reflect their taiwanese heritage

On 08/13/2015 8:24 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 13:29:40 -0500
wrote:

Looked like nothing so much as a scrap yard with piles of rusty cast
iron...

right but to think they are to become final product is not all the expected
for most people

It was, at that time, certainly a surprise to me having no knowledge of
casting and foundry operations at the time...later I became well
acquainted with a fellow who was engineering manager for initially
Lynchburg (VA) foundry then several others over the southeast and
learned a fair amount about their operations...

There's a typo above; the 6 months was intended as 16 altho I forget
whether they had a specific time or not...the piles were a given age
of castings and I think were produced in large number at a given time
and then were used up over a period of time altho the visit was so
long ago now as to have forgotten most of the specifics...

yes 6 sounds short the article i read was for high tolerance machine lathes
and the time frame was years
and as you said they too just dumped them out into the field

they also mentioned that the seasoning process was very limiting for the
business when sales shot up because new product had to be planned
for far in advance

That would depend on how much backlog they cast for; PM had at the time
I was there probably several years' of production lined up. Of course,
there weren't/aren't very many really large, terribly complicated (hence
very expensive) castings in the woodworking machine of the size they
were making...not like some of the commercial four- or six-shaft
moulders or the like...

Jet, Powermatic, Performax, Wilton, and I don't know who all else are
now all owned by a conglomerate call JPW Industries. AFAIK nothing

was just looking at powermatic
their prices don't seem to reflect their taiwanese heritage

They're still the "Cadillac" of the industry; generally they will
outweigh and have features and finish that the others don't, but partly
there is the name just as Deere green paint gathers a premium in part
from its reputation.

--

On 8/14/2015 7:58 AM, dpb wrote:
On 08/13/2015 8:24 PM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 13:29:40 -0500
wrote:

Looked like nothing so much as a scrap yard with piles of rusty cast
iron...

right but to think they are to become final product is not all the
expected
for most people

It was, at that time, certainly a surprise to me having no knowledge of
casting and foundry operations at the time...later I became well
acquainted with a fellow who was engineering manager for initially
Lynchburg (VA) foundry then several others over the southeast and
learned a fair amount about their operations...

There's a typo above; the 6 months was intended as 16 altho I forget
whether they had a specific time or not...the piles were a given age
of castings and I think were produced in large number at a given time
and then were used up over a period of time altho the visit was so
long ago now as to have forgotten most of the specifics...

yes 6 sounds short the article i read was for high tolerance machine
lathes
and the time frame was years
and as you said they too just dumped them out into the field

they also mentioned that the seasoning process was very limiting for the
business when sales shot up because new product had to be planned
for far in advance

That would depend on how much backlog they cast for; PM had at the time
I was there probably several years' of production lined up. Of course,
there weren't/aren't very many really large, terribly complicated (hence
very expensive) castings in the woodworking machine of the size they
were making...not like some of the commercial four- or six-shaft
moulders or the like...

Jet, Powermatic, Performax, Wilton, and I don't know who all else are
now all owned by a conglomerate call JPW Industries. AFAIK nothing

was just looking at powermatic
their prices don't seem to reflect their taiwanese heritage

They're still the "Cadillac" of the industry; generally they will
outweigh and have features and finish that the others don't, but partly
there is the name just as Deere green paint gathers a premium in part
from its reputation.

--

SawStop may have dethroned Powermatic. ;~) My 10" SawStop weighs in at
nearly 700 lbs and has a larger trunnion and arbor diameter at the
bearings. But that said Powermatic is still right at the top.

On 08/14/2015 9:36 AM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 7:58 AM, dpb wrote:
....

They're still the "Cadillac" of the industry; generally they will
outweigh and have features and finish that the others don't, but partly
there is the name just as Deere green paint gathers a premium in part
from its reputation.

SawStop may have dethroned Powermatic. ;~) My 10" SawStop weighs in at
nearly 700 lbs and has a larger trunnion and arbor diameter at the
bearings. But that said Powermatic is still right at the top.

Possibly so, actually...they're still the new kid on the block that I
never really think of; not on my radar so didn't even cross my mind...

I have seen them on a showroom floor in Wichita and they do look good
and I agree they're a top-drawer unit...

--

On 8/14/2015 2:05 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 9:36 AM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 7:58 AM, dpb wrote:
...

They're still the "Cadillac" of the industry; generally they will
outweigh and have features and finish that the others don't, but partly
there is the name just as Deere green paint gathers a premium in part
from its reputation.

SawStop may have dethroned Powermatic. ;~) My 10" SawStop weighs in at
nearly 700 lbs and has a larger trunnion and arbor diameter at the
bearings. But that said Powermatic is still right at the top.

Possibly so, actually...they're still the new kid on the block that I
never really think of; not on my radar so didn't even cross my mind...

I have seen them on a showroom floor in Wichita and they do look good
and I agree they're a top-drawer unit...

--

Now I don't know so much about the Pro series, I have the Industrial
series. The Pro series just seemed dinky in size compared to the
industrial and even my old Jet cabinet saw.


Check out the iron sitting on the front and back of the cabinet. There
is plenty in between too. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...7622991960362/

On 08/14/2015 2:25 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 2:05 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 9:36 AM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 7:58 AM, dpb wrote:
...

They're still the "Cadillac" of the industry; generally they will
outweigh and have features and finish that the others don't, but partly
there is the name just as Deere green paint gathers a premium in part
from its reputation.

SawStop may have dethroned Powermatic. ;~) My 10" SawStop weighs in at
nearly 700 lbs and has a larger trunnion and arbor diameter at the
bearings. But that said Powermatic is still right at the top.

Possibly so, actually...they're still the new kid on the block that I
never really think of; not on my radar so didn't even cross my mind...

I have seen them on a showroom floor in Wichita and they do look good
and I agree they're a top-drawer unit...

--

Now I don't know so much about the Pro series, I have the Industrial
series. The Pro series just seemed dinky in size compared to the
industrial and even my old Jet cabinet saw.


Check out the iron sitting on the front and back of the cabinet. There
is plenty in between too. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...7622991960362/

The PM 2000 base saw is 530 lb; the Sawstop Pro is 540 according to each
manufacturer's data (had to download manual to find it for PM) so
they're quite equivalent in base machine heft.

I don't know what a current Unisaur would go at; probably somewhere
between or more nearly the Pro would be my guess but I didn't go look.

The only place in Wichita that carries any "real" w-working equipment is
not a PM dealer so haven't really seen the 2000 hands-on to compare fit
'n finish to the old Model 66 which was, of course, top notch. I don't
recall what it weighs. Well, an online manual says 640+/- w standard
wings for shipping so I'd guess in the 500 lb range for the base unit;
perhaps a little under. Not _that_ far off methinks...

Well, while doing it looked up the current Unisaw -- no base unit weight
found but 3HP 36" rails and standard wings is 624; again not that
dissimilar but probably a little under the other two.

--


--

On 8/14/2015 3:10 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 2:25 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 2:05 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 9:36 AM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 7:58 AM, dpb wrote:
...

They're still the "Cadillac" of the industry; generally they will
outweigh and have features and finish that the others don't, but
partly
there is the name just as Deere green paint gathers a premium in part
from its reputation.

SawStop may have dethroned Powermatic. ;~) My 10" SawStop weighs in at
nearly 700 lbs and has a larger trunnion and arbor diameter at the
bearings. But that said Powermatic is still right at the top.

Possibly so, actually...they're still the new kid on the block that I
never really think of; not on my radar so didn't even cross my mind...

I have seen them on a showroom floor in Wichita and they do look good
and I agree they're a top-drawer unit...

--

Now I don't know so much about the Pro series, I have the Industrial
series. The Pro series just seemed dinky in size compared to the
industrial and even my old Jet cabinet saw.


Check out the iron sitting on the front and back of the cabinet. There
is plenty in between too. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...7622991960362/


The PM 2000 base saw is 530 lb; the Sawstop Pro is 540 according to each
manufacturer's data (had to download manual to find it for PM) so
they're quite equivalent in base machine heft.

I don't know what a current Unisaur would go at; probably somewhere
between or more nearly the Pro would be my guess but I didn't go look.

The only place in Wichita that carries any "real" w-working equipment is
not a PM dealer so haven't really seen the 2000 hands-on to compare fit
'n finish to the old Model 66 which was, of course, top notch. I don't
recall what it weighs. Well, an online manual says 640+/- w standard
wings for shipping so I'd guess in the 500 lb range for the base unit;
perhaps a little under. Not _that_ far off methinks...

Well, while doing it looked up the current Unisaw -- no base unit weight
found but 3HP 36" rails and standard wings is 624; again not that
dissimilar but probably a little under the other two.

Check the industrial SawStop.

On 08/14/2015 10:53 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 3:10 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 2:25 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 2:05 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 9:36 AM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 7:58 AM, dpb wrote:
...

They're still the "Cadillac" of the industry; generally they will
outweigh and have features and finish that the others don't, but
partly
there is the name just as Deere green paint gathers a premium in part
from its reputation.

SawStop may have dethroned Powermatic. ;~) My 10" SawStop weighs in at
nearly 700 lbs and has a larger trunnion and arbor diameter at the
bearings. But that said Powermatic is still right at the top.

Possibly so, actually...they're still the new kid on the block that I
never really think of; not on my radar so didn't even cross my mind...

I have seen them on a showroom floor in Wichita and they do look good
and I agree they're a top-drawer unit...

--

Now I don't know so much about the Pro series, I have the Industrial
series. The Pro series just seemed dinky in size compared to the
industrial and even my old Jet cabinet saw.


Check out the iron sitting on the front and back of the cabinet. There
is plenty in between too. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...7622991960362/



The PM 2000 base saw is 530 lb; the Sawstop Pro is 540 according to each
manufacturer's data (had to download manual to find it for PM) so
they're quite equivalent in base machine heft.

I don't know what a current Unisaur would go at; probably somewhere
between or more nearly the Pro would be my guess but I didn't go look.

The only place in Wichita that carries any "real" w-working equipment is
not a PM dealer so haven't really seen the 2000 hands-on to compare fit
'n finish to the old Model 66 which was, of course, top notch. I don't
recall what it weighs. Well, an online manual says 640+/- w standard
wings for shipping so I'd guess in the 500 lb range for the base unit;
perhaps a little under. Not _that_ far off methinks...

Well, while doing it looked up the current Unisaw -- no base unit weight
found but 3HP 36" rails and standard wings is 624; again not that
dissimilar but probably a little under the other two.

Check the industrial SawStop.

That _IS_ the industrial SawStop.

--

On 08/15/2015 8:01 AM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 10:53 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 3:10 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 2:25 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 2:05 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 9:36 AM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 7:58 AM, dpb wrote:
...

They're still the "Cadillac" of the industry; generally they will
outweigh and have features and finish that the others don't, but
partly
there is the name just as Deere green paint gathers a premium in
part
from its reputation.

SawStop may have dethroned Powermatic. ;~) My 10" SawStop weighs
in at
nearly 700 lbs and has a larger trunnion and arbor diameter at the
bearings. But that said Powermatic is still right at the top.

Possibly so, actually...they're still the new kid on the block that I
never really think of; not on my radar so didn't even cross my mind...

I have seen them on a showroom floor in Wichita and they do look good
and I agree they're a top-drawer unit...

--

Now I don't know so much about the Pro series, I have the Industrial
series. The Pro series just seemed dinky in size compared to the
industrial and even my old Jet cabinet saw.


Check out the iron sitting on the front and back of the cabinet. There
is plenty in between too. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...7622991960362/




The PM 2000 base saw is 530 lb; the Sawstop Pro is 540 according to each
manufacturer's data (had to download manual to find it for PM) so
they're quite equivalent in base machine heft.

I don't know what a current Unisaur would go at; probably somewhere
between or more nearly the Pro would be my guess but I didn't go look.

The only place in Wichita that carries any "real" w-working equipment is
not a PM dealer so haven't really seen the 2000 hands-on to compare fit
'n finish to the old Model 66 which was, of course, top notch. I don't
recall what it weighs. Well, an online manual says 640+/- w standard
wings for shipping so I'd guess in the 500 lb range for the base unit;
perhaps a little under. Not _that_ far off methinks...

Well, while doing it looked up the current Unisaw -- no base unit weight
found but 3HP 36" rails and standard wings is 624; again not that
dissimilar but probably a little under the other two.

Check the industrial SawStop.

That _IS_ the industrial SawStop.

I thought I had put in the Sawstop data as well...from their site

contract professional industrial
Weights - saw only: 225 317/335 (1.75/3hp) 530 lbs

It's only possible to compare the base saws themselves; accessories such
as the wings, extension tables, etc., etc., are too variable to be
meaningful. The nearly 700 figure (685 actually) comes with the 52"
fence system.

On 8/15/2015 8:18 AM, dpb wrote:
On 08/15/2015 8:01 AM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 10:53 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 3:10 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 2:25 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 2:05 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 9:36 AM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 7:58 AM, dpb wrote:
...

They're still the "Cadillac" of the industry; generally they will
outweigh and have features and finish that the others don't, but
partly
there is the name just as Deere green paint gathers a premium in
part
from its reputation.

SawStop may have dethroned Powermatic. ;~) My 10" SawStop weighs
in at
nearly 700 lbs and has a larger trunnion and arbor diameter at the
bearings. But that said Powermatic is still right at the top.

Possibly so, actually...they're still the new kid on the block that I
never really think of; not on my radar so didn't even cross my
mind...

I have seen them on a showroom floor in Wichita and they do look good
and I agree they're a top-drawer unit...

--

Now I don't know so much about the Pro series, I have the Industrial
series. The Pro series just seemed dinky in size compared to the
industrial and even my old Jet cabinet saw.


Check out the iron sitting on the front and back of the cabinet. There
is plenty in between too. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...7622991960362/





The PM 2000 base saw is 530 lb; the Sawstop Pro is 540 according to
each
manufacturer's data (had to download manual to find it for PM) so
they're quite equivalent in base machine heft.

I don't know what a current Unisaur would go at; probably somewhere
between or more nearly the Pro would be my guess but I didn't go look.

The only place in Wichita that carries any "real" w-working
equipment is
not a PM dealer so haven't really seen the 2000 hands-on to compare fit
'n finish to the old Model 66 which was, of course, top notch. I don't
recall what it weighs. Well, an online manual says 640+/- w standard
wings for shipping so I'd guess in the 500 lb range for the base unit;
perhaps a little under. Not _that_ far off methinks...

Well, while doing it looked up the current Unisaw -- no base unit
weight
found but 3HP 36" rails and standard wings is 624; again not that
dissimilar but probably a little under the other two.

Check the industrial SawStop.

That _IS_ the industrial SawStop.

I thought I had put in the Sawstop data as well...from their site

contract professional industrial
Weights - saw only: 225 317/335 (1.75/3hp) 530 lbs

It's only possible to compare the base saws themselves; accessories such
as the wings, extension tables, etc., etc., are too variable to be
meaningful. The nearly 700 figure (685 actually) comes with the 52"
fence system.


Well regardless which of these saws are you going to use with out a
fence system? The lightest weight industrial SS is 635 lbs. in a
usable configuration.

The industrial does not have the left wing extension attached. It makes
for an odd shaped shipping package. You have to add the left wing,
right fence table extension, and the 3 table support and fence rails and
fence.

On 08/15/2015 8:59 AM, Leon wrote:
On 8/15/2015 8:18 AM, dpb wrote:
....

That _IS_ the industrial SawStop.

I thought I had put in the Sawstop data as well...from their site

contract professional industrial
Weights - saw only: 225 317/335 (1.75/3hp) 530 lbs

It's only possible to compare the base saws themselves; accessories such
as the wings, extension tables, etc., etc., are too variable to be
meaningful. The nearly 700 figure (685 actually) comes with the 52"
fence system.


Well regardless which of these saws are you going to use with out a
fence system? The lightest weight industrial SS is 635 lbs. in a usable
configuration.

It's the base saw weight that reflects the mass of the trunnions and all
which is the key item. The whole point is that there's little
difference in that mass between any of the commercial saws, PM, Unisaw,
Sawstop; they're all within 10% of the mean.

The others all also have to have wings, fence, etc., etc., etc., to end
up with a net weight well above that of the base saw; how much is
totally dependent upon the various options one can choose.

The 685 of your Sawstop with 52" fence and Biesemeyer is only 7% above
the listed weight (640) of my PM66 with just the two 50" extension
rails, standard wings and standard fence; adding the full-length solid
table and an equivalent fence would bring the 66 up to virtually
identical, perhaps even more. Hence, they're essentially identical in
heft; there's simply _not_ that much more "beef" in the Sawstop although
again I agree it's a fine machine.

--

On 8/15/2015 8:01 AM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 10:53 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 3:10 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 2:25 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 2:05 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/14/2015 9:36 AM, Leon wrote:
On 8/14/2015 7:58 AM, dpb wrote:
...

They're still the "Cadillac" of the industry; generally they will
outweigh and have features and finish that the others don't, but
partly
there is the name just as Deere green paint gathers a premium in
part
from its reputation.

SawStop may have dethroned Powermatic. ;~) My 10" SawStop weighs
in at
nearly 700 lbs and has a larger trunnion and arbor diameter at the
bearings. But that said Powermatic is still right at the top.

Possibly so, actually...they're still the new kid on the block that I
never really think of; not on my radar so didn't even cross my mind...

I have seen them on a showroom floor in Wichita and they do look good
and I agree they're a top-drawer unit...

--

Now I don't know so much about the Pro series, I have the Industrial
series. The Pro series just seemed dinky in size compared to the
industrial and even my old Jet cabinet saw.


Check out the iron sitting on the front and back of the cabinet. There
is plenty in between too. ;~)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...7622991960362/




The PM 2000 base saw is 530 lb; the Sawstop Pro is 540 according to each
manufacturer's data (had to download manual to find it for PM) so
they're quite equivalent in base machine heft.


I find shipping weights to be confusing when determining the weights of
the saws. For instance the shipping weight for the PM2000 is 540 lbs,
saw only. And 604lbs gross.
the SS shipping weight is 640 saw only.

When considering weights assembled weight and shipping weight have
different meanings. Shipping weight is important for how much each
packged unit is going to weigh for freight reasons. For instance with
the SS the left wing, a crank, miter gauge, wrenches, packing material,
and pallet are all considered.







I don't know what a current Unisaur would go at; probably somewhere
between or more nearly the Pro would be my guess but I didn't go look.

The only place in Wichita that carries any "real" w-working equipment is
not a PM dealer so haven't really seen the 2000 hands-on to compare fit
'n finish to the old Model 66 which was, of course, top notch. I don't
recall what it weighs. Well, an online manual says 640+/- w standard
wings for shipping so I'd guess in the 500 lb range for the base unit;
perhaps a little under. Not _that_ far off methinks...

Well, while doing it looked up the current Unisaw -- no base unit weight
found but 3HP 36" rails and standard wings is 624; again not that
dissimilar but probably a little under the other two.

Check the industrial SawStop.

That _IS_ the industrial SawStop.

--

On 8/15/2015 9:32 AM, dpb wrote:
On 08/15/2015 8:59 AM, Leon wrote:
On 8/15/2015 8:18 AM, dpb wrote:
...

That _IS_ the industrial SawStop.

I thought I had put in the Sawstop data as well...from their site

contract professional industrial
Weights - saw only: 225 317/335 (1.75/3hp) 530 lbs

It's only possible to compare the base saws themselves; accessories such
as the wings, extension tables, etc., etc., are too variable to be
meaningful. The nearly 700 figure (685 actually) comes with the 52"
fence system.


Well regardless which of these saws are you going to use with out a
fence system? The lightest weight industrial SS is 635 lbs. in a usable
configuration.

It's the base saw weight that reflects the mass of the trunnions and all
which is the key item. The whole point is that there's little
difference in that mass between any of the commercial saws, PM, Unisaw,
Sawstop; they're all within 10% of the mean.

The others all also have to have wings, fence, etc., etc., etc., to end
up with a net weight well above that of the base saw; how much is
totally dependent upon the various options one can choose.

The 685 of your Sawstop with 52" fence and Biesemeyer is only 7% above
the listed weight (640) of my PM66 with just the two 50" extension
rails, standard wings and standard fence; adding the full-length solid
table and an equivalent fence would bring the 66 up to virtually
identical, perhaps even more. Hence, they're essentially identical in
heft; there's simply _not_ that much more "beef" in the Sawstop although
again I agree it's a fine machine.

--
No doubt considering the PM66. ;~) I thought we were comparing the
PM2000, at least that was what I was looking at, if considering a new
purchase.
The PM66 would have been my first choice in 1999. But the Jet was
sooooooo much less expensive.
The 2000 is absolutely a cool saw. I hane no idea how it compares to
the 66 but if I were betting I would say the 66 would be the better saw.
The 2000 seems to be more suited towards the hobbyist/pro. It has
built in features that the hobbyist would appreciate, especially the
built in mobility system. But I think it has always been built over
seas like SS. Oddly IMHO the 2000 looks more old school than the 66.

Two years ago, because I was looking for a safer saw than my 1999 model
I was looking at SS, naturally, and the Laguna TSS with scoring knife
and sliding table. That that saw is freaking heavy, 1054 lbs. While
the Laguna does not have as many safety features it did have some great
extras and I could have swallowed the price but there was nothing wrong
with my Jet cabinet saw and my only reason for trading up was to get as
much built in safety as possible. SS won out.

On 08/15/2015 10:18 AM, Leon wrote:
....

I find shipping weights to be confusing when determining the weights of
the saws. For instance the shipping weight for the PM2000 is 540 lbs,
saw only. And 604lbs gross.
the SS shipping weight is 640 saw only.
....

That's essentially identical, then; the 540 is listed as _NET_, 604 _GROSS_

That leaves 64 lb tare wt for the packing for the base saw only; the
wings, etc., are separate as it is noted as saw only...

Again, I agree the SS is a fine saw; however, no need to try to make it
into more than it is comparatively to others and I grok the decision to
get the SS technology on a new purchase.

I am, convinced the PM2000 and old Model 66 both are essentially
identical in heft and, yes, PM now has everything that I'm aware of
assembled in US from at least mostly Taiwanese parts...I believe that
switch began in the 1990s in earnest and the McMinnville facility closed
entirely in 2000 or 2001.

--

On 8/15/2015 12:25 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/15/2015 10:18 AM, Leon wrote:
...

I find shipping weights to be confusing when determining the weights of
the saws. For instance the shipping weight for the PM2000 is 540 lbs,
saw only. And 604lbs gross.
the SS shipping weight is 640 saw only.
...

That's essentially identical, then; the 540 is listed as _NET_, 604 _GROSS_

That leaves 64 lb tare wt for the packing for the base saw only; the
wings, etc., are separate as it is noted as saw only...

Again, I agree the SS is a fine saw; however, no need to try to make it
into more than it is comparatively to others and I grok the decision to
get the SS technology on a new purchase.

I was not trying to go there.
And while I was comparing weight, and basically mentioned IIRC for
smoothness, most of the weight is in the robust trunnion on the SS. So
where I was going was the SS working/moving parts that affect cut
quality long term make up a lot more of the saws weight than the 2000.

https://www.google.com/search?q=PM+2...w92h7I9XEhM%3A

or

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/







I am, convinced the PM2000 and old Model 66 both are essentially
identical in heft and, yes, PM now has everything that I'm aware of
assembled in US from at least mostly Taiwanese parts...I believe that
switch began in the 1990s in earnest and the McMinnville facility closed
entirely in 2000 or 2001.

If I was in the market and if the 66 was still being manufactured as it
was, I would still prefer it over the 2000. Most manufacturers Like PM
would boast the use of Baldor motors, and rightfully so. I don't think
that is so with the 2000. And while mine does not have the Baldor
either I would prefer that it did.

On 08/15/2015 5:57 PM, Leon wrote:
....

And while I was comparing weight, and basically mentioned IIRC for
smoothness, most of the weight is in the robust trunnion on the SS. So
where I was going was the SS working/moving parts that affect cut
quality long term make up a lot more of the saws weight than the 2000.
....

I'd have to dissassemble and weigh to be able to actually judge that as
being true or not...the PM66 passes the nickel test just fine, too...

From having looked at the SS on the floor in Wichita vis a vis having
the PM 66 for 30+ yr, I'd say there's little to choose one form the
other on the saw itself; the only significant advantage the SS would
have and reason to choose over the other is the technology.

--

On 08/15/2015 7:31 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/15/2015 5:57 PM, Leon wrote:
...

And while I was comparing weight, and basically mentioned IIRC for
smoothness, most of the weight is in the robust trunnion on the SS. So
where I was going was the SS working/moving parts that affect cut
quality long term make up a lot more of the saws weight than the 2000.
...

I'd have to dissassemble and weigh to be able to actually judge that as
being true or not...the PM66 passes the nickel test just fine, too...

From having looked at the SS on the floor in Wichita vis a vis having
the PM 66 for 30+ yr, I'd say there's little to choose one form the
other on the saw itself; the only significant advantage the SS would
have and reason to choose over the other is the technology.

The other point is that the SS has to be able to handle the tremendous
reaction forces of the brake if/when actuated--the others don't have
that load so that they may have as much or even more "long term cut
quality" in the design as the SS even with less actual material because
they don't have the loading so the margin to the actual loading is as
good (or maybe even better). Insufficient engineering data to tell; my
empirical evidence of 50+ yr of PM Model 66's in the field indicates
they were built plenty stout enough, thank you very much!

In all the reviews I've seen on the PM2000 I've no reason to believe it
isn't at least up to the standards of the 66.

--

On 8/15/2015 7:31 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/15/2015 5:57 PM, Leon wrote:
...

And while I was comparing weight, and basically mentioned IIRC for
smoothness, most of the weight is in the robust trunnion on the SS. So
where I was going was the SS working/moving parts that affect cut
quality long term make up a lot more of the saws weight than the 2000.
...

I'd have to dissassemble and weigh to be able to actually judge that as
being true or not...the PM66 passes the nickel test just fine, too...

OK, keep in mind that I am not trying to out do the 66. It was the
standard AFAIWC, when it was still being built. The 2000 is IMHO not
the same and probably would not hold up in a production factory setting
like the 66.

But to let this ****ing contest continue. ROTFL...
Nickel schnickel!
Try the "quarter" test. Thinner and a higher center of gravity.
This quarter does not only stand up but does not dance or roll.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/lcb112...posted-public/

Ain't this fun??


From having looked at the SS on the floor in Wichita vis a vis having
the PM 66 for 30+ yr, I'd say there's little to choose one form the
other on the saw itself; the only significant advantage the SS would
have and reason to choose over the other is the technology.

I would agree, maybe the 66 would be better as it has a longer track
record, if not considering the safety aspect. The 66 had a lot more
mass under the top than the current 2000, the link I provided a picture to.

On 8/15/2015 8:08 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/15/2015 7:31 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/15/2015 5:57 PM, Leon wrote:
...

And while I was comparing weight, and basically mentioned IIRC for
smoothness, most of the weight is in the robust trunnion on the SS. So
where I was going was the SS working/moving parts that affect cut
quality long term make up a lot more of the saws weight than the 2000.
...

I'd have to dissassemble and weigh to be able to actually judge that as
being true or not...the PM66 passes the nickel test just fine, too...

From having looked at the SS on the floor in Wichita vis a vis having
the PM 66 for 30+ yr, I'd say there's little to choose one form the
other on the saw itself; the only significant advantage the SS would
have and reason to choose over the other is the technology.

The other point is that the SS has to be able to handle the tremendous
reaction forces of the brake if/when actuated--the others don't have
that load so that they may have as much or even more "long term cut
quality" in the design as the SS even with less actual material because
they don't have the loading so the margin to the actual loading is as
good (or maybe even better). Insufficient engineering data to tell; my
empirical evidence of 50+ yr of PM Model 66's in the field indicates
they were built plenty stout enough, thank you very much!

Yeah! BUT LOL,,,, the key components are bigger on the SS. And I'm
sure that is all due to what the saw has to with stand if/when it
triggers a brake. The arbor shaft is main bearing has an inside
diameter of 30mm and or 1-3/16" and the secondary is 25mm or about 1".


In all the reviews I've seen on the PM2000 I've no reason to believe it
isn't at least up to the standards of the 66.


I'll agree that the 2000 reviews favorably but I if you compared your 66
to the 2000 I would bet on your saw. FWIW my Jet Exacta cabinet saw
compared well to the better know brands in 1999.. ;~)
And it think it would be interesting to see how the new Unisaw compares
to the older Unisaws from the 90's and back.

This was fun! ;~)

BTW does your 66 have the serpentine belt?

On 08/15/2015 9:38 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/15/2015 8:08 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/15/2015 7:31 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/15/2015 5:57 PM, Leon wrote:
...

And while I was comparing weight, and basically mentioned IIRC for
smoothness, most of the weight is in the robust trunnion on the SS. So
where I was going was the SS working/moving parts that affect cut
quality long term make up a lot more of the saws weight than the 2000.
...

I'd have to dissassemble and weigh to be able to actually judge that as
being true or not...the PM66 passes the nickel test just fine, too...

From having looked at the SS on the floor in Wichita vis a vis having
the PM 66 for 30+ yr, I'd say there's little to choose one form the
other on the saw itself; the only significant advantage the SS would
have and reason to choose over the other is the technology.

The other point is that the SS has to be able to handle the tremendous
reaction forces of the brake if/when actuated--the others don't have
that load so that they may have as much or even more "long term cut
quality" in the design as the SS even with less actual material because
they don't have the loading so the margin to the actual loading is as
good (or maybe even better). Insufficient engineering data to tell; my
empirical evidence of 50+ yr of PM Model 66's in the field indicates
they were built plenty stout enough, thank you very much!

Yeah! BUT LOL,,,, the key components are bigger on the SS. And I'm sure
that is all due to what the saw has to with stand if/when it triggers a
brake. The arbor shaft is main bearing has an inside diameter of 30mm
and or 1-3/16" and the secondary is 25mm or about 1".


In all the reviews I've seen on the PM2000 I've no reason to believe it
isn't at least up to the standards of the 66.


I'll agree that the 2000 reviews favorably but I if you compared your 66
to the 2000 I would bet on your saw. FWIW my Jet Exacta cabinet saw
compared well to the better know brands in 1999.. ;~)
And it think it would be interesting to see how the new Unisaw compares
to the older Unisaws from the 90's and back.

This was fun! ;~)

BTW does your 66 have the serpentine belt?

No three matched-set; originals still after some 30+ yr...

--

On 08/15/2015 9:38 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/15/2015 8:08 PM, dpb wrote:
....

The other point is that the SS has to be able to handle the tremendous
reaction forces of the brake if/when actuated--the others don't have
that load so that they may have as much or even more "long term cut
quality" in the design as the SS even with less actual material because
they don't have the loading so the margin to the actual loading is as
good (or maybe even better). Insufficient engineering data to tell; my
empirical evidence of 50+ yr of PM Model 66's in the field indicates
they were built plenty stout enough, thank you very much!

Yeah! BUT LOL,,,, the key components are bigger on the SS. And I'm sure
that is all due to what the saw has to with stand if/when it triggers a
brake. The arbor shaft is main bearing has an inside diameter of 30mm
and or 1-3/16" and the secondary is 25mm or about 1".
....

However, that may be, I'm unwilling to take that as prima facie evidence
that the other saw(s) are under-designed for _their_ design loads and
won't be just as accurate for just as long as the SS. (As noted above,
I believe the track record of the 66 is clear evidence of its minimum
adequacy of design having been well exceeded.)

Given the advent of the capabilities in FEA since the original Model 66
design, it's not at all surprising to me that refined engineering
analysis could get even more stiffness than the original from less
casting. Again, there's insufficient data publicly available and I'm
certainly not going to take the time to do a full-blown FEA model for
comparison (even if one were able to get sufficient detail on the
designs which would only be able to do by actual disassembly and
measurement as the vendors aren't going to release engineering
drawings), but given that there's essentially the same mass in both PM
I'd give pretty good odds the owners of current new models will still be
being pleased with their performance years from now just as the owners
of Model 66's have been with theirs.

That's not to say the SS owners won't be also; altho I'd worry somewhat
with them with regards to that long-term reliability of the electronics
without, at least, key component replacements/updates--the double-edged
sword of electronics.

Not sure how much "fun", but certainly pointless...

--

On 8/16/2015 6:31 AM, dpb wrote:
On 08/15/2015 9:38 PM, Leon wrote:
On 8/15/2015 8:08 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/15/2015 7:31 PM, dpb wrote:
On 08/15/2015 5:57 PM, Leon wrote:
...

And while I was comparing weight, and basically mentioned IIRC for
smoothness, most of the weight is in the robust trunnion on the SS. So
where I was going was the SS working/moving parts that affect cut
quality long term make up a lot more of the saws weight than the 2000.
...

I'd have to dissassemble and weigh to be able to actually judge that as
being true or not...the PM66 passes the nickel test just fine, too...

From having looked at the SS on the floor in Wichita vis a vis having
the PM 66 for 30+ yr, I'd say there's little to choose one form the
other on the saw itself; the only significant advantage the SS would
have and reason to choose over the other is the technology.

The other point is that the SS has to be able to handle the tremendous
reaction forces of the brake if/when actuated--the others don't have
that load so that they may have as much or even more "long term cut
quality" in the design as the SS even with less actual material because
they don't have the loading so the margin to the actual loading is as
good (or maybe even better). Insufficient engineering data to tell; my
empirical evidence of 50+ yr of PM Model 66's in the field indicates
they were built plenty stout enough, thank you very much!

Yeah! BUT LOL,,,, the key components are bigger on the SS. And I'm sure
that is all due to what the saw has to with stand if/when it triggers a
brake. The arbor shaft is main bearing has an inside diameter of 30mm
and or 1-3/16" and the secondary is 25mm or about 1".


In all the reviews I've seen on the PM2000 I've no reason to believe it
isn't at least up to the standards of the 66.


I'll agree that the 2000 reviews favorably but I if you compared your 66
to the 2000 I would bet on your saw. FWIW my Jet Exacta cabinet saw
compared well to the better know brands in 1999.. ;~)
And it think it would be interesting to see how the new Unisaw compares
to the older Unisaws from the 90's and back.

This was fun! ;~)

BTW does your 66 have the serpentine belt?

No three matched-set; originals still after some 30+ yr...

--


When I was first shopping in 1999, IIRC, PM had already switched to the
serpentine belt. I believe most everything else had the 3 belts. The
SS has 2 serpentine belts and not side by side. Only one of the belts
drives the arbor and the other is driven by the motor. There is power
transfer pulley somewhere in the middle.

On 08/16/2015 9:13 AM, Leon wrote:
On 8/16/2015 6:31 AM, dpb wrote:
....

BTW does your 66 have the serpentine belt?

No three matched-set; originals still after some 30+ yr...

When I was first shopping in 1999, IIRC, PM had already switched to the
serpentine belt. I believe most everything else had the 3 belts. The SS
has 2 serpentine belts ...

I think they're a product in search of a problem...and marketing for a
reason to switch.

--

On 08/16/2015 7:09 AM, dpb wrote:
....

Given the advent of the capabilities in FEA since the original Model 66
design, it's not at all surprising to me that refined engineering
analysis could get even more stiffness than the original from less
casting. ...

And, again, just to complete the thought, the real power of FEA
available to current designers is that besides just purely
stiffness/strength, they can also look at and tune out resonance effects
and such with minute modifications to produce quieter and
smoother-running equipment. It's the kind of thing we did routinely in
design of test gear in a former life and I'd be quite unsurprised if it
didn't happen w/ PM as well as at SS and the other "high-priced spreads"
manufacturers--it's what keeps them just a little cut above the offshore
and I'd guess where at least a fair fraction of that higher cost goes...

Mostly conjecture, granted, but based on experience w/ other
manufacturing and knowing as having done competitor product evaluation
amd patent "engineering workarounds" (otherwise known as "reverse
engineering" ) in a former life it's the kind of things we'd see in
the lower-cost competition and that we could demonstrate with lab
testing where our products excelled in comparison...

--