Comment by smolder
8 months ago
This is pretty true. Sawstop adds more to the cost of a low end table saw than a low end table saw is worth.
8 months ago
This is pretty true. Sawstop adds more to the cost of a low end table saw than a low end table saw is worth.
Then I guess the question really is: do we think (probably less experienced) consumers should be able to buy table saws that can easily accidentally cut their fingers off, in a way that is preventable but too costly?
Better take away kitchen knives too.
Also, you can get a push stick for pennies. There's never an actual reason you need to put your fingers anywhere close to a moving blade.
Table saws, in spite of being used far less than kitchen knives, account for far more digit amputations and more serious ones.
It is pretty uncommon and rather difficult to cause yourself a digit injury that cannot be recovered from with a kitchen knife. Bad technique is most likely to lop off the end of the fingertip which can fully regrow so long as the cut isn’t very deep.
Mandolines and meat slicers (guards are bypassed when cleaning which happens every 4hr, they also tend to be used by 16 year olds) are much much more dangerous but they tend to be dialed in quite shallowly which limits the damage.
Table saws are THE most dangerous thing for your fingers because of where people tend to put their hands when using the tool and how they can go right through your digits and how they’re dialled in to make thick cuts. The logic that well if we accept kitchen knives we shouldn’t have safety regulations on table saws doesn’t make sense because table saws are far more dangerous and unlike with kitchen knives it’s actually possible to enforce the default use of an effective safety mechanism which ensures a cut will usually be shallow enough to be recovered from. Of course some people will disable the brake excessively but the average person will likely keep it on most of the time.
You can argue we shouldn’t have this safety regulation because it will add costs to consumers, and point out that other safety approaches already exist, the safety paradox, but the comparison to kitchen knives doesn’t really make all that much sense. I’d argue adding saw brakes as a standard feature makes a ton of sense due to the high social cost of digit amputation and the inconvenient and frequently ignored use of other safety approaches.
Easy to cut yourself with a kitchen knife, hard to cut your finger off. Safety being proportional to harm is perfectly reasonable.
> There's never an actual reason you need to put your fingers anywhere close to a moving blade.
But that's how it is: people do cut their fingers off on table saws. They all know what you said. And yet 30 K accidents per year in the US alone. It is a serious problem.
I never bought one because it's just too big of a risk.
2 replies →
You hit a knot in your 2x4 while on a table saw and you might be surprised when you see your fingers laying on the ground and you thought you were being safe too.
All table saws including cheap ones come with a stick used to do the termination of the cut and the instruction manual also says to use the stick. SawStop is probably more useful for experienced contractors pushing the limit to do faster cuts
You can hurt yourself with a whole array of tools, especially in construction. A sawzall is a pretty horrifying gadget really, for example, and that's likely more popular among homeowners than a table saw.
I can lose fingers with my recip saw, circular saw, oscillating multi-tool, or angle grinder; scalp myself with my dremel (long hair); put a nail through myself with one of my many nailguns; the list of potential risks associated with power tools is numerous.
I think table saw brakes are awesome and absolutely have a benefit for things like high school shop classes, but a properly functioning blade guard also does the job most times.
10 replies →
More experienced customers are likely using the saw more often so I wouldn’t presume this only or primarily benefits the inexperienced.
First digit amputation (100% recoverable) I caused myself happened after spending most of my life using a knife because I just got complacent and was cooking when I knew I was extremely fatigued. Wood is also a natural product where natural variance can cause a table saw to operate in unexpected ways that catch people off guard.
The hobbyist table saw owners I know (myself included) tend to be more careful around a saw. We have the luxury of time to setup and think about our cuts (and less complacency) than the folks shoving wood through a saw to meet a deadline or because the boss is telling them they need to make X amount of cabinets per day.
Gotta love false dichotomies. There are anti-kickback and guard solutions on the market today. They suck on the cheaper saws but it would be a hell of a lot less expensive to fix that than add a saw stop.
I would prefer woodworkers pay more for table saws than I have to pay for their reconstructive surgeries via higher health insurance premiums.
I think you'll pay high health insurance premiums regardless of whether anyone gets hurt because it's a parasitic industry and we live in a culture of bottomless greed.
Then the insurance companies could require it.
But does it actually cost that much more or does SawStop just price their saws at a premium for having a premium feature?
My understanding is that the excess cost isn't so much the safety device itself but that cheap, flimsy table saws can't handle the extreme torque created by stopping the saw more-or-less instantly, so the device is limited to higher end equipment that's heavier and has better build quality.
If it costs 200$ to add the device and modify the saw to accept it and the original saw cost 300$ you've got a pretty massive increase. Also from some deep dive I saw apparently SawStop has basically cornered the entire premium market and the only market left for other saw makers was the low end range.